Organizer
Gadget news
Honor launches Magicbook X16 Plus and X14 Plus with new Intel Core i5
2:24 pm | December 3, 2024

Author: admin | Category: Mobile phones news | Tags: | Comments: Off

Honor announced the 300 series smartphones yesterday, and it also unveiled two new Magicbook laptops – X16 Plus and X14 Plus, both running the 13th gen Intel Core i5-220H. They also share the same memory options – 16 GB or 32 GB RAM and 1 TB storage. The Magicbook X16 Plus 2025, as is its full name, shares features a 16" screen, an 1.79 kg body with under 18 mm profile. Here, the screen supports up to 120 Hz refresh rate, has a resolution of 2,560 x 1,600 pixels and up to 430 nits brightness. The 75 Wh battery supports 65W fast charging. It has two USB-C, two USB-A ports (Gen1 & Gen...

Honor launches Magicbook X16 Plus and X14 Plus with new Intel Core i5
2:24 pm |

Author: admin | Category: Mobile phones news | Tags: | Comments: Off

Honor announced the 300 series smartphones yesterday, and it also unveiled two new Magicbook laptops – X16 Plus and X14 Plus, both running the 13th gen Intel Core i5-220H. They also share the same memory options – 16 GB or 32 GB RAM and 1 TB storage. The Magicbook X16 Plus 2025, as is its full name, shares features a 16" screen, an 1.79 kg body with under 18 mm profile. Here, the screen supports up to 120 Hz refresh rate, has a resolution of 2,560 x 1,600 pixels and up to 430 nits brightness. The 75 Wh battery supports 65W fast charging. It has two USB-C, two USB-A ports (Gen1 & Gen...

AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D review: a gaming dynamo with new, unexpected suprises
8:24 pm | November 11, 2024

Author: admin | Category: Computers Computing Computing Components Gadgets | Tags: , , | Comments: Off

AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D: Two-minute review

This generation of processors has been a mixed bag at best (and disappointing at worst), so it makes sense that Team Red would go all out to ensure the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D delivered something that exceeded expectations.

In that regard, the 9800X3D is a smashing success, delivering substantially better gaming performance than the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D that it replaces, though at a slightly higher $479 / £449.99 (about AU$700) price point. For gamers though, most will happily pay a bit more for a roughly 15% increase in gaming performance on average.

The chip isn't without faults, though. It isn't the absolute best processor for gaming in terms of framerates (that title belongs to the Intel Core i9-14900K over several games, averaged out), but where the last-gen Intel flagship simply threw raw wattage to get to the top, AMD's latest gaming processor uses substantially less power to come within 6% of the 14900K's overall gaming performance, a difference that is so close to being within the margin of variance and test setups that if I reran all my tests next week, the 9800X3D might beat it outright.

But, honestly, it doesn't need to do that. Intel's 14900K is overkill for anyone not running creative workloads like video editing, and the power cost is simply too high to justify getting an extra 6% overall gaming performance in synthetic tests. The Ryzen 9800X3D, meanwhile, will get you effectively identical actual performance and at a lower cost, both in MSRP terms, but also reduced power consumption and indirect savings like not needing to shell out for a 360mm AIO cooler to get the most out of the chip.

For that, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D is indisputably the best processor for gaming you can buy right now, and it cements 3D V-Cache as the second most impressive innovation for gaming hardware after AI upscaling and it's something that Intel just doesn't have an answer for it.

AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D: Price & availability

An AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D in its retail packaging

(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
  • How much is it? Its MSRP is $479 / £449.99 (about AU$700)
  • When is it out? It went on sale November 7, 2024
  • Where can you get it? You can get it in the US, UK, and Australia

The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D is available now in the US, UK, and Australia for $479 / £449.99 / AU$799, respectively.

This is a bump up from the price of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D it replaces, which launched at $449 / £439 / AU$779. I would have loved to see the price remain the same, of course, but the last-gen chip wasn't exactly a cheap processor to begin with, and both chips are very much targeted at an enthusiast market where the price bump here isn't exactly going to be a dealbreaker—so long as the performance increase justifies the bump in price.

In terms of Intel's competing offerings right now, on the performance side, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (and Intel Core i9-14900K, for that matter) is $110 / £100 / AU$300 more expensive to get the same kind of gaming performance. As for in-class silicon, the 9800X3D is about 15-20% more expensive than the competing Intel Core Ultra 7 265K, and is roughly 33% more expensive than the AMD Ryzen 7 9700X.

Essentially, the 9800X3D is a specialist chip for gamers, and while it isn't a performance slouch, at this price it's really only for PC gamers who want the best overall gaming processor and don't much care about stellar performance elsewhere. For those who need more than just a gaming chip, other options from AMD and Intel will be a better fit for the price.

  • Value: 3.5 / 5

AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D: Specs

AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D: Features & chipset

A mockup of the design of AMD's 2nd-generation 3D V-cache

(Image credit: AMD)

The fundamental specs of the 9800X3D aren't much different from the 7800X3D. They both sport the same 8-core/16-thread setup as the AMD Ryzen 7 9700X, but like the 7800X3D, the 9800X3D has an additional 64MB L3 cache while the Ryzen 7 9700X only has 32MB L3 cache.

This 3D V-Cache in the Ryzen 7 9800X3D has been redesigned from the previous two generations of AMD X3D chips. This second-generation 3D V-Cache, as AMD calls it, fundamentally changes how the 3D V-Cache die interfaces with the main processing die, which addresses some of the main complaints of the previous two generations of X3D chips.

In the first iteration of 3D V-Cache, the extra cache die was stacked on top of the main processing cores, but with 2nd-generation V-Cache, the extra cache die is underneath the main die, leaving the main processing cores free to directly interface with the CPU cooler.

This is a big deal, since the processing cores are where all the heat is being generated, so having an extra layer of silicon between it and the CPU cooler had a lot of implications for what the chip could do. Thermals had to be carefully managed, so clock speeds had to be kept in check and there was no ability to overclock the chip.

By moving the 3D V-Cache die underneath the main processor core complex, the thermal restraints around clock speeds and voltage no longer apply, so the 9800X3D is the first 3D V-cache chip to feature full overclocking support, allowing precise voltage controls at the same voltage limits as the rest of the Ryzen 9000-series lineup.

Compared to the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D, then, the 9800X3D benefits from noticeably faster base clock and boost clock speeds out of the box, and overclockers can now tinker with their CPUs without too much concern that they'll brick the chip (though with overclocking, that is always possible and can void your warranty, so use caution).

Beyond that, the only major change from the previous generation is faster DDR5 memory support, from 5200MHz with the 7800X3D to 5600MHz with the 9800X3D, though both chips support AMD EXPO memory overclocking for even faster memory speeds.

  • Features: 4 / 5

AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D: Performance

At the end of the day though, all that fancy new tech wouldn't amount to much if the chip's performance didn't deliver, and thankfully, it does - though not universally.

In the synthetic benchmarks, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D showed very strong single-core performance on par with the rest of the Ryzen 9000-series lineup. The Ryzen 7 7800X3D, meanwhile, lags behind its Ryzen 7000 siblings noticeably, owing to the need to control thermals by limiting clock speeds. The Ryzen 9800X3D does not have this problem. Likewise, its multi-core performance is also unconstrained, running ahead of the Ryzen 7 9700X across the board.

On the creative front, this is generally not going to be a chip for creatives to concern themselves with - though there is one exception. If you're a photographer or graphic designer who does a lot of work in Adobe Photoshop or its alternatives, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D's extra cache is going to be a serious benefit for your workflows, beating out even the Intel Core i9-14900K in PugetBench for Adobe Photoshop be a few hundred points.

Everyone else though, this chip is not going to do much for you.

On the gaming side, this is where the 9800X3D really shows off, though there's a bit of a caveat to that. In games where the main CPU bottleneck is game logic, such as Total War: Warhammer III or Civilization VI, the extra 3D V-Cache isn't necessarily going to help your game performance. In that instance, you're going to want something with the fastest clocks possible to plow through all those AI decision trees or physics calculations before a game frame is even drawn.

As such, Intel's last-gen (and even current-gen) chips have an advantage in some games like Returnal (where complex bullet and geometry physics are the main CPU workload) or Total War: Warhammer III (where a lot of individual actors need to have their logic calculated quickly) because these gaming workloads benefit from faster clock speeds.

