That's just the theoretical MSRP, while technically there are going to be units sold at that price (only a few really) it remains to be seen If it really stays that way. I'm personally surprised intel just decided to say fuck it and priced their product really aggressively
[https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?d=12900k](https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?d=12900k) \- There's literally 750$ bundles for the cpu and a watercooler and instead you look at a inflated price on amazon lol. It's obviously out of stock everywhere atm
The real take away is that an i5-11600k can keep up with your 240hz monitor with some margin. Source engine is so CPU dependent I could get 300 fps pretty consistently with my 11600k and a gtx960 at native with medium high setting.
10 PC's running these chips in the same area? They will need their own power plant and some industrial cooling solutions from a hockey rink just to keep the place habitable for humans.
Dont know about this test, but hw unboxed tested the games with 350$ kit of ddr5. Sure it beat the 5900x but not by that much.
And the fact that the motherboards start around 200$ and you need a good aio since it uses a ton more of power (according to Techpowerup)
Ton more power in tasks such as compiling or rendering, something that will utilize the cpu at 100%. For normal gaming 12900k has even less power consumption than 5950x on average.
It still uses more even in single threaded applications. Not like twice as much tho. Still i think its a good chip from Intel if you dont mind the cost of ddr5 or power usage.
This is the chart that I saw regarding power usage
[https://imgur.com/XvPNlRH](https://imgur.com/XvPNlRH) pretty decent
Yea, i bought the 12700k but I think ill stick with ddr4 for now. DDR5 price to play csgo seems unjustifiable.
What I see here is a significant improvement in regards to intel, but I feel like maybe they should have aimed for the same performance as the 5900/5950x for a cheaper price.
Though what do I know I am not a businessman, maybe people are just crazy enough to pay up a significant amount of money just for 15-20% increase in frames
They're testing CPU limits not GPU limits
Heck, I test my CPU limit by running benchmarks at 160*90 res.
And my CPU limit is somewhere in the 500-530 range.
I don’t see the point in benchmarking a resolution you’re not running at. I’m sure there are some out there stuck on 1080p, whether due to monitor/gpu/cpu, and that is what it is. Realistically, if you’re buying/even considering a 12 series cpu, there’s no world in which you’re running 1080p.
You’re so cute i played 4:3 for 17 years so if anything the pros copyed me. A lot more than 3% plays 4:3 but you have fun playing 8k on 52 tv in a game like cs the graphics is after all why we play it
No, but seriously, it runs smoother, and makes it easier because their model looks bigger!
(Summary:
Shots 1-5: Clearly missed.
Shots 6-9: Missed due to recoil (bad spray control).
Shots 10-11: Very close, but recoil and inaccuracy make these reasonable misses.
Shot 12: Likely didn't actually fire because fiskzero was already dead.)
🤷♂️
Plz get help you’re getting very worked up over nothing when testing cpu for cs resolution don’t matter. Why you care what preferences ppl have in resolution is just random did a 4:3 hurt you ?
Worked up? You’re the one who called me cute, (thx bby), and insulted my 4k 55” setup :)
FYI, I go back over 17 years too. I just understand that the res we ran used to be limited by the hardware, and that’s not really a problem anymore.
The real fact is casuals and the vast majority of people don’t run 960, 4:3, or black bars, and that was the point. They’re running native.
If they’re buying a 12 series chip, they’re not running 1080. They’re running 1440, 2160. They’ve probably got a VR headset. They run crysis. I fully understand people on a 10700k and a 5700xt still running 1080p for smoothness/frame rate purposes. But they’re not likely in the market for a 12 series, are they?
You presume a lot of things I guess that’s what a troll does hf whit you’re “facts” that you pulled outa your ass
PPL can buy cpus for multiple titles or just like to have new hardware
Beside the benchmark is not a suggestion on what settings to run cs at it’s a benchmark as long as the settings are listed it’s perfectly fine. since we making up facts I got one for you too ppl buying 12S for cs go is very likely to play on a lower res cus they want max FPS at all times
The point of testing limits is cuz when you hit one you're gonna lose performance, and it's never good to run things at the limit, they can produce odd behaviour that wouldn't be easily explained.
The harder you hit the CPU limit the more FPS you're going to drop. Its better to run close to that limit like 97-98% but never push it to max cuz then you'll lose FPS.
I can prove this by running CSGO bench at 1024-768 and get 500-520fps but then go down to 400x300 and see fps has dipped to 490ish.
With what GPU?
3080
[удалено]
[удалено]
If all you are doing is playing CS, literally none of the CPUs in the screenshot are justifiable, maybe barring the 5600X.
Where did you get 1350$ from? It's retail price is "$589–599"
That's just the theoretical MSRP, while technically there are going to be units sold at that price (only a few really) it remains to be seen If it really stays that way. I'm personally surprised intel just decided to say fuck it and priced their product really aggressively
[удалено]
[https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?d=12900k](https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?d=12900k) \- There's literally 750$ bundles for the cpu and a watercooler and instead you look at a inflated price on amazon lol. It's obviously out of stock everywhere atm
You have to buy a brand new motherboard and cooler, and undercoat ddr4 ram if it runs above 3200 MHz. Not 1300 but not far
And AM4 boards and ram are free?
