What's Hot

    Gordon Moore, Intel Co-Founder, Tech Industry Visionary and Passes At 94

    April 11, 2023

    NVIDIA CES 2023 Special Address Live Blog (8am PT/16:00 UTC)

    April 9, 2023

    Intel Leadership Shuffle: Stuart Pann in for IFS, Raja Koduri out for GPUs & off to AI Startup

    April 6, 2023
    Facebook Twitter Instagram
    PC Central
    • Home
    • Guides
    • CPU

      Gordon Moore, Intel Co-Founder, Tech Industry Visionary and Passes At 94

      April 11, 2023

      AMD Quietly Launches A620 Platform: Sub $100 AM5 Motherboards

      March 17, 2023

      Intel Unveils Core i9-13900KS: Raptor Lake Spreads Its Wings to 6.0 GHz

      March 15, 2023

      Best CPUs for Gaming March 2023

      March 7, 2023

      A Lighter Touch: Exploring CPU Power Scaling On Core i9-13900K and Ryzen 9 7950X

      February 14, 2023
    • gpus

      NVIDIA CES 2023 Special Address Live Blog (8am PT/16:00 UTC)

      April 9, 2023

      Intel Leadership Shuffle: Stuart Pann in for IFS, Raja Koduri out for GPUs & off to AI Startup

      April 6, 2023

      The AMD CES 2023 Keynote Live Blog (6:30pm PT/02:30 UTC)

      March 27, 2023

      AMD Issues Early Q3’22 Financial Results: Misses Guidance By $1B as Client Revenue Craters

      March 25, 2023

      NVIDIA Releases Hotfix For GeForce Driver To Resolve CPU Usage Spikes

      March 20, 2023
    • Notebook Reviews

      The ASUS Vivobook Pro 15 OLED Review: For The Creator In All Of Us

      March 30, 2023

      Intel Expands 12th Gen Core to Ultraportable Laptops, from 5-cores at 9 W to 14-cores at 28 W

      March 22, 2023

      Intel Alder Lake-H Core i9-12900HK Review: MSI's Raider GE76 Goes Hybrid

      February 23, 2023

      Updated AMD Notebook Roadmap: Zen 4 on 4nm in 2023, Zen 5 By End of 2024

      January 7, 2023

      AMD Mobile GPU 2022 Update: Radeon 6000S Series, 6x50M Parts, and Navi 24-Based 6500M and 6300M

      December 30, 2022
    • Desktop Reviews

      ZOTAC’s Streaming Mini-PC, the MI553B, with Integrated AVerMedia Capture Card

      March 26, 2023

      Samsung ArtPC: Cylindrical PC with 360º audio, i5/i7 plus NVMe, Preorders from $1200

      March 26, 2023

      HP Envy 27-Inch AIO Updates: Six-Core Coffee Lake, 4K Display, NVMe

      March 16, 2023

      AMD Creates Quad Core Zen SoC with 24 Vega CUs for Chinese Consoles

      March 12, 2023

      ASUS Booth Tour at CES 2016: 10G Switches, External GPU Dock, USB-C Monitor and more

      February 20, 2023
    • Mac Reviews
    Facebook Twitter Instagram
    PC Central
    Home»CPU»A Lighter Touch: Exploring CPU Power Scaling On Core i9-13900K and Ryzen 9 7950X
    CPU

    A Lighter Touch: Exploring CPU Power Scaling On Core i9-13900K and Ryzen 9 7950X

    PC CentralBy PC CentralFebruary 14, 2023Updated:April 13, 2023No Comments9 Mins Read
    Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
    Share
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email

    One of the biggest running gags on social media and Reddit is how hot and power hungry CPUs have become over the years. Whereas at one time flagship x86 CPUs didn't even require a heatsink, they can now saturate whole radiators. Thankfully, it's not quite to the levels of a nuclear reactor, as the memes go – but as the kids say these days, it's also not a nothingburger. Designing for higher TDPs and greater power consumption has allowed chipmakers to keep pushing the envelope in terms of performance – something that's no easy feat in a post-Dennard world – but it's certainly created some new headaches regarding power consumption and heat in the process. Something that, for better or worse, the latest flagship chips from both AMD and Intel exemplify.

    But despite these general trends, this doesn't mean that a high performance desktop CPU also needs to be a power hog. In our review of AMD's Ryzen 9 7950X, our testing showed that even capped at a these days pedestrian 65 Watts, the 7950X could deliver a significant amount of performance at less than half its normal power consumption.

    If you'll pardon the pun, power efficiency has become a hot talking point these days, as enthusiasts look to save on their energy bills (especially in Europe) while still enjoying fast CPU performance, looking for other ways to take advantage of the full silicon capabilities of AMD's Raphael and Intel's Raptor Lake-S platforms besides stuffing the chips with as many joules as possible. All the while, the small form factor market remains a steadfast outpost for high efficiency chips, where cooler chips are critical for building smaller and more compact systems that can forego the need for large cooling systems.

