Newest intel i7: Intel Core i7-7700K Desktop Processor 4 Cores up to 4.5 GHz Unlocked LGA 1151 100/200 Series 91W : Electronics

Intel Core i7-13700K Review: Core i9 Gaming at i7 Pricing

Tom’s Hardware Verdict

The Core i7-13700K is the best CPU for gaming at its price point and also offers leading performance in our productivity benchmarks at a significantly lower price than AMD’s competing Ryzen 7 7700X, and it even challenges the $549 Ryzen 9 7900X in most work.

  • +

    95%+ of Core i9 gaming performance

  • +

    Strong performance in productivity apps

  • +

    Excellent pricing

  • +

    Supports either DDR4 or DDR5

  • +

    Superior platform pricing

  • +


Why you can trust Tom’s Hardware
Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

Today’s best Intel Core i7-13700K deals



$428. 99


No price information

Check Amazon

Show More Deals

The 13th-Gen Intel $409 Core i7-13700K slots into the middle of Intel’s Raptor Lake product stack (or at least its product stack as of late October 2022), delivering the lion’s share of the gaming performance of its market-leading counterpart, the $589 Core i9-13900K, in tandem with more than enough horsepower in productivity workloads for most users — but for $180 less. It also easily outperforms the competing AMD Ryzen 7000 chip, making it one of the best CPUs for gaming and a chart-topper in our CPU benchmark hierarchy.

The Core i7-13700K’s performance stems from its 5.4 GHz boost clock, a record for the i7 family, and Intel’s addition of four more e-cores, bringing the chip to 16 total cores and 24 threads. Even though Intel still uses the ‘Intel 7’ process node, it leveraged a newer revision of the silicon to push clock speeds higher while improving power efficiency. Intel also etched the cores on a new, larger die and added additional L3 and L2 cache.

Swipe to scroll horizontally

Row 0 — Cell 0 Price Cores / Threads (P+E) P-Core Base/Boost (GHz) E-Core Base/Boost (GHz) Cache (L2/L3) TDP / PBP / MTP Memory
Core i9-13900K / KF $589 (K) — $564 (KF) 24 / 32 (8+16) 3.0 / 5.8 2.2 / 4.3 68MB (32+36) 125W / 253W DDR4-3200 / DDR5-5600
Core i7-13700K / KF $409 (K) — $384 (KF) 16 / 24 (8+8) 3. 4 / 5.4 2.5 / 4.2 54MB (24+30) 125W / 253W DDR4-3200 / DDR5-5600
Core i5-13600K / KF $319 (K) — $294 (KF) 14 / 20 (6+8) 3.5 / 5.1 2.6 / 3.9 44MB (20+24) 125W / 181W DDR4-3200 / DDR5-5600
  • Intel Core i7-13700K (Intel Core i7) at Newegg for $428.99

Intel’s continued aggressive chip pricing and options for lower-priced platforms and memory make the Core i7-13700K a powerful, yet more affordable option: The Core i7-13700K is the best CPU for gaming at its price point and also offers leading performance in our application benchmarks at a significantly lower price than AMD’s competing Ryzen 7 7700X, and it even challenges the $549 Ryzen 9 7900X in most work.  

Just like the previous-gen chips, the 13th-Gen Raptor Lake processors come with a mix of both big performance cores (p-cores) for latency-sensitive work and small efficiency cores (e-cores) for threaded and background applications. The e-cores stick with the same Gracemont architecture as before, but the p-cores move from the Golden Cove design to Raptor Cove. For much more on the architecture, check out our Intel Core i9-13900K and Core i5-13600K review.

