Intel Alder Lake and Raptor Lake compared - What makes the "smaller" processors so interesting

Compared to their 11th generation Rocket Lake processors, Intel managed to achieve a big jump in performance with the introduction of their hybrid CPUs. Based on the new 1700 socket and the new Z600 processor, the Intel Core i9-12900K featured 16 cores and 24 threads in total. Just under a year later, there was already a noticeable jump in performance with the release of the Rocket Lake series. One problem which has followed Intel's top-of-the-range models for multiple generations: In certain situations where the CPU finds itself at high load, the devices' power consumption can be quite high. Power consumption in the newest model measures 253 watts - but this is just a guideline, as the built-in cooling system and the resulting temperatures actually determine the processor's performance limit if all restrictions regarding TDP limits have been deactivated in the BIOS.

When it comes to performance, the smaller models such as the Intel Core i5-12400 or the Intel Core i5-13400 actually prove to be more interesting. Both models feature 6 P-cores and even at maximum load, they are very efficient - proving they don't necessarily need a high-performance and expensive cooling system. This makes both models perfect for a budget gaming system.

We used the following system for the benchmarks and tests below: 

• Streacom BC1 V2 Open Benchtable
• Asus ROG Maximus Z690 Hero (BIOS v2204)
• Custom-Loop water cooling (pump: Alphacool Aquastream XT Ultra, radiator: Watercool: MO-RA3 420 LT BLACK)
• Palit GeForce RTX 4090 Gamerock OC
• EVGA SuperNOVA P+ 1600W
• G.Skill Ripjaws S5 (2x 16 GB - DDR5-5200)
• Intel Optane 905p 480 GB (system)
• Intel SSD DC P4618 PCIe 3.1 x8 6,4 TB (for games) 
• Microsoft Windows 11 Professional 64-Bit (version 22H2)

As expected, the Intel Core i9-13900K is the one to live up to. Its single-core and muti-core performance was admirable and resulted in a great outcome in our tests. The Intel Core i7-13700K was the second-fastest processor, which has a comparable number of cores to the Intel Core i9-12900K. But in detail, a lot has changed: Next to higher clock rates, the Raptor Lake S processors benefit from a larger L2 and L3 cache. This led the Intel Core i7-13700K to perform about 10% better than the Intel Core i9-12900K. Due to the Intel Core i7-13700K's great performance and the relatively small gap between it and the current flagship, you should seriously consider this model if you are looking to save a bit of money. There are around $180 between the two, after all.

In the lower third, you can find your so-called introductory processors for budget gaming systems. This sounds harsh, but if you take a look at their performance, the "small" Intel Core i5-13400 put the Intel Core i9-11900K in its place. However, the Intel Core i5-12400 couldn't keep up due to its missing E-cores, which were only introduced with the Intel Core i5-13400. Even so, its 10% distance behind in all the benchmarks is quite small in relation. We shouldn't forget its considerably lower power consumption, as well.

Furthermore, the Intel Core i7-12700 and Intel Core i7-13700 are also very interesting with regard to their performance and ranking. Both models come without the K abbreviation, and as a result, are somewhat limited when it comes to their PL2 limit. Taking into consideration the conditions of our tests, in which all processors were able to display their unlimited performance, these two models still prove to be a great mid-range alternative. They are cheaper than their namesake and have freely selectable multipliers - but generally speaking, they are just as fast.

During our load test, which we performed using the Cinebench R15 continuous loop, all processors showed good performance. In detail, only the Intel Core i7-12700K fell a little behind due to a decline in performance and as a result, this further places it on the same level as the non-K model. 

All of the tested processors fared well in terms of system performance. Although, some clear differences became obvious when it came to the synthetic system performance tests. However, you will likely not feel a noticeable difference in normal, everyday use. If you want to play games and stream at the same time while avoiding getting a second system, then you should probably be looking at getting an Intel Core i7.

If you just want to use your PC to play unlimited games, then you should first ask yourself in which resolution you want to play these. As seen in the individual processors' benchmarks together with an Nvidia GeForce RTX 4090, the CPU performance becomes more and more irrelevant with increasing resolutions. From time to time, you will also find that some games scale well and with many processing units at resolutions higher than 1,440p. The Intel Core i7-13700 is a good middle ground - its performance rating in the tested games only lagged a little behind the Intel Core i9-13900K.

Our two entry-level models, the Intel Core i5-12400 and Intel Core i5-13400, look a little defeated at first glance. Nevertheless, they still managed to deliver sufficient performance in the games we tested - providing smooth gameplay using all of the tested presets. The right balance is also important in the rest of the hardware. In reality, it makes no sense to combine the current strongest Nvidia graphics card with a "budget CPU". To ensure equal opportunity when delivering a direct comparison, we left the test platform unchanged for all of the processors - with the exception of the Intel Core i9-13900K. As there were no further flagship samples available at the time of testing, we left out the Schenker XMG Sector - Intel's test results.