Where 3D V-Cache really benefits gaming is when there's data being communicated from the CPU to the GPU, like texture files or model geometry, and that additional cache memory can retain these smaller-but-not-tiny files in the fastest possible memory that can hold it. This mitigates the latency introduced when drawing a new game frame when the CPU has to go back to RAM to fetch a file because it didn't already have it in its much closer cache memory.

Games like F1 2023 and Tiny Tina's Wonderland benefited mightily from the extra available cache. In the case of the former, the Ryzen 9800X3D just wallops the Intel Core i9-14900K, and in the case of the latter, runs a very close second to it.

Taken all together, the Intel Core has a slight advantage just given the mix of games I used to test these chips, but for most gamers, the odds are good that the thing you're going to be looking for is a processor that works with your graphics card the best most of the time, and in this case, that'll be the Ryzen 7 9800X3D.

Overall, then, with performance that comes in neck-and-neck with the best Intel processors in gaming workloads on average, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D would already be an incredible chip.

But I simply can't get over the fact that the 9800X3D can do this with just 53% of the power of the Core i9-14900K. Add to that the Ryzen 7 9800X3D's impressive single- and multi-core performance, surprisingly great Photoshop performance, and gen-on-gen performance gains at very little power or monetary cost, and the Ryzen 7 9800X3D is easily one of the best AMD processors ever made.

  • Performance: 5 / 5

Should you buy the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D?

An AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D in a masculine hand

(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

Buy the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D if...

On balance, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D is as good a gaming processor as you'll ever need.

Unlike its predecessor, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D can keep up with its peer class in general performance as well, not just gaming.

Don't buy it if...

If you're looking for more of a general-purpose processor, this chip isn't really for you.

The Ryzen 7 9800X3D isn't cheap, and for those on a budget, there are good processors out there that will get the job done.View Deal

Also consider

The Intel Core i7-14700K is still my favorite processor for its incredible performance at an accessible price.

Read the full Intel Core i7-14700K reviewView Deal

  • Originally reviewed November 2024
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Review
6:00 pm | October 24, 2024

Author: admin | Category: Computers Computing Computing Components Gadgets | Tags: , , | Comments: Off

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K & Intel Core Ultra 5 245K: One-minute review

An Intel Core Ultra 9 processor in its retail packaging

(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

I've had a couple of pre-briefings with Intel over the past couple of months about Intel Arrow Lake, so I can't say I'm surprised by the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, but it doesn't mean enthusiasts are going to be any less disappointed with what we got in the end.

Both Core Ultra chips effectively match the performance of the chips they are replacing, and while I've been saying for a while now that we have to stop looking at performance as the only metric that matters, the efficiency gains offered by these chips are not substantial enough to really merit the investment if you're rocking a 13th-gen Intel chip or better.

The new chips do come with some architecture changes worthy of note, though, and they aren’t all useless for consumers. For starters, the chips come equipped with an NPU, the first Intel desktops to do so, and the new Intel Arc integrated GPU offers some improved graphics capabilities that will make a real difference for some AIO (all-in-one) PCs.

However, these are largely going to be unnecessary for just about any gamer or content creator out there since most desktops are going to have a discrete graphics card that will run AI circles around the NPU in these chips, and make the Intel Arc iGPU pretty much a non-factor in anything other than the most budget gaming PC from a couple of years ago.

For some folks, unfortunately, Intel Arrow Lake misses the target they wanted it to hit, and with strong competition from AMD’s Ryzen 9000-series, these aren't the best processors for gaming or content creation. But, Intel has to start somewhere as it shifts to a new platform, and it managed to produce a very different kind of chip over its predecessors without giving up too much on the performance front, which is no easy feat.

Ultimately, they're perfectly fine chips if you're buying them in a prebuilt PC or if you're coming in from 11th-gen Intel or older (or making the move from AMD), since you'll have to buy all-new kit anyway, so you might as well set yourself up for Nova Lake next year. But anyone with a Raptor Lake chip isn't going to see any real benefit from these, so they're better off waiting for Nova Lake in 2025 to make the jump.

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K & Intel Core Ultra 5 245K: Price & availability

An Intel Core Ultra 5 processor in its retail packaging

(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Intel Core Ultra 5 245K are available now in the US, UK, and Australia, priced at $589 / £548.99 / AU$1,099 and $309 / £289.99 / AU$589, respectively.

While the prices for these two chips stay the same or come in slightly lower than their predecessors, which is good, there are a bunch of added costs to upgrade to these chips... which is bad. First, they require an LGA 1851 chipset, so you’re going to have to buy a new motherboard in order to use them. They also don’t support DDR4 RAM, so you’re likely going to have to buy new DDR5 RAM as well.

The LGA 1851 socket does take the same CPU coolers as an LGA 1700 socket, though, so if you have a 12th-gen or better processor, at least your cooler will fit.

Against AMD’s latest, the Core Ultra 9 285K is better priced than AMD’s flagship Ryzen 9 9950X, but more expensive than the Ryzen 9 9900X. The Core Ultra 5 245K is slightly more expensive than AMD’s competing Ryzen 5 9600X.

  • Value: 3 / 5

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K & Intel Core Ultra 5 245K: Specs

An Intel Core Ultra 5 processor slotted into a motherboard

(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K & Intel Core Ultra 5 245K: Chipset & features

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Intel Core Ultra 5 245K are newly architected desktop processors, powered by the same Lion Cove P-cores and Skymont E-cores found in the Intel Meteor Lake chips released late last year for laptops.

Intel Arrow Lake is essentially Intel Meteor Lake for desktops, and so it also features the same Intel NPU 3 13 TOPS neural processor as Meteor Lake, and the same Intel Arc Alchemist integrated GPU with four Xe cores (including four ray tracing cores) as its laptop cousin.

The max clock speeds of the Core Ultra 9 285K and Core Ultra 5 245K are slightly lower on performance cores (though with a higher base frequency) and higher across the board on the efficiency cores over the Core i9-14900K and Core i5-14600K, respectively.

The maximum amount of RAM is unchanged at 192GB, though the Core Ultra chips do not support DDR4 RAM, but they can support faster DDR5 memory up to 6,400MT/s.

Other than that, the TDP of the two Core Ultra chips is essentially unchanged from the 14th-gen chips they’re replacing, but they do have a 5°C higher TjMax (Tjunction max, which is the maximum thermal junction temperature that a processor can hit before it lowers performance to prevent overheating), so the chips won’t start to throttle until they hit 105°C.

  • Features: 3.5 / 5

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K & Intel Core Ultra 5 245K: Performance

Intel Core Ultra 5 processor in a motherboard

(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

Well, we’ve finally come to the performance segment of the review, and I wish I had better news for you, but most of you will be disappointed.

Starting with synthetic performance, the Core Ultra 9 285K is a very mixed bag vis-a-vis the Core i9-14900K and AMD Ryzen 9 9950X and Ryzen 9 9900X.

In some tests like Geekbench 6.2, the Core Ultra 9 outperforms the 14900K in single-core performance by about 8%, only to lose out by about the same in Cinebench R23’s single-core benchmark. Meanwhile, in Cinebench R23’s multi-core performance, the Core Ultra 9 285K comes in about 12% faster than the 14900K and is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X.

The Core Ultra 5 245K, meanwhile, is effectively even with the Core i5-14600K, but fares much better in PCMark 10’s Home CPU benchmark, showing a roughly 14.5% performance boost over the 14600K and a 5.6% better showing than the AMD Ryzen 5 9600X.

In terms of average creative performance, the Core Ultra 9 285K does slightly better than the 14900K but slightly worse than the Ryzen 9 9950X — it’s substantially better than the Ryzen 9 9900X, on average, however.

The Core Ultra 5 245K, meanwhile does slightly worse, on average, than the Core i5-14600K, but comes out nearly 23% better on average than the Ryzen 5 9600X.

The gaming performance of the Core Ultra chips was easily the biggest disappointment, however, and is where these two chips really falter against Raptor Lake Refresh.

The Core Ultra 9 285K came in about 14% slower in gaming performance than the Core i9-14900K (though about 7-8% better than the Ryzen 9 9950X and Ryzen 9 9900X).

The Core Ultra 5 245K, meanwhile, came in about 9% slower than the i5-14600K, and only about 4% faster than the Ryzen 5 9600X.

Needless to say, if you’re looking for the best processor for gaming, you’ll want to look at the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D or wait to see what the upcoming AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D does later this year.

When all the scores are tabulated and the final averages calculated, the Core Ultra 9 285K shows slightly better multi-core performance, slightly lower single-core performance, slightly better creative performance, and much worse gaming performance against its predecessor.