Swipe to scroll horizontally

AMD Ryzen 7000 Zen 4 vs Intel Raptor Lake
Row 0 — Cell 0 Price Cores / Threads (P+E) P-Core Base/Boost (GHz) E-Core Base/Boost (GHz) Cache (L2/L3) TDP / PBP / MTP Memory
Core i9-13900K / KF $589 (K) — $564 (KF) 24 / 32 (8+16) 3. 0 / 5.8 2.2 / 4.3 68MB (32+36) 125W / 253W DDR4-3200 / DDR5-5600
Ryzen 9 7950X $699 16 / 32 4.5 / 5.7 80MB (16+64) 170W / 230W DDR5-5200
Core i9-12900K / KF $589 (K) — $564 (KF) 16 / 24 (8+8) 3.2 / 5.2 2.4 / 3.9 44MB (14+30) 125W / 241W DDR4-3200 / DDR5-4800
Ryzen 9 7900X $549 12 / 24 4.7 / 5.6 76MB (12+64) 170W / 230W DDR5-5200
Core i7-13700K / KF $409 (K) — $384 (KF) 16 / 24 (8+8) 3. 4 / 5.4 2.5 / 4.2 54MB (24+30) 125W / 253W DDR4-3200 / DDR5-5600
Core i7-12700K / KF $409 (K) — $384 (KF) 12 / 20 (8+4) 3.6 / 5.0 2.7 / 3.8 37MB (12+25) 125W / 190W DDR4-3200 / DDR5-4800
Ryzen 7 7700X $399 8 / 16 4.5 / 5.4 40MB (8+32) 105W / 142W DDR5-5200
Ryzen 5 7600X $299 6 / 12 4.7 / 5.3 38MB (6+32) 105W / 142W DDR5-5200
Core i5-13600K / KF $319 (K) — $294 (KF) 14 / 20 (6+8) 3. 5 / 5.1 2.6 / 3.9 44MB (20+24) 125W / 181W DDR4-3200 / DDR5-5600
Core i5-12600K / KF $289 (K) — $264 (KF) 10 / 16 (6+4) 3.7 / 4.9 2.8 / 3.6 29.5MB (9.5+20) 125W / 150W DDR4-3200 / DDR5-4800

The 16-core, 24-thread $409 Core i7-13700K contends with the eight-core 16-thread $399 Ryzen 7 7700X. Intel bumped the 13700K’s p-core boost frequency up by 400 MHz over its predecessor, bringing it up to 5.4 GHz. Intel also threw in an additional four e-cores for a total of eight, and a 400 MHz increase to the e-core boost brings it to 4.2 GHz. The combination of higher clocks and more cores delivers a sizeable leap forward in multi-threaded workloads.

The Core i7-13700K has the same 125W Processor Base Power (PBP — the amount of power the chip pulls when it isn’t in a fully boosted state) as the previous-gen Core i7-12700K. However, Intel increased the Maximum Turbo Power (MTP), the maximum amount of power the chip can draw when in a boosted state. The new 253W limit is a whopping 63W increase over the prior-gen Core i7-12700K (33% increase).

Intel’s new chips are its most power-efficient yet. But like AMD, Intel has taken a power-be-damned approach to regain leadership, dialing up the power limits for all the desktop PC chips. The heat can be hard to control, so you’ll need to plan for a beefy chip cooler. Intel doesn’t include a cooler with the Core i7-12700K but recommends a 280mm AIO watercooler or air equivalent (or greater). Existing LGA 1700 coolers are compatible with the new motherboards. Bear in mind that your cooler’s performance can significantly limit the chips’ performance, so it’s best to overprovision, especially if you plan on overclocking.

On the flip side, you can now easily overclock to the highest clock rates we’ve ever seen, and that’s even without using exotic cooling. For instance, we dialed in a 5.5 GHz all-core overclock with an AIO watercooler with the Core i7-13700K.

Intel also increased the 13700K’s  L2 cache from 1.25MB to 2MB for each p-core and doubled the amount of L2 cache for each cluster of e-cores to 4MB. Intel also added 5MB of additional L3 cache.

Intel has increased its DDR5 memory support up to 5600 MT/s if you use one DIMM per channel (1DPC), a big increase over the prior 4800 MT/s speed with Alder Lake. Just as importantly, Intel increased 2DPC speeds up to 4400 MT/s, an improvement over the previous-gen 3600 MT/s. Unlike AMD’s all-in approach with DDR5, Raptor Lake also supports DDR4-3200 memory, ensuring a value option for Intel platforms.

Raptor Lake drops into motherboards with the LGA 1700 socket, so it will work with existing 600-series or new 700-series chipsets. Intel says that, on a like-for-like basis, you shouldn’t see any performance differences if you use a previous-gen 600-series motherboard for Raptor Lake. As usual, Intel has Z-series (Z790, in this case) motherboards available at first, with the value-centric B- and H-series coming when it launches the rest of the Raptor Lake lineup.

The 700-series motherboards bring minor improvements over the 600-series, but Intel has increased the number of PCIe 4.0 lanes hanging off the chipset to 20, an increase of eight additional lanes, and support for one more USB 3.2 Gen 2×2 200Gps port, bringing the total to five. As before, the Raptor Lake chip itself supports 16 lanes of PCIe 5.0 and four PCIe 4.0 lanes for a storage device.

