Intel Core i9-13900KS 6 GHz Processor Will be 22% More expansive

Yeah... no.

 

Is this how they'll compete with the X3D?

 

So 500W for first time?

 

lol turbo 6 ghz over 5.8 ghz... 200 over 5800... 3.4% max perf increase, if the turbo time is the same.

 

What intrigues me more about this table are the lower-end parts. Seems definitive at this point I will not be getting the 13400[F].
So for me it comes down to the 13500 and 7700. Assuming they're priced the same (which at this rate they might be), I'll be going with whichever offers the best performance-per-watt.

 

Hey @HH
There's a minor typo on the header:
Expensive instead of expansive.
BR

 

Good luck raising prices in these times.

 

Need predictions. 6 GHz @how many E/P cores and how many threads?

 

Maybe the chip is getting bigger to accommodate the extra performance?

 

The FX57 was $1000 USD back in 2005 so I suppose it's progress given inflation and what not.

 

Does anyone care about 200 MHz extra ? Especially when the 150 bucks lower CPU is identical and boosts to 5.8 already ?

 

Maybe in 2years when my body will have recovered from the limbs I sold to get a 4090.

 

I like my 13900K, it was a noticeable improvement over the 10900K that it replaced. It doesn't even need to be OC'd as it's not even bottlenecking my 4090 at 1080p in the tests I've done.

 

Well it was to be expected, since the current lineup can do significantly higher clock.
Even my poor binned 13600k can do 200MHz more at stock voltage.