    All of this is to say that while it's great to see the envelope pushed in terms of peak performance, the typical focus on how an unlocked chip scales when overclocking (pushing CPU frequency and CPU VCore voltages) is just one way to look at overall CPU performance. So today we are going to go the other way, and to take a look at overall energy efficiency for users – to see what happens when we aim for the sweet spot on the voltage/frequency curve. To that end, today we're investigating how the Intel Core i9-13900K and AMD Ryzen 9 7950X perform at different power levels, and to see what kind of benefits power scaling can provide compared to stock settings.

    The Ever Changing Definition of TDP (Thermal Design Power)

    One of the most frustrating talking points surrounding processors involves TDP, or more specifically, what TDP even is. While the term has a fixed definition – Thermal Design Power – what that actually means in regards to the specifications of a product varies from one hardware maker to the next. Even Intel and AMD have slightly different definitions of TDP (despite sharing the x86 CPU market), which makes it a complicated and at-times confusing term. In short, TDP is no longer an unflinching guide to the maximum power consumption from a specific processor – or even how much heat energy can dissipate from a processor

    This is is a matter we have given plenty of column inches to over the years, so below are some previous articles on the subject of power and TDP:

    • Why Intel Processors Draw More Power Than Expected: TDP and Turbo Explained
    • Talking TDP, Turbo, and Overclocking: An Interview with Intel Fellow Guy Therien

    Starting with Intel, while the company assigns official TDP figures to its processors, the reality is that their unlocked processors are not limited to one assigned power figure. At best, Intel offers a set of TDP values based around the base frequency of their chips, while power level 1 (PL1) and power level 2 (PL2) ratings are laid on top of that to define the power parameters for those all-important (and all-advertised) turbo clock speeds.

    Meanwhile, looking at how AMD defines its TDP figures has been made more difficult with the release of its Ryzen 7000 series processors and the accompanying AM5 platform. While AMD does give out default TDP figures the Ryzen 7000 series, this is no more a hard ceiling than it is with Intel; the other element is what AMD calls Package Power Tracking, or PPT for short. The defined TDP value is assigned to its processors based on default frequency levels, while PPT is defined as the limitation to what the actual socket can deliver in terms of power (and what flagship chips tuned for maximum performance will try to consume).

     

    The long and short of matters is that, on practically any consumer-level motherboard paired with an adequate cooler, using any unlocked processor, including the two we're focusing on today, will circumvent the chip's base TDP rating in order to provide the highest turbo clock speeds possible, capped only by the temperature and electrical delivery limits. So taking the Ryzen 9 7950X as an example, although the default TDP is 170 W, the actual PPT wattage is defined as 230 W (with a sustained current of 160 A).

    The good news, however, is that these power limits are easily user-adjustable on both AMD and Intel platforms. Many motherboards for both platforms offer a plethora of adjustable values to raise and lower these limits, and even within Windows there are software packages like AMD's Ryzen Master and Intel's XTU that can make the necessary changes.

    Finding The Sweet Spot Balance Between Performance, Power, and Heat

    For its latest series of processors, AMD is offering a new feature called ECO Mode, which reduces a 170 W TDP-rated processor to 105 W (and a 105 W TDP-rated processor down to 65 W). When we reviewed the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X processor, we found some interesting results when using it at 65 W instead of its default value of 170 W.

    The most important thing we observed was that at 65 W, the Ryzen 9 7950X processor outperformed the Intel Core i9-12900K at default settings in the CineBench R23 multi-threaded test, which is nothing short of impressive. Since then, Intel released its 13th Gen Core series codenamed Raptor Lake, so the overall playing field has been leveled some. But still, it shows the potential value in dialing down the power consumption of a flagship CPU, as the 7950X was able to deliver 80% of its peak performance at under half the power consumption.

     

    Those findings, in turn, inspired the thesis behind this doing this article: we wondered how both the Core i9-13900K and Ryzen 9 7950X performed when using it with various power restrictions applied. So for this article, we're going ahead and testing just that situation, running AMD and Intel's flagship CPUs are various power levels.

    We've selected several power limits/PPTs to test, including the following:

    • Intel Core i9-13900K at default settings (125 W base, 253 W turbo)
    • AMD Ryzen 9 7950X at default settings (170 W base, 230 W PPT)
    • Both at 125 W
    • Both at 105 W
    • Both at 65 W
    • Both at 35 W

    Throughout all of this, it's important to note that the Intel Core i9-13900K and AMD Ryzen 9 7950X have a critical distinction in terms of construction: chiplets. Whereas the Core i9-13900K is a monolithic design with cache, core, memory controller (IMC), and iGPU all being built within a single die, AMD's Ryzen 9 7950X is built upon a chiplet design. As a result, the 7950X uses three different chiplets for all of its major functions, with two eight-core core complex dies (CCD) and one IO die (IOD) containing the memory controller, PCIe, and graphics.