  • MORE: AMD vs Intel
  • MORE: Zen 4 Ryzen 7000 All We Know
  • MORE: Raptor Lake All We Know 
  • 1

Current page:
Flagship i9 Gaming at i7 Pricing

Next Page Intel Core i7-13700K Power, Heat, Overclocking, Benchmark Test Setup

Paul Alcorn is the Deputy Managing Editor for Tom’s Hardware US. He writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage and enterprise hardware.

Intel Core i7-11370H Review: Quad-Cores Aren’t Enough in 2021

Today we’ve got another benchmark review of a mobile processor, and this is admittedly kind of a weird one. The Intel Core i7-11370H is part of the Tiger Lake h45 line-up that was announced during CES 2021. Tiger Lake h45 bridges the gap between Tiger Lake UP3 series for ultraportables, and their regular 45W H-series chips used for production-focused laptops and gaming machines.

The i7-11370H is weird in the sense that it’s basically the same silicon used for ultraportable laptops, but overclocked. It uses the same 4 core, 8 thread layout, but bumps up the default power limit from 28W to 35W, and increases the base clock from 3.0 to 3.3 GHz relative to the Core i7-1185G7. There’s also 12MB of L3 cache, an Iris Xe GPU with 96 execution units, and the same memory support as Tiger Lake UP3.

When marketing this chip, Intel’s performance slides focus on single-thread performance gains versus 10th-gen, but then when talking multi-thread, Intel compares Tiger Lake h45 to their 11th-gen 15W processors — not exactly the same class of system and it’s highly unlikely a bigger gaming system would be tossing up between the 11370H and 1185G7. Intel’s focus on integrated graphics is also strange given that most H-series laptops use a discrete GPU.

We guess this is partly down to the reality that Tiger Lake h45 and the Core i7-11370H does not pack as many cores as Intel’s prior generation Comet Lake H-series CPUs, which in the Core i7 range started with 6 cores and also had 8-core options.

We’ll soon find out how they stack up.

This launch honestly gets more bizarre when you look at the systems out there using the 11370H. Intel’s plan for this chip was to create a new «ultraportable» gaming laptop segment, which would lead to thin 14-15″ systems suitable for 1080p gaming, harnessing the lower TDP of this chip.

It isn’t really a new segment given Ryzen laptops have been doing this for a little while now in systems like the Zephyrus G14 and Flow X13 from Asus, but it’s understandable that Intel wanted to compete here, too.

However, that’s not how OEMs are using the 11370H. The main system on the market today is the Asus TUF Dash F15, the laptop we have in for benchmarking today.

It may even be the only system using this CPU for now. In any case, this is far from the 14″ laptop with a Z-height of less than 18mm that Intel were talking about, this is just your regular 15.6-inch entry-level to mid-range gaming system with a 20mm Z-height and weighing in at 2kg.

On a surface assessment, this is a perfectly fine system. It has proper ventilation for the cooling fans underneath, a decent 1080p IPS display that runs at up to 240Hz, 16GB of DDR4-3200 in my review unit, and up to a GeForce RTX 3070 running at 80-85W which we also got. This is all standard gaming laptop stuff, and I quite like the design found here at this price point.

But confusingly, Asus are choosing to operate the 11370H with a stock long-term power limit of 48W, not the 35W default TDP that Intel has specified. So not only is the TUF Dash F15 not really that new «ultraportable» style gaming system, it doesn’t even bother using the chip at 35W, which begs the question why Asus chose to use it over Intel’s standard 45W H-series parts like the 10750H or 10870H. I can’t answer that question, but maybe we’ll find out in the performance testing.

As the chip operates at 48W out of the box, with a short boost period up to 60W, we’re comparing it to other 45W processors in our charts today, run at a long-term limit of 45W. This does give a small power advantage to the 11370H compared to other chips in our charts, however this is the limitation of testing with this platform and laptop. Let’s kick off the benchmarks with some productivity tests.


In Cinebench R20, the Core i7-11370H performs roughly on par with Intel’s Core i7-10750H in the multi-threaded test. This does present a substantial gain to per-core performance as the 10750H is a six-core chip, versus just four for the 11370H, but it still is a relatively weak performer compared to other parts in this chart.

Intel’s own 8-core processors like the 10870H are a step above in performance, and the 11370H ends up about 20% slower than AMD’s last-generation Ryzen 5 4600H quad-core. It is faster than Tiger Lake U-series processors as expected.

In the single-thread test as expected we see the 11370H significantly outperform Comet Lake parts including the Core i9-10980HK with about a 25% improvement to performance. That’s very substantial gen-on-gen and highlights what we may see down the line with Tiger Lake h55 chips.