The Core Ultra 5 245K is generally slower for just about everything compared to the Core i5-14600K, though it does have much better productivity performance, so this will make a great chip for affordable AIO PCs without discrete graphics.

The real disappointment with Arrow Lake, though, lies with its energy efficiency... or lack thereof. Most people don’t even need the performance of the Intel Core i9-14900K or even the Intel Core i5-14600K, so I’d be fine with lower performance if it meant that there was much less power draw, but the Core Ultra 9 285K and Core Ultra 5 245K max out at 90.5% and 93.3% of the power of their predecessors, respectively.

That’s still much too high, and at that point, you might as well just stick with Raptor Lake Refresh and undervolt the CPU.

Ultimately, given the significantly higher cost of making the switch to these processors from the LGA 1700 chips, the performance and efficiency just don’t make these compelling purchases on their own.

If you’re shopping for the best prebuilt gaming PC though, though, I won’t be too worried about picking between one with a 14th-gen chip or these new Core Ultras. You’re not going to notice the difference.

  • Performance: 3.5 / 5

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K & Intel Core Ultra 5 245K: Should you buy it?

Buy the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K or Intel Core Ultra 5 245K if...

If you haven't made the leap to the latest Intel processors, you're going to have to buy all new stuff anyway, so you might as well go for these chips and future-proof your PC for Nova Lake next year.

While the efficiency gains on these two chips aren't huge, they are more efficient, which is definitely a good thing.View Deal

Don't buy them if...

Running these chips is going to require a new motherboard at least, and likely will require you to buy new RAM as well, making these chips a substantial investment.

While the performance of these chips is great in absolute terms, they aren't any better than their predecessors, though substantially worse for gaming.

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K & Intel Core Ultra 5 245K: Also Consider

The Intel Core i7-14700K is still my pick for the best processor for most people thanks to its strong performance and accessible pricing.

Read the full Intel Core i7-14700K review

If you're looking for the best processor for gaming, then this is the processor you need to buy, at least until its successor come out.

Read the full AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D review

How I tested the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Intel Core Ultra 5 245K

When I test processors, I put them through a rigorous process that takes into account synthetic benchmarks, creative workloads, gaming performance, and more to arrive at my scores.

I use industry standard tools like Geekbench, Cinebench, and PCMark, as well as creative apps like Adobe Photoshop, Blender, and Handbrake.

For gaming, I use built-in benchmarks for CPU-intensive games like Total War: Warhammer III on low graphics settings at 1080p to better isolate a CPU's impact on the game's framerates.

Finally, I make sure to use the same system for common-socket processors, the fastest RAM and SSD, and the most powerful GPU and motherboards available to maintain consistency wherever possible to ensure that CPU scores are comparable.

With each new processor I review, I retest previous processors I've reviewed in order to get updated scores for each, after installing the latest system and BIOS updates.

I've tested and retested two generations of processors more times than I can count over the last couple of years, so I am intimately familiar with how these chips perform, and my deep computer science and journalism background allows me to put all of this testing data into its proper context for consumers so they can make the right choice when shopping for a new processor.

  • Originally reviewed October 2024
Red Magic Titan 16 Pro laptop launches with Intel Core i9 and RTX4060 or RTX4070 graphics
9:29 pm | July 3, 2024

Author: admin | Category: Mobile phones news | Tags: | Comments: Off

Aside from the new Red Magic 9S Pro and 9S Pro+ smartphones, the nubia sub-brand has today also introduced the Titan 16 Pro laptop. As the name implies, it's got a 16-inch screen, with 16:10 aspect ratio, 3ms response time, 240 Hz refresh rate, and 2560x1600 resolution. The top brightness is 500 nits, and it has support for G-Sync and DC dimming, while covering 100% of the DCI-P3 color space. The laptop has the Intel Core i9 CPU and Nvidia's GeForce RTX4060 or RTX4070 graphics. You can configure up to 32GB of Samsung-made DDR5 5600MHz memory (and expand all the way up to 96GB), while for...

Intel Core i9-14900KS debuts with 6.2 GHz max turbo frequency
3:35 pm | March 15, 2024

Author: admin | Category: Mobile phones news | Tags: | Comments: Off

Intel introduced the Core i9-14900KS processor today with one major milestone – the processor now reaches 6.2 GHz turbo frequency, a first for stock desktop CPUs. The processor gains 200 MHz over the Core i9-14900K and Core i9-13900KS but keeps the rest of the specs, like 24 CPU cores and 32 Threads. The KS variant of the 14th-gen Intel chip has a higher base power limit of 150W, compared with the K version, but was already the same as the 13th-gen KS. The max turbo frequency across the board is 200 MHz higher; everything else remains the same – 36 MB cache, 192 GB supported RAM,...

Intel Core i9-14900K review: more of a Raptor Lake overclock than a refresh
4:00 pm | October 17, 2023

Author: admin | Category: Computers Computing Computing Components Gadgets | Tags: , , , | Comments: Off

Intel Core i9-14900K: Two-minute review

The Intel Core i9-14900K is a hard chip to justify, which is a weird thing to say about a processor that is arguably the best Intel has ever put out.

With very little fanfare to herald its arrival following the announcement of Intel Meteor Lake at Intel Innovation in September 2023 (and confirmation that Intel Meteor Lake is coming to desktop in 2024), Intel's 14th-generation flagship processor cannot help but draw parallels to the 11th-gen Rocket Lake chips that immediately preceded Intel Alder Lake.

The Core i9-11900K was something of a placeholder in the market until Intel could launch Alder Lake at the end of 2021. Those processors featured a new hybrid architecture and a more advanced 10nm process that helped propel Intel back to the top of our best processor list, despite strong competition from AMD.

With Intel Raptor Lake Refresh, we're back in placeholder territory, unfortunately. The performance gains here are all but non-existent, so we are essentially waiting on Meteor Lake while the i9-14900K absolutely guzzles electricity and runs hot enough to boil water under just about any serious workload with very little extra performance over the Intel Core i9-13900K to justify the upgrade.

The problem for the Core i9-14900K is that you can still get the i9-13900K.

It's not that the Core i9-14900K isn't a great processor; again, it's unquestionably the best Intel processor for the consumer market in terms of performance. It beats every other chip I tested in most categories with the exception of some multitasking workflows and average gaming performance, both of which it comes in as a very close runner-up. On top of that, at $589, it's the same price as the current Intel flagship, the Intel Core i9-13900K (assuming the i9-14900K matches the i9-13900K's £699 / AU$929 sale price in the UK and Australia).

The problem for the Core i9-14900K is two-fold: you can still get the i9-13900K and will be able to for a long while yet at a lower price, and the Intel Core i7-14700K offers performance so close to the 14th-gen flagship at a much lower price that the 14900K looks largely unnecessary by comparison. Essentially, If you've got an i7-13700K or i9-13900K, there's is simply nothing for you here.

If you're on an 11th-gen chip or older, or you've got an AMD Ryzen processor and you're looking to switch, this chip will be the last one to use the LGA 1700 socket, so when Meteor Lake-S comes out in 2024 (or even Lunar Lake-S, due out at the end of 2024 or early 2025), you won't be able to upgrade to that processor with an LGA 1700 motherboard. In other words, upgrading to an LGA 1700 for this chip is strictly a one-shot deal.

The only people who might find this chip worth upgrading to are those currently using a 12th-gen processor who skipped the 13th-gen entirely, or someone using a 13th-gen core i5 who wants that extra bit of performance and doesn't mind dropping $589 on a chip they might be upgrading from again in a year's time, which isn't going to be a whole lot of people. 

Unfortunately, at this price, it'll be better to save your money and wait for Meteor Lake or even Lunar Lake to drop next year and put the $589 you'd spend on this chip towards the new motherboard and CPU cooler you'll need once those chips are launched.

An Intel Core i9-14900K with its promotional packaging

(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

Intel Core i9-14900K: Price & availability

  • How much does it cost? US MSRP $589 (about £470/AU$855)
  • When is it out? October 17, 2023
  • Where can you get it? You can get it in the US, UK, and Australia

The Intel Core i9-14900K is available as of October 17, 2023, for a US MSRP of $589 (about £470/AU$855), which is the same as the Intel Core i9-13900K it is replacing. We don't have confirmation on UK and Australia pricing yet, though I've asked Intel for clarification and will update this review if and when I hear back from the company. If the 14900K keeps the same UK and Australia pricing as the Core i9-13900K, however, it'll sell for £699/AU$929 in the UK and Australia respectively.