    A screenshot from AMD's Ryzen Master Overclocking software during testing

    This means that when setting a defined power limited with the Core i9-13900K, it's limiting power from all of the variables as mentioned. Whereas doing the same on the Ryzen 9 7950X wouldn't yield the quite same effect, as the IOD and CCDs operate semi-independently, albeit through AMD's Infinity Fabric interconnect. To properly limit the power on the Ryzen 9 7950X, the Package Power Tracking limit would need to be applied to constrict the power limits properly, such as setting a value of 125 W on the PPT and not just on the CPU cores.

    Test Bed and Setup

    Since both Intel and AMD use different platforms and sockets, we're using the MSI MPG Z790 Carbon WIFI for the Core i9-13900K and the GIGABYTE X670E Aorus Master for the Ryzen 9 7950X. To try and keep things on a level playing field, we're using an SK Hynix Platinum P41 2TB NVMe storage drive and AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT graphics card.

    Normally we would rely on JEDEC memory settings defined by each platform, but in this case, we've opted to test both platforms with the same SK Hynix DDR5-5600B CL46 memory configuration. This is the memory we used for the Intel Core i9-13900K review, but it's faster than the highest official JEDEC settings supported by AMD's Ryzen 7000 series platform (DDR5-5200). Either way, we wanted to make our comparisons as apples-to-apples as possible, including holding memory at a constant performance and power level to investigate the benefits (if any) of restricting system power draw.

    Power Scaling Test Bed (DDR5)
    Intel & AMD
    CPUs Core i9-13900K ($589)
    24 Cores, 32 Threads
    125 W Base, 253 W Turbo

    Ryzen 9 7950X ($699)
    16 Cores, 32 Threads
    170 W Base, 230 W PPT

    Motherboards MSI MPG Z790 Carbon WIFI (13900K)
    GIGABYTE X670E Aorus Master (7950X)
    Memory SK Hynix
    2×16 GB
    DDR5-5600B CL46
    Cooling EKWB EK-AIO Elite 360 D-RGB 360mm 
    Storage SK Hynix Platinum P41 2TB PCIe 4.0 x4
    Power Supply Corsair HX1000
    GPUs AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT, 31.0.12019
    Operating Systems Windows 11 22H2

    Regarding benchmarks, we've opted for a small selection of rendering and encoding tests as we believe these will highlight differences in processor performance at the different power levels. For gaming, we've opted for Total War: Warhammer 3, as this is a notoriously heavily CPU-dependent title, while Borderlands 3 is more graphically demanding. We thought it would be prudent to test one of each, although if anyone would like to request more titles from our CPU 2023 benchmarking suite, feel free, and we'll add data as we find the time to collect and collate it.

    105W 125W 230W 253W 65W AMD Corei9-13900K CPUs Efficiency Intel PowerScaling PPT Ryzen97950X TDP
    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
    PC Central

    Related Posts

    Gordon Moore, Intel Co-Founder, Tech Industry Visionary and Passes At 94

    April 11, 2023

    Intel Leadership Shuffle: Stuart Pann in for IFS, Raja Koduri out for GPUs & off to AI Startup

    April 6, 2023

    The ASUS Vivobook Pro 15 OLED Review: For The Creator In All Of Us

    March 30, 2023

    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    • Popular Posts

    Gordon Moore, Intel Co-Founder, Tech Industry Visionary and Passes At 94

    April 11, 2023

    CES 2016: 34-inch 3440×1440 AIO Hands-On at GIGABYTE

    July 30, 2016

    CES 2016: ASRock Shows mini-STX 5×5 for Business and Education

    December 22, 2016

    CES 2016: MSI’s 27-inch 4K Gaming AIO with Full Sized Discrete GPU, the 27XT 6QE

    December 28, 2016

    Apple Updates MacBook Pro Family for 2018: More CPU Cores, DDR4, & Same Form Factors

    December 7, 2018

    Apple Announces Q1 FY 2018 Earnings

    December 20, 2018

    CES 2019: Digital Storm Spark, a ‘Mini-ITX’ with MXM RTX 2080

    August 1, 2019

    The 2020 Mac Mini Unleashed: Putting Apple Silicon M1 To The Test

    August 3, 2020
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    © 2023 PC Central.Get expert reviews on best computers, CPUs, motherboards, graphics cards and other computer components. We provide the latest tech news and up-to-date product reviews to help you make the right choice. Join us now!

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.