The 11370H ends up slightly faster than the 1185G7 and around on par with AMD’s Ryzen 9 5980HS, so when comparing AMD to Intel in current generation processors, it’s neck and neck in this workload.

In Handbrake, the Core i7-11370H is slightly slower than Intel’s lowest Core i7 SKU from the previous generation, the Core i7-10750H. While not a huge margin, when comparing these parts at 45W and even factoring in the 11370H’s slight power advantage, it’s not a great result to see a performance regression. This CPU ends up 17% slower than the Core i7-10870H which is commonly used in refreshed gaming laptops of early 2021, and ends up 18% behind AMD’s Ryzen 5 4600H.

Very similar results in Blender, which presents almost identical margins to the Handbrake test we were just looking at. As a production system for these heavy CPU limited multi-core workloads, the 11370H fights admirably with just a quad-core design but ultimately falls short of other Core i7 processors and AMD’s entire H-series line from last year.

Code compilation shows a larger performance delta between the 11370H and 10750H, with the newer Tiger Lake processor ending up 7 percent behind the last-gen Core i7 option. While it is faster than prior Skylake-era quad-cores operating in this power range, all higher core count parts are better for Chromium compilation based on what we’ve tested.

In MATLAB, the 11370H is able to perform reasonably well, producing performance more in the range of the Core i7-10875H, and slightly ahead of AMD’s Ryzen 5 4600H.

On the other hand, in our Microsoft Excel workload, the 11370H’s performance goes backwards compared to the 10750H and ends up 25% slower than the Ryzen 5 4600H.

One of the strongest results for the 11370H is in PCMark 10’s Applications test, which measures Microsoft Office and Edge web browsing performance. Thanks to high single-thread performance gains compared to Comet Lake, this new Tiger Lake part is able to outperform the Core i7-10870H despite only having half the CPU cores.

It’s faster than AMD’s new Ryzen 5000 35W parts, but not as fast as the Ryzen 9 5900HX. Generally performance is similar to what Tiger Lake has produced previously in the ultraportable class.

7-Zip compression performance is disappointing, and actually isn’t quite as fast as our Core i7-1185G7 laptop. This is because the TUF F15 only boosts up to 60W which is slightly lower than what our 1185G7 test system achieved. In any case this is another workload where we see a performance regression comparing the 11370H to the 10750H, where the 11370H is over 20 percent slower.

In fact the margin between these Core i7 CPUs is quite similar in decompression as well. 7-Zip benefits quite a bit from additional cores and threads, so the 11370H’s quad-core design puts it at a disadvantage here despite gains to each core’s performance.

Acrobat PDF exporting is another strong result for the 11370H. The CPU’s ability to push up as high as 4.8 GHz makes it the fastest CPU we’ve tested in our mobile test suite, slightly ahead of AMD’s new Ryzen 5000 CPUs like the Ryzen 9 5980HS.

In Adobe Photoshop using the Puget Systems workload, the 11370H is able to match Intel’s previous generation Core i7 processors. However, once again boost performance wasn’t quite as good as previous Tiger Lake systems I’ve tested, and on top of that memory bandwidth may be having some influence as well. The TUF F15 uses DDR4 memory, instead of the higher-bandwidth LPDDR4X that can benefit Tiger Lake in some of these workloads.

In DaVinci Resolve we start to see the effects of the Core i7-11370H when paired with a powerful discrete GPU. Despite the RTX 3070 generally being one of the fastest 80W GPUs you can get, the 11370H appears to be holding it back somewhat in Puget System’s Resolve benchmark.

It ends up no faster than the Core i7-10750H paired with the RTX 2070 Max-Q, and behind eight-core CPUs that use either the RTX 3060 or RTX 3070. It appears the CPU is the limiting factor here, rather than the GPU, and ultimately this performance is only modest.

In Adobe Premiere using the Puget Systems export test, the Core i7-11370H delivers disappointing performance. Premiere is more CPU heavy and does benefit from higher core count parts. Most of the H-series processors we’ve tested in this workload are 8-core models, which deliver substantially higher performance. This makes the 11370H a weak option as a Premiere-capable laptop CPU.

Gaming Performance

Next up we have some gaming tests. The big point of comparison here is between the Core i7-11370H and the Core i7-10870H using the same RTX 3070 80W GPU. Both of these CPUs are being used in this first wave of refreshed RTX 30 series gaming laptops, so we’ll get a good look at how they stack up in a moment.

I’ve tested these games at 1080p Ultra settings with Nvidia Optimus enabled, which is currently the most reasonable CPU limited setup you might use a gaming laptop for.