Meanwhile, this is still cheaper than most of AMD's rival chips in this tier, the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D, AMD Ryzen 9 7950X, and AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D, with only the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X coming in cheaper than the i9-14900K. 

This does make the Core i9-14900K the better value against these chips, especially given the level of performance on offer, but it's ultimately too close to the 13900K performance-wise to make this price meaningful, as a cheaper 13900K will offer an even better value against AMD's Ryzen 9 lineup.

  • Price score: 3 / 5

A masculine hand holding an Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

Intel Core i9-14900K: Specs & features

  • Faster clock speeds than i9-13900K
  • Some additional AI-related features

The Intel Core i9-14900K is the final flagship using Intel's current architecture, so it makes sense that there is very little in the way of innovation over the Intel Core i9-13900K.

Using the same 10nm Intel 7 process node as its predecessor and with the same number of processor cores (8 P-cores/16 E-cores), threads (32), and cache (32MB total L2 cache plus additional 36MB L3 cache), the only real improvement with the 14900K in terms of specs are its faster clock speeds.

All cores get a 0.2GHz increase to their base frequencies, while the P-core turbo boost clock increases to 5.6GHz and the E-core turbo clock bumps up to 4.4GHz from the 13900K's 5.4GHz P-Core turbo clock and 4.3GHz E-core turbo clock.

While those clock speeds are the official max turbo clocks for the two types of cores, the Core i9-14900K and Intel Core i7-14700K have something called Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0, which increases the frequency of the best-performing core in the chip and gives it even more power within the power and thermal limits. That gets the Core i9-14900K up to 5.8GHz turbo clock on specific P-cores while active.

Additionally, an exclusive feature of the Core i9 is an additional Ludicrous-Speed-style boost called Intel Thermal Velocity Boost. This activates if there is still power and thermal headroom on a P-core that is already being boosted by the Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0, and this can push the core as high as 6.0GHz, though these aren't typical operating conditions.

Both of these technologies are present in the 13900K as well, but the 14900K bumps up the maximum clock speeds of these modes slightly, and according to Intel, that 6.0GHz clock speed makes this the world's fastest processor. While that might technically be true, that 6.0GHz is very narrowly used so in practical terms, the P-Core boost clock is what you're going to see almost exclusively under load.

The Core i9-14900K has the same 125W TDP as the 13900K and the same 253W maximum turbo power as well, though power draw in bursts of less than 10ms can go far higher.

If this reads like a Redditor posting about their successful overclocking setup, then you pretty much get what this chip is about. If you're looking for something innovative about this chip, I'll say it again, you're going to have to wait for Meteor Lake.

The Core i9-14900K also has support for discrete Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth 5.4 connectivity, as does the rest of the 14th-gen lineup, as well as support for discrete Thunderbolt 5, both of which are still a long way down the road.

The only other thing to note is that there have been some AI-related inclusions that are going to be very specific to AI workloads that almost no one outside of industry and academia is going to be running. If you're hoping for AI-driven innovations for everyday consumers, let's say it once more, with feeling: You're going to have to wait for—

  • Chipset & features score: 3.5 / 5

An Intel Core i9-14900K slotted into a motherboard

(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

Intel Core i9-14900K: Performance

  • Best-in-class performance, but only by a hair
  • Gets beat by AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D and i7-14700K in gaming performance
  • Runs even hotter than the i9-13900K

If you took any elite athlete who's used to setting records in their sport, sometimes they break their previous record by a lot, and sometimes it's by milliseconds or fractions of an inch. It's less sexy, but it still counts, and that's really what we get here with the Intel i9-14900K.

On pretty much every test I ran on it, the Core i9-14900K edged out its predecessor by single digits, percentage-wise, which is a small enough difference that a background application can fart and cause just enough of a dip in performance that the 14900K ends up losing to the 13900K. 

I ran these tests more times than I can count because I had to be sure that something wasn't secretly messing up my results, and they are what they are. The Core i9-14900K does indeed come out on top, but it really is a game of inches at this point.

Image 1 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 7 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 8 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 9 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 10 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 11 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 12 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 13 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)

Across all synthetic performance and productivity benchmarks, the Core i9-14900K comes out on top, with the notable exception of Geekbench 6.1's multi-core performance test, where the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X scores substantially higher, and the Passmark Performance Test's overall CPU score, which puts the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X and Ryzen 9 7950X3D significantly higher. Given that all 16 cores of the 7950X and 7950X3D are full-throttle performance cores, this result isn't surprising.

Other than that though, it's the 14900K all the way, with a 5.6% higher geometric average on single-core performance than the 13900K. For multi-core performance, the 14900K scores a 3.1% better geometric average, and in productivity workloads, it scores a 5.3% better geometric average than its predecessor.

Against the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X, the Core i9-14900K scores about 13% higher in single-core performance, about 1% lower in multi-core performance, and 5% better in productivity performance.

Image 1 of 7

Creative benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 7

Creative benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 7

Creative benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 7

Creative benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 7

Creative benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 7

Creative benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 7 of 7

Creative benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)

Creative benchmarks reveal something of a mixed bag for the Core i9-14900K. In all cases, it beats its predecessor by between 2.6% to as much as 10.9%. Against the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X and 7950X3D, the Core i9-14900K consistently loses out when it comes to rendering workloads like Blender and V-Ray 5, but beats the two best AMD processors by just as much in photo and video editing. And since 3D rendering is almost leaning heavily on a GPU rather than the CPU, AMD's advantage here is somewhat muted in practice.

Image 1 of 6

Gaming benchmarks for Intel 14th gen processors

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 6

Gaming benchmarks for Intel 14th gen processors

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 6

Gaming benchmarks for Intel 14th gen processors

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 6

Gaming benchmarks for Intel 14th gen processors

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 6

Gaming benchmarks for Intel 14th gen processors

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 6

Gaming benchmarks for Intel 14th gen processors

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)

Gaming is another area where Intel had traditionally done well thanks to its strong single-core performance over AMD, but all that flipped with the introduction of AMD's 3D V-Cache. 

While the Intel Core i9-14900K barely moves the needle from its predecessor's performance, it really doesn't matter, since the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D manages to ultimately score an overall victory and it's not very close. The Core i9-14900K actually manages a tie for fourth place with the Intel Core i7-13700K, with the Core i7-14700K edging it out by about 4 fps on average.

Image 1 of 2

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 2

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)

Of course, all this performance requires power, and lots of it. The Core i9-14900K pretty much matched the maximum recorded power draw of the Core i9-13900K, with less of a watt's difference between the two, 351.097W to 351.933, respectively.

The Core i9-14900K still managed to find a way to run hotter than its predecessor, however; something I didn't really think was possible. But there it is, the 14900K maxing out at 105ºC, three degrees hotter than the 13900K's max. It's the hottest I've ever seen a CPU run, and I'm genuinely shocked it was allowed to run so far past its official thermal limit without any overclocking on my part.

  • Performance: 3.5 / 5

A masculine hand holding an Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

Intel Core i9-14900K: Verdict

  • The best chip for dedicated performance like video editing and productivity
  • There are better gaming processors out there for cheaper
  • The Intel Core i7-14700K offers a far better value
Image 1 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 7 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)

In the final assessment then, the Core i9-14900K does manage to win the day, topping the leaderboard by enough of a margin to be a clear winner, but close enough that it isn't the cleanest of wins. 

Overall, its single-core and productivity performance are its best categories, slightly faltering in creative workloads, and coming up short enough on gaming that it's not the chip I would recommend as a gaming CPU.

Like all Core i9s before it, the 14900K is the worst value of Intel's 14th-gen launch lineup, but it's better than its predecessor for the time being (though that advantage won't last very long at all), and it does manage to be a better value proposition than the Ryzen 9 7950X and Ryzen 9 7950X3D, while matching the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, so all in all, not too bad for an enthusiast chip.

Still, the Intel Core i7-14700K is right there, and its superior balance of price and performance makes the Intel Core i9-14900K a harder chip to recommend than it should be.

Should you buy the Intel Core i9-14900K?

Buy the Intel Core i9-14900K if...

Don't buy it if...

Also Consider

If my Intel Core i9-14900K review has you considering other options, here are two processors to consider... 

How I tested the Intel Core i9-14900K

  • I spent nearly two weeks testing the Intel Core i9-14900K
  • I ran comparable benchmarks between this chip and rival flagship processors
  • I gamed with this chip extensively
Test System Specs

These are the specs for the test system used for this review:

Intel Motherboard: MSI MPG Z790E Tomahawk Wifi
AMD Motherboard: ASRock X670E Steel Legend
CPU Cooler:
MSI MAG Coreliquid E360 AIO
Memory:
32GB SK Hynix DDR5-4800
SSD: Samsung 990 Pro
PSU: Thermaltake PF3 1050W ATX 3.0
Case: Praxis Wetbench

I spent about two weeks testing the Intel Core i9-14900K and its competition, using it mostly for productivity and content creation, with some gaming thrown in as well.

