Core i9-13900KS 6 GHz CPU Beats Core i9-13900K By 10 Percent In New Benchmarks

Raptor Lake CPU
Raptor Lake CPU (Image credit: Intel)

It's no secret that Intel is preparing the Core i9-13900KS to rival the best CPUs on the market. The special edition Raptor Lake processor will boost to an impressive 6 GHz; however, early benchmarks have revealed that the Core i9-13900KS may not be much faster than the Core i9-13900K, the existing flagship Raptor Lake chip.

The Core i9-13900KS retains the same recipe as the Core i9-13900K, which will wield 24 cores and 32 threads. In addition, the configuration consists of eight P-cores and 16 E-cores. Therefore, the Core i9-13900KS' performance uplift will come entirely from the improved clock speeds. The regular Core i9-13900K hits 5.8 GHz through Intel's Thermal Velocity Boost (TVB) technology, whereas the Core i9-13900KS will reach 6 GHz. The extra 200 MHz will lift the Core i9-13900KS slightly over the Core i9-13900K.

Hardware detective Benchleaks (opens in new tab) uncovered three Geekbench 5 submissions for the Core i9-13900K. We've used the highest result for comparison to get an idea of the best-case scenario. The test system's other components included the Asus ROG Maximus Z790 Hero and an ultra-fast 32GB DDR5-7200 memory kit.

Intel Core i9-13900KS Benchmarks

Swipe to scroll horizontally
ProcessorSingle-Core ScoreMulti-Core Score
Core i9-13900KS2,31926,774
Core i9-13900K2,22724,311
Ryzen 9 7950X2,19222,963
Core i9-12900KS2,08119,075
Core i9-12900K1,98817,324

Note: Non-Core i9-13900K scores are from Geekbench 5's processor database.

The Core i9-13900K delivered 4.1% higher single-core performance than the Core i9-13900K. The chip also outperformed the Core i9-12900KS and Core i9-12900K by 11.4% and 16.6%, respectively. The Core i9-13900KS also exhibited 5.8% higher single-core performance than the Ryzen 9 7950X, AMD's current Ryzen 7000 flagship.

In terms of multi-core performance, the Core i9-13900K was up to 10.1% faster than the Core i9-13900K. It also jumped ahead of the Core i9-12900KS and Core i9-12900K by 40.4% and 54.5%, respectively. On the other hand, the Ryzen 9 7950X was no match for the Core i9-13900KS, either, with the 6 GHz chip obtaining a 16.6% higher multi-core score.

With the Core i9-12900KS, Intel had the fastest gaming processor that money could buy. Unfortunately for the Blue Team, AMD later snatched the title with the Ryzen 7 5800X3D. As a result, Intel aims to recover the crown with the Core i9-13900KS. However, word on the street is that AMD is reportedly cooking up to three Ryzen 7000 3D V-Cache chips for 2023, so it will be an excellent year for gamers with many formidable gaming options.

Zhiye Liu
RAM Reviewer and News Editor

Zhiye Liu is a Freelance News Writer at Tom’s Hardware US. Although he loves everything that’s hardware, he has a soft spot for CPUs, GPUs, and RAM.

  • DougMcC
    Would it have been so hard to completely redesign the K series with 10 p-cores instead of 8 for a marginal performance advantage in certain benchmarks? Stupid lazy Intel.
    Reply
  • Zizo007
    RIP, 7950X3D will be much faster in many games where cache is important. Just look at the 5800X3D and this time the 3D cache is even faster and more optimized.
    Reply
  • JustinTimeCuber1
    DougMcC said:
    Would it have been so hard to completely redesign the K series with 10 p-cores instead of 8 for a marginal performance advantage in certain benchmarks? Stupid lazy Intel.
    Sure bro you're smarter than those stupid lazy Intel employees with their so-called "degrees" in "computer engineering"
    Reply
  • lmcnabney
    How does a 3-4% clock speed increase deliver a 10% performance gain?
    Reply
  • spongiemaster
    Zizo007 said:
    RIP, 7950X3D will be much faster in many games where cache is important. Just look at the 5800X3D and this time the 3D cache is even faster and more optimized.
    12900KS was on average about 1% faster than the 5800X3D in gaming. And just like the previous gen, the 13900KS will crush the 7800X3D in pretty much everything else. Most people don't use their computer for gaming.
    Reply
  • Zizo007
    spongiemaster said:
    12900KS was on average about 1% faster than the 5800X3D in gaming. And just like the previous gen, the 13900KS will crush the 7800X3D in pretty much everything else. Most people don't use their computer for gaming.
    I said in cache optimized games, 5800x3d is significantly faster than 12900KS there and now its a different situation as the 7950X is already too close to the performance of the 13900K, on top of that this time the 3D cache is faster and more optimized vs 5800X3D.

    https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-5800x3d-review
    Reply
  • spongiemaster
    Zizo007 said:
    I said in cache optimized games, 5800x3d is significantly faster than 12900KS there and now its a different situation as the 7950X is already too close to the performance of the 13900K, on top of that this time the 3D cache is faster and more optimized vs 5800X3D.

    https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-5800x3d-review
    What games does a 12900k struggle to run that magically become playable on a 5800X3D with its "significantly faster" performance?
    Reply
  • TerryLaze
    Zizo007 said:
    I said in cache optimized games, 5800x3d is significantly faster than 12900KS there and now its a different situation as the 7950X is already too close to the performance of the 13900K, on top of that this time the 3D cache is faster and more optimized vs 5800X3D.

    https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-5800x3d-review
    Yeah but it could be close because that's the limit of the games so no matter how much better the cache is it won't improve the games.
    We can only guess and as far as guessing goes you can go both ways with the same amount of sureness.
    Reply
  • zecoeco
    I saw the Ryzen 7900x boost to 6.2GHz via PBO out of the box. So I don't think it's the world's first 6GHz as Intel claim.

    Instantaneous 1ns pulses of 6GHz in one core isn't going to help much in performance, but its Intel's special chip. +200MHz for $100 more is not a good idea.
    Reply
  • TerryLaze
    zecoeco said:
    I saw the Ryzen 7900x boost to 6.2GHz via PBO out of the box, no overclock no tuning. So I don't think it's the world's first 6GHz as Intel claim.

    Instantaneous 1ns pulses of 6GHz in one core isn't going to help much in performance, but its Intel's special chip. +200MHz for $100 more is not a good idea.
    PBO is both tuning and overclocking....
    https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3491-explaining-precision-boost-overdrive-benchmarks-auto-oc
    Reply