First I want to start with some GPU limited titles just to warm us up. One of those is Dirt 5. We can see here that with the RTX 3070, the 11370H and 10870H systems perform about the same which is to be expected. Another title where we see this occur is Metro Exodus, the previous generation system is slightly faster but overall it’s quite similar performance.

But then when we get into more CPU limited titles, the situation changes entirely. Here we have Resident Evil 2 using the Balanced preset, which is largely CPU limited on these systems at 1080p. The laptop equipped with the eight-core 10870H is substantially faster, we’re talking 54% faster which is an insane margin for any sort of CPU limited hardware. Luckily though this is a bit of a worst case scenario for the TUF F15 and the 11370H, so let’s move on.

In Star Wars Jedi Fallen Order we still do see a large performance discrepancy between the 10870H and 11370H configurations, but we’re only talking a 29% difference here which is looking a lot better than the previous chart. That’s still a large difference, but in a CPU limited game like this, the performance delta isn’t that far off what we saw in some productivity benchmarks like Blender or Chromium compilation. When you’re packing such a powerful GPU, having that extra CPU headroom does make a big difference.

In Borderlands 3 we get a bit of relief. While the 10870H configuration is still faster, it’s now just 11% ahead which is a much more manageable margin and lower than some of the productivity deltas we saw. But it’s still slower than quite a popular laptop configuration with the new RTX 3070.

We’ll show a couple more benchmarks here, one of them is Watch Dogs Legion. Again we do see a performance discrepancy between the newer quad-core design and the older eight-core design, with the 10870H pulling 16% ahead in this game. Again everything is tested here with Optimus enabled in an apples-to-apples configuration, you will gain performance when you disable Optimus and let the display run straight off the dGPU, as that will alleviate the CPU bottleneck somewhat, however other systems gain performance as well with direct dGPU connections and our goal here is to test in the most CPU limited environment as we can, as we do with all CPU reviews.

And the last chart I’ll show here is Death Stranding where again the 11370H system is quite severely CPU bottlenecked. The 10870H configuration was a huge 36% faster as the quad-core CPU layout is a significant performance limiting factor when playing at 1080p. Given that running at 1080p with Optimus enabled is the default out of the box experience, that’s not great.

All up we tested 17 games on the TUF F15 and the performance numbers are not pretty compared to our Core i7-10870H laptop running the same RTX 3070 80W GPU. In some games that were extremely GPU limited, the performance delta between the two was small, 5% or less. There was another group of results where the newer Tiger Lake design was 10 to 15 percent slower, and then in the worst cases we had a couple of results over 35% slower where the games were very CPU limited and basically maxing out the CPU across all four cores.

At this point I don’t think we need to show any more benchmarks for the Intel Core i7-11370H, because we have a pretty good idea of how it performs across both productivity and gaming. We do have a bit to say in this conclusion, so we’ll start with the positives.

What We Learned

Right now, the Core i7-11370H is the fastest H-series processor from Intel in lightly-threaded workloads. That’s largely a by-product of Intel’s six and eight core Tiger Lake h55 designs not being announced or released yet, but still, the 11370H can clock up to 4.8 GHz and that allows it to match Ryzen 5000 processors in a number of single-threaded tests. It’s not an outright win for Intel, but does improve performance substantially over the 10th generation.

With better IPC and performance per core, the 11370H is also quite a bit faster than prior quad-core designs from Intel in multi-threading. However, that’s just about where the positives end for this processor.

The major issue for the 11370H is that lightly-threaded productivity applications are not the primary use case for an H-series laptop. People buying these sorts of systems — designs like the Asus TUF Dash F15 — are either wanting larger multi-core and GPU performance for stuff like video editing, 3D rendering and compiling; or they want a system for gaming. And the 11370H fails in both of these areas.

For multi-thread productivity workloads, the absolute best thing I can say about the 11370H is that it’s as fast as Intel’s last-generation mainstream Core i7, the Core i7-10750H, depending on the benchmark. But in many cases it’s slower than that part, as Intel are providing fewer CPU cores. This means that when comparing Intel’s new, baseline Core i7 model to Intel’s previous baseline Core i7 model at roughly the same power, we’re on average seeing a multi-core performance regression.

And that’s the most favorable comparison we have in the Core i7 range. Put the i7-11370H up against the eight-core i7-10870H and the newer 11th-gen processor loses by 15% or more. Put it up against AMD’s last-gen entry-level Ryzen 5 part and it loses by even more. There is a clear trend that for these workloads, a sizable IPC gain can’t offset the reduction in CPU core count.