I used the standard battery of synthetic benchmarks I use for processor testing, and ran the same tests on rival chips from AMD as well as the other 14th-gen chips in the Raptor Lake Refresh launch lineup and 13th-generation Raptor Lake processors. For Intel chips, I used the same motherboard, RAM, SSD, and graphics card to ensure I was isolating just the CPU's performance across every chip. For AMD chips, I used a comparable AM5 motherboard so differences in the motherboard configuration and circuitry are mitigated to the largest extent possible.

I've been testing and reviewing computer hardware for years now, and with an extensive background in computer science, I know processors in and out, and I use that knowledge to ensure every chip is thoroughly tested.

We pride ourselves on our independence and our rigorous review-testing process, offering up long-term attention to the products we review and making sure our reviews are updated and maintained - regardless of when a device was released, if you can still buy it, it's on our radar.

Read more about how we test

First reviewed October 2023

Intel Core i7-14700K review: salvaging Raptor Lake Refresh with i9-13900K performance
4:00 pm |

Author: admin | Category: Computers Computing Computing Components Gadgets | Tags: , , , | Comments: Off

Intel Core i7-14700K: One-minute review

The Intel Core i7-14700K is the workhorse CPU in the Intel's 14th generation launch line-up, and like any good workhorse, it's going to be the one to do the heavy lifting for this generation of processors. Fortunately for Intel, the Core i7-14700K succeeds in keeping Raptor Lake Refresh from being completely forgettable.

Of all the chips launched on October 17, 2023, the Core i7-14700K is the only one to get a substantive spec upgrade over its predecessor as well as a slight cut in price to just $409 (about £325/AU$595), which is $10 less than the Intel Core i7-13700K it replaces.

So what do you get for $10 less? Gen-on-gen, you don't get a whole lot of improvement (about 6% better performance overall compared to the 13700K), but that figure can be deceiving, since the Core i7-13700K was at the top of our best processor list for a reason. 

With the 13700K's performance being within striking distance of the Intel Core i9-13900K, that 6% improvement for the 14700K effectively closes the gap, putting the 14700K within just 3% of the 13900K overall, and even allowing it to pull ahead in average gaming performance, losing out to only the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D.

Fortunately for Intel, the Core i7-14700K succeeds in keeping Raptor Lake Refresh from being completely forgetable.

In terms of productivity and general performance, the Core i7-14700K shines as well, going toe to toe with the best AMD processors like the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X and AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D, giving it a very strong claim on being the best Intel processor processor for most people.

Given its excellent mix of performance and price, the Intel Core i7-14700K could very well be the last Intel chip of the LGA 1700 epoch that anyone should consider buying, especially if you're coming from a 12th-gen chip. 

With the Core i9-13900K outperforming the Intel Core i9-12900K by as much as 25% in some workloads, someone coming off an i9-12900K or lower will find it hard to believe that an i7 could perform this well, but that's where we're at. And with the i7-14700K coming in about 30% cheaper than the Intel Core i9-14900K, while still managing to come remarkably close in terms of its performance, the Intel Core i7-14700K is the Raptor Lake Refresh chip to buy if you're going to buy one at all.

An Intel Core i7-14700K with its promotional packaging

(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

Intel Core i7-14700K: Price & availability

  • How much does it cost? US MSRP $409 (about £325/AU$595)
  • When is it out? October 17, 2023
  • Where can you get it? You can get it in the US, UK, and Australia

The Intel Core i7-14700K is available on October 17, 2023, with a US MSRP of $409 (about £325/AU$595), which is a slight decrease from its predecessor's MSRP of $419 (about £335/AU$610), and about 31% lower than the Intel Core i9-14900K and 32% percent lower than the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X. 

It's also cheaper than the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D, and just $10 more expensive than the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X, putting it very competitively priced against processors in its class.

The comparisons against the Core i9 and Ryzen 9 are far more relevant, however, since these are the chips that the Core i7-14700K are competing against in terms of performance, and in that regard, the Intel Core i7-14700K is arguably the best value among consumer processors currently on the market.

  • Price score: 4 / 5

Intel Core i7-14700K: Specs & features

  • Four additional E-Cores
  • Slightly faster clock speeds
  • Increased Cache
  • Discrete Wi-Fi 7 and Thunderbolt 5 support

The Intel Core i7-14700K is the only processor from Intel's Raptor Lake Refresh launch line-up to get a meaningful spec upgrade.

Rather than the eight performance and eight efficiency cores like the i7-13700K, the i7-14700K comes with eight performance cores and 12 efficiency cores, all running with a slightly higher turbo boost clock for extra performance. The i7-14700K also has something called Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0, which is a mouthful but also gives the best performing P-core an extra bump up to 5.6GHz so long as the processor is within power and thermal limits.

The increased core count also adds 7MB of additional L2 cache for the efficiency cores to use, further improving their performance over the 13700K's, as well as four additional processing threads for improved multitasking.

It has the same TDP of 125W and same Max Turbo Power rating of 253W as the 13700K, with the latter being the upper power limit of sustained (greater than one second) power draw for the processor. This ceiling can be breached, however, and processing cores can draw much more power in bursts as long as 10ms when necessary.

There is also support for discrete Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth 5.4 connectivity, as well as discrete Thunderbolt 5 wired connections, so there is a decent bit of future proofing in its specs.

  • Chipset & features score: 4 / 5

An Intel Core i7-14700K slotted into a motherboard

(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

Intel Core i7-14700K: Performance

  • Outstanding performance on par with the i9-13900K
  • Best gaming performance of any Intel processor
  • More power hungry than predecessor, so also runs hotter

The Intel Core i7-14700K is arguably the best performing midrange processor on the market, coming within striking distance of the Core i9-13900K and Ryzen 9 7950X across most workloads, including very strong multi core performance thanks to the addition of four extra efficiency cores.

Image 1 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 7 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 8 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 9 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 10 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 11 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 12 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 13 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)

The strongest synthetic benchmarks for the 14700K are single core workloads, which puts it effectively level with the Core i9-13900K and often beating the Ryzen 9 7950X and 7950X3D chips handily. 

This translates into better dedicated performance, rather than multitasking, but even there the Core i7-14700K does an admirable just keeping pace with chips with much higher core counts.

Image 1 of 7

Creative benchmarks for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 7

Creative benchmarks for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 7

Creative benchmarks for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 7

Creative benchmarks for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 7

Creative benchmarks for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 7

Creative benchmarks for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 7 of 7

Creative benchmarks for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)

In creative workloads, the 14700K also performs exceptionally well, beating out the 13900K on everything except 3D model rendering, which is something that is rarely given to a CPU to do any when even the best cheap graphics cards can process Blender or V-Ray 5 workloads many times faster than even the best CPU can.

Image 1 of 6

Gaming benchmarks for Intel 14th gen processors

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 6

Gaming benchmarks for Intel 14th gen processors

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 6

Gaming benchmarks for Intel 14th gen processors

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 6

Gaming benchmarks for Intel 14th gen processors

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 6

Gaming benchmarks for Intel 14th gen processors

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 6

Gaming benchmarks for Intel 14th gen processors

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)

In gaming performance, the Core i7-14700K scores a bit of an upset over its launch sibling, the i9-14900K, besting it in gaming performance overall, though it has to be said that it got some help from a ridiculously-high average fps in Total War: Warhammer III's battle benchmark. In most cases, the i7-14700K came up short of the 13900K and 14900K, but not by much.

And while it might be tempting to write off Total War: Warhammer III as an outlier, one of the biggest issues with the Core i9's post-Alder Lake is that they are energy hogs and throttle under load quickly, pretty much by design. 

In games like Total War: Warhammer III where there are a lot of tiny moving parts to keep track of, higher clock speeds don't necessarily help. When turbo clocks kick into high gear and cause throttling, the back-and-forth between throttled and not-throttled can be worse over the course of the benchmark than the cooler but consistent Core i7s, which don't have to constantly ramp up and ramp down. 

So the 14700K isn't as much of an outlier as it looks, especially since the 13700K also excels at Total War: Warhammer III, and it too beats the two Core i9s. Total War: Warhammer III isn't the only game like this, and so there are going to be many instances where the cooler-headed 14700K steadily gets the work done while the hot-headed i9-13900K and 14900K sprint repeatedly, only to effectively tire themselves out for a bit before kicking back up to high gear.