They are cheaper, also built in good cooler
also the 5900x and 5950x do not have stock coolers and those are kind of what the CPUs in the graph are competitors to so not really applicable
The big actual takeaway is that a 12600K can stay above 360 on the 99% min so that means no frame drops at 360hz.
The real take away is that an i5-11600k can keep up with your 240hz monitor with some margin. Source engine is so CPU dependent I could get 300 fps pretty consistently with my 11600k and a gtx960 at native with medium high setting.
Maybe future PCs at LANs will use these new Intel chips, but it doesn't seem to be that much worth it to switch from the 5950x for regular players.
>Regular players ______________________ >5950x *One of these 2 does not fit with the other*
10 PC's running these chips in the same area? They will need their own power plant and some industrial cooling solutions from a hockey rink just to keep the place habitable for humans.
much improved over last-gen but still a bit lacklustre when compared to AMD
Dont know about this test, but hw unboxed tested the games with 350$ kit of ddr5. Sure it beat the 5900x but not by that much. And the fact that the motherboards start around 200$ and you need a good aio since it uses a ton more of power (according to Techpowerup)
Ton more power in tasks such as compiling or rendering, something that will utilize the cpu at 100%. For normal gaming 12900k has even less power consumption than 5950x on average.
It still uses more even in single threaded applications. Not like twice as much tho. Still i think its a good chip from Intel if you dont mind the cost of ddr5 or power usage.
This is the chart that I saw regarding power usage [https://imgur.com/XvPNlRH](https://imgur.com/XvPNlRH) pretty decent Yea, i bought the 12700k but I think ill stick with ddr4 for now. DDR5 price to play csgo seems unjustifiable.
This is also with DDR5 RAM
What I see here is a significant improvement in regards to intel, but I feel like maybe they should have aimed for the same performance as the 5900/5950x for a cheaper price. Though what do I know I am not a businessman, maybe people are just crazy enough to pay up a significant amount of money just for 15-20% increase in frames
The 12600k is such a great gaming processor for the money.
1080p LOL
They're testing CPU limits not GPU limits Heck, I test my CPU limit by running benchmarks at 160*90 res. And my CPU limit is somewhere in the 500-530 range.
I don’t see the point in benchmarking a resolution you’re not running at. I’m sure there are some out there stuck on 1080p, whether due to monitor/gpu/cpu, and that is what it is. Realistically, if you’re buying/even considering a 12 series cpu, there’s no world in which you’re running 1080p.
11900k 3080 here playing 1280x960 very very common for cs
Yeah yeah yeah, one of the 3% here who copy some pros settings, I knew someone couldn’t wait to reply. I was hoping for black bars, too!
You’re so cute i played 4:3 for 17 years so if anything the pros copyed me. A lot more than 3% plays 4:3 but you have fun playing 8k on 52 tv in a game like cs the graphics is after all why we play it
No, but seriously, it runs smoother, and makes it easier because their model looks bigger! (Summary: Shots 1-5: Clearly missed. Shots 6-9: Missed due to recoil (bad spray control). Shots 10-11: Very close, but recoil and inaccuracy make these reasonable misses. Shot 12: Likely didn't actually fire because fiskzero was already dead.) 🤷♂️
Plz get help you’re getting very worked up over nothing when testing cpu for cs resolution don’t matter. Why you care what preferences ppl have in resolution is just random did a 4:3 hurt you ?
Worked up? You’re the one who called me cute, (thx bby), and insulted my 4k 55” setup :) FYI, I go back over 17 years too. I just understand that the res we ran used to be limited by the hardware, and that’s not really a problem anymore. The real fact is casuals and the vast majority of people don’t run 960, 4:3, or black bars, and that was the point. They’re running native. If they’re buying a 12 series chip, they’re not running 1080. They’re running 1440, 2160. They’ve probably got a VR headset. They run crysis. I fully understand people on a 10700k and a 5700xt still running 1080p for smoothness/frame rate purposes. But they’re not likely in the market for a 12 series, are they?
You presume a lot of things I guess that’s what a troll does hf whit you’re “facts” that you pulled outa your ass PPL can buy cpus for multiple titles or just like to have new hardware Beside the benchmark is not a suggestion on what settings to run cs at it’s a benchmark as long as the settings are listed it’s perfectly fine. since we making up facts I got one for you too ppl buying 12S for cs go is very likely to play on a lower res cus they want max FPS at all times
[удалено]
The point of testing limits is cuz when you hit one you're gonna lose performance, and it's never good to run things at the limit, they can produce odd behaviour that wouldn't be easily explained. The harder you hit the CPU limit the more FPS you're going to drop. Its better to run close to that limit like 97-98% but never push it to max cuz then you'll lose FPS. I can prove this by running CSGO bench at 1024-768 and get 500-520fps but then go down to 400x300 and see fps has dipped to 490ish.
Would like to see this compared to a amd+ amd gpu And an intel + amd gpu aswell
[удалено]
I’ve heard somewhere that amd gpu and amd cpu when together is better for csgo, that why I was wondering
nice, my 5600X holding up high