As for gaming, the Core i7-11370H is frankly not well suited for it. It causes significant CPU bottlenecks in many titles, which is similar to what we’ve seen previously with Intel’s quad-core parts, it’s just that now we have even faster laptop GPUs like the RTX 3070 on hand. At a bare minimum in today’s gaming laptops with a high-end part like the 3070 you want a decent six-core CPU, if not better.

The 11370H being a power overclocked U-series part isn’t cutting it here. I think Intel’s attempt at making a low-power CPU into an H-series part for gaming laptops has failed.

The key takeaway here is that the Core i7-11370H is one CPU you should avoid.

If you stick to previous-gen Core i7 CPUs, or Ryzen 4000 or newer, I think in general you’ll end up with a superior experience. The risk of severely bottlenecking an RTX 3070 with this inadequate quad-core CPU is far too high for my liking.

I also take significant issue with the name Intel has used here. I have no idea how this ended up as a Core i7 part, given you have to go all the way back to Kaby Lake 7th generation parts in early 2017 to find the last quad-core H-series Core i7 CPU: the Core i7-7700HQ, as an example. Since then, the Core i7 range has denoted six-core CPUs, or more recently eight-core CPUs. Putting the 11370H in the Core i7 series serves to both dilute Intel’s Core i7 brand, and deceive less tech-savvy customers into thinking they are getting a powerful processor when they aren’t.

Simply put, the Core i7-11370H should be a Core i3 processor. Instead, Intel seems eager to cram four, six and eight core parts all into the Core i7 range. If and when that happens, what is even the point of having i3, i5 and i7 ranges for laptops.

Finally, the Asus TUF Dash F15 happens to be a fine laptop on most aspects. If the choice of CPU would be a proper 10th-gen Core i7 part or a Ryzen processor, we could certainly recommend you took a look. We don’t understand why Asus chose to use this CPU instead as it seems most other OEMs passed on it for their early 2021 refreshes. Did they want to experiment and see what the result was? We can’t say for sure, but unfortunately the 11370H is holding the F15 back from greater things.

Shopping Shortcuts
  • GeForce RTX 3060 Laptops on Amazon
  • GeForce RTX 3080 Laptops on Amazon
  • Ryzen 7 5800U Laptops on Amazon
  • Core i7-1165G7 Tiger Lake Laptops on Amazon
  • Core i7-1185G7 Tiger Lake Laptops on Amazon
  • Ryzen 9 5900HX Laptops on Amazon
  • Ryzen 7 5800H Laptops on Amazon

Intel Core i7-12700K | 67 factors

smartphonesgraphic cardswireless headphones CPU


Intel Core i7-12700K


Intel Core i7-12700K

Why is it better than Intel Core7 iK


  • CPU speed?
    8 x 3. 6GHz & 4 x 2.7GHz vs 12.5GHz
  • RAM speed?
    4800MHz vs 2489.55MHz
  • Processor thread of execution?
    20 vs 7.73
  • Semiconductor size?
    10nm vs 16.99nm
  • L2 cache?
    12MB vs 2.23MB
  • Turbo clock speed?
    5GHz vs 3.84GHz
  • PassMark result?
    34449 vs 8680.27
  • L3 cache?
    25MB vs 9.54MB

Which comparisons are the most popular? nine0073

Intel Core i7-12700k


Intel Core i5-12600K

Intel Core i7-12700K


AMD Ryzen 7 5800x


VS 9000 VS 9000 ATPL Core i7-12700K


Intel Core i9-12900K

Intel Core i7-12700K


Intel Core i7-12700

Intel Core i7-12700K

2 VS

ANTEL CORE I7-11700 Intel Core i7-12700K


Intel Core i7-12700h

Intel Core i7-12700K


AMD Ryzen 7 5800x3D

Intel Core I7-12700K 9000 VS


I5-13600CA I5-13-13600C


Intel Core i9-12900

Price Comparison

Cheaper than Intel Core i7-12700K

User Reviews

Overall Rating

Users Intel Core0 90 127 K0003

Intel Core i7-12700k


1 reviews of users


Price and quality ratio

8. 0 /10

1 Votes

9000 9000 9000 9.0 90 90 90 90 9

1 Votes


9.0 /10

1 Votes


10.0 /10

1 Votes

Energy efficiency

9000 9000

7.0 /10

1 votes


CPU speed

8 x 3.6GHz & 4 x 2.7GHz

). It is calculated by adding the clock speeds of each core or, in the case of multi-core processors, each group of cores.

processor thread

More threads result in better performance and better multitasking. nine0003

turbo clock speed

When the processor is running below its limits, it can jump to a higher clock speed to increase performance.