Image 1 of 2

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 2

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)

The additional efficiency cores might not draw as much power as the performance cores, but the additional power is still noticeable. The 14700K pulls down nearly 30W more watts than the 13700K, though it is still a far cry from the Core i9-13900K's power usage.

This additional power also means that the Core i7-14700K runs much hotter than its predecessor, maxing out at 100ºC, triggering the CPU to throttle on occasion. This is something that the i7-13700K didn't experience during my testing at all, so you'll need to make sure your cooling solution is up to the task here.

  • Performance: 4.5 / 5

An Intel Core i7-14700K with its promotional packaging

(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

Intel Core i7-14700K: Verdict

  • Fantastic single-core performance
  • Intel's best gaming processor, and second overall behind the Ryzen 7 7800X3D
  • Best value of any midrange processor
Image 1 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 7 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)

Ultimately, the Intel Core i7-14700K is the best processor in the Raptor Lake Refresh line-up, offering very competitive performance for a better price than its predecessor and far better one than comparable chips one tier higher in the stack.

It's not without fault, though. It's not that much better than the i7-13700K, so everything I'm saying about the i7-14700K might reasonably apply to its predecessor as well. And honestly, the i7-14700K doesn't have too high a bar to clear to standout from its launch siblings, so it's performance might only look as good in comparison to the i9 and i5 standing behind it.

But, the numbers don't lie, and the Intel Core i7-14700K displays flashes of brilliance that set it apart from its predecessor and vault it into competition with the top-tier of CPUs, and that's quite an achievement independent of how the rest of Raptor Lake Refresh fares. 

A masculine hand holding an Intel Core i7-14700K

(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

Should you buy the Intel Core i7-14700K?

Buy the Intel Core i7-14700K if...

Don't buy it if...

Also Consider

If my Intel Core i7-14700K review has you considering other options, here are two processors to consider... 

How I tested the Intel Core i7-14700K

  • I spent nearly two weeks testing the Intel Core i7-14700K
  • I ran comparable benchmarks between this chip and rival midrange processors
  • I gamed with this chip extensively
Test System Specs

These are the specs for the test system used for this review:

Intel Motherboard: MSI MPG Z790E Tomahawk Wifi
AMD Motherboard: ASRock X670E Steel Legend
CPU Cooler:
MSI MAG Coreliquid E360 AIO
Memory:
32GB SK Hynix DDR5-4800
SSD: Samsung 990 Pro
PSU: Thermaltake PF3 1050W ATX 3.0
Case: Praxis Wetbench

I spent about two weeks testing the Intel Core i7-14700K and its competition, primarily for productivity work, gaming, and content creation.

I used a standard battery of synthetic benchmarks that tested out the chip's single core, multi core, creative, and productivity performance, as well as built-in gaming benchmarks to measure its gaming chops. 

I then ran the same tests on rival chips from AMD as well as the other 14th-gen chips in the Raptor Lake Refresh launch line-up and 13th-generation Raptor Lake processors. For Intel chips, I used the same motherboard, RAM, SSD, and graphics card to ensure I was isolating just the CPU's performance across every chip. For AMD chips, I used a comparable AM5 motherboard so differences in the motherboard configuration and circuitry are mitigated to the largest extent possible.

I've been testing and reviewing computer hardware for years now, and with an extensive background in computer science, I know processors in and out, and I use that knowledge to ensure every chip is thoroughly tested.

We pride ourselves on our independence and our rigorous review-testing process, offering up long-term attention to the products we review and making sure our reviews are updated and maintained - regardless of when a device was released, if you can still buy it, it's on our radar.

Read more about how we test

First reviewed October 2023

Intel Core i5-14600K review: wait for Meteor Lake
4:00 pm |

Author: admin | Category: Computers Computing Computing Components Gadgets | Tags: , , , | Comments: Off

Intel Core i5-14600K: Two-minute review

The Intel Core i5-14600K is not the kind of processor you're really going to want to upgrade to, despite technically offering the best value of any processor I've tested.

First, the good. This is one of the best processor values you're going to find on the market, no matter what happens with the price of its predecessor. Currently, it has the best performance for its $319 price tag (about £255/AU$465), and AMD's competing Ryzen 5 7600X isn't all that close. If you're looking to get the most bang for your buck today, then the Intel Core i5-14600K is it.

In terms of performance, this isn't a bad chip at all; I'd even say it's a great one if you take its predecessor out of the running, which will inevitably happen as its last remaining stock gets bought up. It doesn't have the performance of the Intel Core i7-14700K, but that's a workhorse chip, not the kind that's meant to power the best computers for the home or the best budget gaming PCs as these chips start making their way into prebuilt systems in the next couple of months.

For a family computer or one that's just meant for general, every day use, then this chip is more than capable of handling whatever y'll need it for. It can even handle gaming fairly well thanks to its strong single core performance. So, on paper at least, the Core i5-14600K is the best Intel processor for the mainstream user as far as performance goes.

The real problem with the i5-14600K is that its performance is tragically close to the Core i5-13600K's. And even though the MSRP of the Intel Core i5-13600K is technically higher than that of the Core i5-14600K, it's not going to remain that way for very long at all.

The real problem with the i5-14600K, and one that effectively sinks any reason to buy it, is that its performance is tragically close to the Core i5-13600K's.

As long as the i5-13600K is on sale, it will be the better value, and you really won't even notice a difference between the two chips in terms of day-to day-performance.

That's because there's no difference between the specs of the 14600K vs 13600K, other than a slightly faster turbo clock speed for the 14600K's six performance cores.

While this does translate into some increased performance, it comes at the cost of higher power draw and temperature. During testing, this chip hit a maximum temperature of 101ºC, which is frankly astounding for an i5. And I was using one of the best CPU coolers around, the MSI MAG Coreliquid E360 AIO, which should be more than enough to keep the temperature in check to prevent throttling.

Image 1 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 7 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 8 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 9 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 10 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 11 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 12 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 13 of 13

Synthetic benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)

Looking at the chip's actual performance, the Core i5-14600K beats the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X and the Intel Core i5-13600K in single core performance, multi core performance, and with productivity workloads, on average. Other than its roughly 44% better average multi core performance against the Ryzen 5 7600X, the Core i5-14600K is within 3% to 4% of its competing chips.

Image 1 of 7

Creative benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 7

Creative benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 7

Creative benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 7

Creative benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 7

Creative benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 7

Creative benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 7 of 7

Creative benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)

In creative workloads, the Core i5-14600K again manages to outperform the Ryzen 5 7600X by about 31% on average, but it's just 2.4% better than its predecessor, and none of these chips are especially great at creative content work. If you're messing around with family albums or cutting up TikTok videos, any one of these chips could do that fairly easily. For heavier-duty workloads like video encoding and 3D rendering, the Intel chips hold up better than the mainstream Ryzen 5, but these chips really aren't practical for that purpose.

Image 1 of 6

Gaming benchmarks for Intel 14th gen processors

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 6

Gaming benchmarks for Intel 14th gen processors

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 6

Gaming benchmarks for Intel 14th gen processors

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 6

Gaming benchmarks for Intel 14th gen processors

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 6

Gaming benchmarks for Intel 14th gen processors

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 6

Gaming benchmarks for Intel 14th gen processors

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)

On the gaming front, it's more of the same, though now at least the Ryzen 5 7600X is back in the mix. Overall, the Core i5-14600K beats its 13th-gen predecessor and AMD's rival chip by about 2.1% and 3.2% respectively.

Image 1 of 2

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 2

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i9-14900K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)

All of this comes at the cost of higher power draw and hotter CPU temperatures, though, which isn't good especially for getting so little in return. What you really have here is an overclocked i5-13600K, and you can do that yourself and save some money by buying the 13600K when it goes on sale, which is will.

An Intel Core i5-14600K against its promotional packaging

(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

Intel Core i5-14600K: Price & availability

  • How much does it cost? US MSRP $319 (about £255/AU$465)
  • When is it out? October 17, 2023
  • Where can you get it? You can get it in the US, UK, and Australia

The Intel Core i5-14600K is available in the US, UK, and Australia as of October 17, 2023, for an MSRP of $319 (about £255/AU$465). 

This is a slight $10 price drop from its predecessor, which is always good thing, and comes in about $20 (about £15/AU$30) more than the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X, so fairly middle of the pack price-wise.