Has an unlocked multiplier

✔Intel Core i7-12700K

Some processors come with an unlocked multiplier and are easier to overclock, allowing you to get better quality in games and other applications.

L2 Cache

More L2 scratchpad memory results in faster results in CPU and system performance tuning. nine0003

L3 cache

More L3 scratchpad memory results in faster results in CPU and system performance tuning.

L1 cache

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

More L1 scratchpad results in faster results in CPU and system performance tuning.

L2 core

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

More data can be stored in L2 scratchpad for access by each processor core.

L3 core

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

More data can be stored in L3 scratchpad for access by each processor core.


PassMark result

This benchmark measures CPU performance using multithreading.

PassMark result (single)

This benchmark measures processor performance using a thread of execution. nine0003

Geekbench 5 result (multi-core)

Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform test that measures the performance of a multi-core processor. (Source: Primate Labs,2023)

Cinebench R20 result (multi-core)

Cinebench R20 is a test that measures the performance of a multi-core processor by rendering a 3D scene.

Cinebench R20 result (single core)

Cinebench R20 is a test to evaluate the performance of a single core processor when rendering a 3D scene. nine0003

Geekbench 5 result (single core)

Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform test that measures the single core performance of a processor. (Source: Primate Labs, 2023)

Blender test result (bmw27)

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

The Blender benchmark (bmw27) measures CPU performance by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render a scene in a shorter time.

result Blender (classroom)

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

The Blender (classroom) benchmark measures CPU performance by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render a scene in a shorter time.

performance per watt

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

This means that the processor is more efficient, giving more performance per watt of power used.

Integrated graphics

GPU clock speed


The graphics processing unit (GPU) has a higher clock speed.

turbo GPU


When the GPU is running below its limits, it can jump to a higher clock speed to increase performance.

GPU Execution Units

A Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) with more execution units can provide better graphics.

monitor support

By using multiple displays, you can increase your workspace, making it easier to work across multiple applications.

version of DirectX

DirectX is used in games with a new version that supports better graphics.

OpenGL version

The newer the OpenGL version, the better graphics quality in games.

version of OpenCL

Some applications use OpenCL to use the power of the graphics processing unit (GPU) for non-graphical computing. Newer versions are more functional and better quality. nine0003

texture units (TMUs)

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

TMUs accept textured units and bind them to the geometric layout of the 3D scene. More TMUs generally means texture information is processed faster.

imaging units ROPs

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

ROPs are responsible for some of the final steps of the rendering process, such as writing the final pixel data to memory and for performing other tasks such as anti-aliasing to improve the appearance of graphics. nine0003


RAM speed


Can support faster memory which speeds up system performance.

maximum memory bandwidth


This is the maximum rate at which data can be read from or stored in memory.

DDR memory version

DDR (Double Data Rate Synchronous Dynamic Random Access Memory) is the most common type of main memory. New versions of DDR memory support higher maximum speeds and are more energy efficient. nine0003

memory channels

More memory channels increase the speed of data transfer between memory and processor.

maximum memory

Maximum memory (RAM).

bus baud rate

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

The bus is responsible for transferring data between various components of a computer or device.

Supports memory troubleshooting code

✖Intel Core i7-12700K

Memory error recovery code can detect and correct data corruption. It is used when necessary to avoid distortion, such as in scientific computing or when starting a server.

eMMC version

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

A newer version of eMMC — built-in flash memory — speeds up the memory interface, has a positive effect on device performance, for example, when transferring files from a computer to internal memory via USB. nine0003

bus frequency

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

The bus is responsible for transferring data between different components of a computer or device


uses multithreading

✔Intel Core i7-12700K

by dividing each physical processor core into logical cores, also known as threads. Thus, each core can run two instruction streams at the same time. nine0003


✔Intel Core i7-12700K

AES is used to speed up encryption and decryption.


✔Intel Core i7-12700K

AVX is used to help speed up calculations in multimedia, scientific and financial applications, and to improve the performance of the Linux RAID program.

version of SSE

SSE is used to speed up multimedia tasks such as editing images or adjusting audio volume. Each new version contains new instructions and improvements. nine0003

Has F16C

✔Intel Core i7-12700K

F16C is used to speed up tasks such as image contrast adjustment or volume control.

bits transmitted at the same time

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

NEON provides faster media processing such as MP3 listening.