In terms of actual value, as it goes to market, this chip has the highest performance for its price of any chip in any product tier, but only by a thin margin, and one that is sure to fall very quickly once the price on the 13600K drops by even a modest amount.

Intel Core i5-14600K: Specs

Intel Core i5-14600K: Verdict

  • Best performance for the price of any chip tested...
  • ...but any price drop in the Core i5-13600K will put the 14600K in second place
  • Not really worth upgrading to with the Core i7-14700K costing just $90 more
Image 1 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 2 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 3 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 4 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 5 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 6 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)
Image 7 of 7

Final benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-14600K

(Image credit: Future / Infogram)

Ultimately, the market served by this chip specifically is incredibly narrow, and like the rest of the Raptor Lake Refresh line-up, this is the last hurrah for the Intel LGA 1700 socket.

That means if you go out and buy a motherboard and CPU cooler just for the 14th-gen, it's a one time thing, since another generation on this platform isn't coming. It doesn't make sense to do that, so, if you're upgrading from anything earlier than the 12th-gen, it just makes so much more sense to wait for Meteor Lake to land in several months time and possibly get something really innovative.

If you're on a 12th-gen chip and you can't wait for Meteor Lake next year, the smartest move is to buy the i7-14700K instead, which at least gives you i9-13900K-levels of performance for just $90 more than the i5-14600K.

Ultimately, this chip is best reserved for prebuilt systems like the best all-in-one computers at retailers like Best Buy, where you will use the computer for a reasonable amount of time, and then when it becomes obsolete, you'll go out and buy another computer rather than attempt to upgrade the one you've got.

In that case, buying a prebuilt PC with an Intel Core i5-14600K makes sense, and for that purpose, this will be a great processor. But if you're looking to swap out another Intel LGA 1700 chip for this one, there are much better options out there.

Should you buy the Intel Core i5-14600K?

Buy the Intel Core i5-14600K if...

Don't buy it if...

Also Consider

If my Intel Core i5-14600K review has you considering other options, here are two processors to consider... 

How I tested the Intel Core i5-14600K

  • I spent nearly two weeks testing the Intel Core i5-14600K
  • I ran comparable benchmarks between this chip and rival midrange processors
  • I gamed with this chip extensively
Test System Specs

These are the specs for the test system used for this review:

Intel Motherboard: MSI MPG Z790E Tomahawk Wifi
AMD Motherboard: Gigabyte Aorus X670E Extreme
CPU Cooler:
MSI MAG Coreliquid E360 AIO
Memory:
32GB SK Hynix DDR5-4800
SSD: Samsung 990 Pro
PSU: Thermaltake PF3 1050W ATX 3.0
Case: Praxis Wetbench

I spent about two weeks testing the Intel Core i5-14600K and its competition, primarily for productivity work, gaming, and content creation.

I used a standard battery of synthetic benchmarks that tested out the chip's single core, multi core, creative, and productivity performance, as well as built-in gaming benchmarks to measure its gaming chops. 

I then ran the same tests on rival chips from AMD as well as the other 14th-gen chips in the Raptor Lake Refresh launch lineup and 13th-generation Raptor Lake processors. For Intel chips, I used the same motherboard, RAM, SSD, and graphics card to ensure I was isolating just the CPU's performance across every chip. For AMD chips, I used a comparable AM5 motherboard so differences in the motherboard configuration and circuitry are mitigated to the largest extent possible.

I've been testing and reviewing computer hardware for years now, and with an extensive background in computer science, I know processors in and out, and I use that knowledge to ensure every chip is thoroughly tested.

We pride ourselves on our independence and our rigorous review-testing process, offering up long-term attention to the products we review and making sure our reviews are updated and maintained - regardless of when a device was released, if you can still buy it, it's on our radar.

Read more about how we test

First reviewed October 2023

MSI Prestige 13 Evo review: MSI goes for the premium ultrabook crown
1:37 pm | September 22, 2023

Author: admin | Category: Computers Computing Gadgets Laptops | Tags: , , | Comments: Off

MSI Prestige 13 Evo: Two-minute review

Make no mistake: the MSI Prestige 13 Evo is a premium laptop. This almost feels like the blueprint for the best ultrabooks, a supremely lightweight but still powerful laptop with a whole host of features and a sleek, minimalist aesthetic.

Coming in either white or gunmetal gray colorways, the Prestige 13 Evo is equipped with almost everything you could want from an ultrabook; a wide variety of physical ports, a large, responsive trackpad, and a selection of useful security features.

Weighing in at just 0.99kg (2.18lbs), this laptop sits in the same weight class as the popular LG Gram, and it's even lighter than the eminently portable M2 MacBook Air. With a 13.3-inch display and a thickness of just 1.7cm, it's phenomenally easy to pick the Prestige 13 Evo up and take it wherever you go - in fact, the AC adapter is also very lightweight, but you won't need to bring that everywhere since this ultrabook also offers some impressive battery life.

The MSI Prestige 13 Evo ultrabook pictured on a wooden desk.

(Image credit: Future)

My immediate comparison point for any compact ultrabook like this is the Dell XPS 13, which has long sat among the best laptops out there. MSI's laptop is actually a bit closer in price to the XPS 13 Plus, which I recently reviewed - and I think it just about edges out Dell's competitor thanks to slightly better average performance and a more practical physical design.

The 13th-gen Intel Core CPU at the heart of this laptop more than pulls its weight, giving you the option of some light gaming and creative work alongside the usual productivity tasks we test for on ultrabooks. I was impressed by the smooth, responsive user experience and generally strong performance in our benchmarking suite - more on that later.

The MSI Prestige 13 Evo ultrabook pictured on a wooden desk.

(Image credit: Future)

While the stripped-down appearance might not appeal to everyone (the XPS 13 Plus certainly has this one beat purely in terms of aesthetics), it's function over form here; and I personally like the straightforward design choices made by MSI.

If I had to level some criticisms at the MSI Prestige 13 Evo, they'd probably focus on the pricing. At $1,499 (£1,399.99, about AU$2,350) with apparently only one configuration available (though the baseline specs vary a bit between regions), it's undeniably expensive, matching the XPS 13 Plus model I reviewed. At this price point, the Prestige's relatively run-of-the-mill FHD+ display pales a bit in comparison to the 3.5K OLED screen of the Plus - and I mean pales in a literal sense, since it simply can't match the OLED's brightness and rich color density.

Other than the somewhat lackluster display, though, I have very little to dislike here; MSI has knocked it out of the park with this one, and I almost wish I could keep the Prestige 13 Evo forever - my own daily laptop is starting to look a little tired...

MSI Prestige 13 Evo: Price & availability

  • How much does it cost? $1,499.99 / £1,399.99 / about AU$2,350
  • When is it available? Available now
  • Where can you get it? Available in the US and UK, no official Australian release yet

MSI's pricing can be somewhat arcane at the best of times, but I've done my best to work this one out for you. There appears to be only one standard model of the MSI Prestige 13 Evo available in western territories, but it's not quite identical across every region.

It looks like my review unit is a UK-only model, but the only significant difference here is that it uses 16GB of DDR5 memory instead of the 32GB found by default in the US-spec version. I've only listed the review model's specs below, but bear in mind that you'll be getting some extra RAM if you buy this laptop in the States.

Since MSI doesn't maintain its own storefronts in the US and UK, you'll need to purchase the Prestige 13 Evo from a reseller like Amazon - for any British readers, you should absolutely check out this deal at Scan.co.uk, which puts the laptop down to just £779.99, a frankly ridiculous deal. Over in the US, the 32GB version is mildly discounted to $1,299.99 at Amazon at the time of writing.

There doesn't appear to be any immediate availability in Australia, so my commiserations go out to our friends down under - your only option will be to import one.

  • Price score: 4 / 5

The MSI Prestige 13 Evo ultrabook pictured on a wooden desk.

(Image credit: Future)

MSI Prestige 13 Evo: Specs

As I noted above, our review unit appears to be UK-only; you can't buy the 32GB version here, and I couldn't find the 16GB model for sale anywhere in the US. I've listed the UK spec below, but other than the RAM, it's identical to the US model in every way.

The Intel Core i7-1360P processor has become a staple of many premium ultrabooks recently, and you get plenty of high-speed storage thanks to the 1TB M.2 SSD. Wi-Fi 6E and Bluetooth 5.3 ensure you're getting the best in wireless connectivity too. Barring the middling display, this is a solid selection of specs.