✔Intel Core i7-12700K

MMX is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting picture contrast or adjusting volume. nine0003

Has TrustZone

✖Intel Core i7-12700K

The technology is integrated into the processor to ensure device security when using features such as mobile payments and digital rights management (DRM) video streaming.

interface width

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

The processor can decode more instructions per clock (IPC), which means that the processor performs better

Price comparison

Which CPU is better?

This page is currently only available in English.

Test and review: Intel Core i7-12700K is a great processor for its price

We’ve already tested the fastest and slowest K processor from the new Alder Lake line, today we’re rounding up the Core i7-12700K results. As we noted in the first review, Intel is back! Alder Lake design has a lot of innovation, from hybrid cores to I/O interface. Today we’ll be adding a third processor that rounds out the new Alder Lake lineup in the middle. nine0448

Alder Lake desktop processors combine several innovations: a hybrid performance design with fast and efficient cores, both core types rely on a new microarchitecture, the desktop die is produced on a 10nm process for the first time, the new platform supports DDR5 and PCI Express 5.0. So there are a lot of innovations.

We already published a white paper last week where we looked at the architectures and technical innovations of the new processors. Initially, Intel introduces six CPU models with different numbers of powerful and efficient cores. Interestingly, Intel has equalized the power consumption levels PL1=PL2, and today we will present the corresponding tests. We have already covered the microarchitecture of performance cores (Golden Cove) and efficient cores (Gracemont). nine0003

Desktop processors are the first to feature Intel 7 technology (previously 10 nm Enhanced SuperFin) using an IP block design that Intel plans to use in other future processors. With the addition of DDR5 and PCI Express 5.0 support, we get two new I/O technologies. Moreover, DDR5 can be used from the very start of the platform, since the corresponding motherboards and memory strips have already appeared in retail. We will carry out the appropriate tests. The hybrid design of Alder Lake relies heavily on the interplay of software and hardware. In particular, the Intel Thread Director technology is very important here. nine0003

DDR4 vs. DDR5 memory benchmarks and Windows 10 vs. Windows 11 can be found in our first article. The same goes for the AVX-512, IPC, integrated graphics and overclocking tests.

Subscribe to the Hardwareluxx VKontakte and Facebook groups, as well as to our Telegram channel (@hardwareluxxrussia).

nine0466 12 MB


Processor comparison
Cores L3 cache L2 cache Turbo 3.0 Frequency Boost Base frequency Base Power Turbo Power Price
Core i9-12900K 8P+8E 30 MB 14 MB 5.2 GHz 5.1 / 3.9 GHz 3.2 / 2.4 GHz 125 W 241 W from 67.000 ₽
Core i9-12900KF 8P+8E 30 MB 14 MB 5.2 GHz 5.1 / 3.9 GHz 3.2 / 2.4 GHz 125 W 241 W from 64.800 ₽
Core i7-12700K 8P+4E 25 MB 5. 0 GHz 4.9 / 3.8 GHz 3.6 / 2.7 GHz 125 W 190 W from 50.400 ₽
Core i7-12700KF 8P+4E 25 MB 12 MB 5.0 GHz 4.9 / 3.8 GHz 3.6 / 2.7 GHz 125 W 190 W from 52.700 ₽
Core i5-12600K 6P+4E 20 MB 9.5 MB 4.9 / 3.6 GHz 3.7 / 2.8 GHz 125 W 150 W from 38.200 ₽
Core i5-12600KF 6P+4E 20 MB 9.5 MB 4.9 / 3.6 GHz 3.7 / 2.8 GHz 125 W 150 W from 42.400 ₽

The top model Core i9-12900K(F) with eight performance and eight efficient cores operates at frequencies up to 5.1 and 3.9 GHz, respectively. The L3 and L2 caches are the largest here because they depend on the number of active cores. The base TDP is set to 125W, but the processor can consume 241W on an ongoing basis. The Core i7-12700K(F) is a real «700K», that is, it differs from the older model not only in the selection of crystals, unlike Rocket Lake. Intel has disabled one cluster of E-cores, so the tested processor has an 8+4 configuration. Accordingly, the L3 and L2 caches are slightly smaller. Clock frequencies are reduced by several hundred megahertz. Finally, Turbo TDP reduced from 241 to 190 W. I wonder how the new processor will show itself in practice.

Intel introduced the «junior» Core i5-12600K(F), which is also devoid of two productive cores. The L3 and L2 caches have been further reduced to 20MB and 9.5MB, respectively. The Core i5-12600K no longer has Turbo 3.0, but the base clock and Boost are pretty close to the Core i7-12700K(F). But the TDP Turbo has been cut back to 150W.

We recommend checking out our guide to picking the best Intel and AMD processor for the current quarter.