  • Specs score: 4.5 / 5

MSI Prestige 13 Evo: Design

  • Minimalist exterior
  • Lots of ports and security features
  • Display really should be a bit better

As far as ultrabooks go, the MSI Prestige 13 Evo isn't particularly exciting - but that's not to say it's bad. The design is straightforward, with a robust screen hinge that gently angles the keyboard towards you when opened and a large touchpad at the bottom.

The exterior construction is plastic (to further serve the goal of reducing the overall weight) but thankfully it doesn't feel cheap, with sturdy rubber feet and minimal flex in the casing when you press firmly on the keyboards.

Speaking of the keyboard - it's a little cramped for my liking, with the bottom-right keys in particularly feeling a tad squished together, but I'm conscious that I have pretty large hands (I'm 6'3", if you were wondering) and most users probably won't have any trouble typing on the Prestige 13 Evo. My partner - who has regular-sized hands - tried it out, and reported no problems with the keyboard. The keys themselves have a good amount of travel and the touchpad feels firm and responsive.

The MSI Prestige 13 Evo ultrabook pictured on a wooden desk.

(Image credit: Future)

I mentioned higher up that the display here is sub-par. For the avoidance of doubt, I don't mean it's a poor-quality display exactly, because the maximum brightness and color reproduction are more or less what I'd expect from an IPS panel at this resolution. The anti-glare coating works fine in well-lit environments and I definitely do like the 16:10 aspect ratio, which gives you more screen space for scrolling and the esoteric 1200p resolution.

My beef is more with the fact that if I spend this much on a laptop, I'd expect a slightly better display. Plenty of ultrabooks at this price point offer either higher-resolution screens or superior panel types like OLED or AMOLED; with its bog-standard 60Hz refresh rate and middling contrast, this one failed to impress me even if it was fine in practice for everyday work.

At least the screen bezels are pleasingly thin - with just enough room along the top for a 1080p webcam, something that I did lampoon the Dell XPS 13 Plus for lacking in that review. At this price point, 720p just doesn't cut it. The microphone array and dual speakers are also good, if not mind-blowing.

The MSI Prestige 13 Evo ultrabook pictured on a wooden desk.

(Image credit: Future)

Mediocre screen aside, the Prestige 13 Evo excels in virtually every other area when it comes to design. MSI has pleasingly declined to worship at the altar of the MacBook and instead opted for a wide range of physical ports: no USB hub required here, as we've got two Thunderbolt 4 USB-C ports, one conventional USB-A, HDMI video out, a microSD card reader (an increasingly rare inclusion on ultrabooks) and of course the humble 3.5mm audio jack.

The only thing missing here is an Ethernet port, but that shouldn't be necessary thanks to best-in-class WiFi 6E and the latest Bluetooth 5.3 for wireless connectivity. Wired internet is mostly reserved for gaming laptops these days, anyway.

Lastly, the Prestige 13 Evo rounds out its feature set with a selection of excellent privacy and security add-ons. We've got a fingerprint scanner built into the power button, an IR camera for facial recognition logins via Windows Hello, and dedicated buttons for shutting off your webcam and microphone - backed up by a physical shutter you can slide over the webcam itself for maximum digital privacy.

These features will best serve professional users who use their laptops to handle potentially sensitive data, but shouldn't be overlooked by less security-focused users; the speedy convenience of Windows Hello is always good.

  • Design score: 4.5 / 5

MSI Prestige 13 Evo: Performance

  • Intel Core i7-1360P is strong
  • Slightly outperforms some rivals with similar specs
  • Light gaming definitely an option here
MSI Prestige 13 Evo: Laptop benchmarks

Here's how the MSI Prestige 13 Evo performed in our suite of benchmark tests:

3DMark Night Raid: 18,320; Fire Strike: 5,419; Time Spy: 1,772
GeekBench 6: 2,458 (single-core); 9,643 (multi-core)
25GB File Copy:
1,659MBps
Handbrake 1.6: 10m 41s
CrossMark: Overall: 1,665; Productivity: 1,617; Creativity: 1,746; Responsiveness: 1,577
Sid Meier's Civilization VI: Gathering Storm (1080p, High): 37.9fps; (1080p, Low): 54.2fps
Web Surfing (Battery Informant): 12 hrs 3 mins

I was thoroughly impressed with the performance of the MSI Prestige 13 Evo - even though I've seen the same Intel Core i7-1360P CPU powering other laptops I've reviewed.

Here, the processor seems to be operating at its maximum potential: I saw strong performance across the board in both synthetic benchmarks and practical tests, with the processor even managing to offer some entry-level gaming capabilities in Civilization VI and Valorant - both relatively undemanding titles in terms of hardware requirements, but still great games.

The MSI Prestige 13 Evo ultrabook pictured on a wooden desk.

(Image credit: Future)

General use is speedy and lag-free; I could open a dozen tabs in Google Chrome with Steam and Spotify running in the background and didn't experience any slowdown whatsoever.

In synthetic benchmarks like GeekBench 6, the i7-1360P demonstrated excellent single-core performance and solid multi-core results, putting it head and shoulders above its 12th-generation Intel counterparts. The SSD is also relatively speedy at about 1.65GB/s - not the fastest laptop drive I've ever seen, but quick enough to make moving files around a breeze.

It's probably worth noting that the 32GB version available in the US might benefit from its larger memory in certain RAM-intensive workloads, so if you're aiming to do stuff like code compiling, that might be a good pick over ultrabooks with the standard 8GB or 16GB of memory.

The MSI Prestige 13 Evo ultrabook pictured on a wooden desk.

(Image credit: Future)

Naturally, the lack of a dedicated graphics card means you won't be doing any high-end gaming or 4K video editing tasks on this laptop, but that's fine - it's a small sacrifice to make for the incredibly thin-and-light design.

Thermal performance is also excellent here; the Prestive 13 Evo has a large perforated section on the underside for venting excess heat, and the interior thermal solution clearly works well - it barely even got warm throughout our testing process.

  • Performance score: 5 / 5

MSI Prestige 13 Evo: Battery

  • Solid battery life, not quite best-in-class
  • More than 10 hours of regular use
  • Compact charger

Battery life is a make-or-break area for many ultrabooks, but thankfully the Prestige 13 Evo delivers. You can get more than 10 hours of everyday use on a single charge, and using features like Windows 11's built-in battery saver mode can let you stretch that time even further.

The battery does drain a little faster if you're doing anything more demanding - for example, playing videos at maximum brightness with the speakers turned up - but overall I was very pleased with the longevity of this ultrabook. It doesn't quite match up to Apple's MacBooks, but it's at least in the same ballpark as the M1 MacBook Air.

The bundled AC adapter is relatively compact too, connecting via USB-C. Strangely, the Prestige 13 Evo also has a proprietary power connector, which was compatible with a different MSI laptop charger I had lying around. With the EU aiming to make USB-C the standard for charging our devices, that sort of port will soon be a distant memory.

  • Battery score: 4 / 5

The MSI Prestige 13 Evo pictured on a wooden desk with AC adapter.

(Image credit: Future)

Should you buy the MSI Prestige 13 Evo?

Buy it if...

You want solid Windows performance
Barring the powerful M-series silicon found in Apple's MacBook Air, this is some of the best performance you can get from a compact ultrabook - good job putting Intel's 1360P to work, MSI.

You don't want to use a USB hub
If laptop makers could stop removing everything except USB-C ports from their devices, I'd be very grateful. The port selection on offer here is strong, with HDMI output for connecting a second display being particularly welcome.

Don't buy it if...

You want a great display
While it's far from a complete disaster, at this price point I was really hoping to see a better screen than this. The maximum brightness is good but colors look a little bit washed out compared to other laptops I've seen in the same price range.

MSI Prestige 13 Evo: Also consider

If the MSI Prestige 13 Evo has you considering other options, here are two more laptops to consider...

How I tested the MSI Prestige 13 Evo

  • Replaced my everyday laptop
  • Tested productivity work, web browsing, gaming
  • Used for a full day on battery power

As usual, I swapped out my normal HP Spectre x360 for the MSI Prestige 13 Evo as my everyday work laptop, doing all my typical tasks on it - word processing, video meetings, and web browsing - for several days. I only ever charged it overnight, and didn't run into any battery-related difficulties whatsoever.

I also used it casually, taking it out into the backyard on a nice evening to watch some Netflix with my partner and on a different occasion using it to play some Into The Breach, a game I will probably always be quietly addicted to.

We pride ourselves on our independence and our rigorous review-testing process, offering long-term attention to the products we review and making sure our reviews are updated and maintained - regardless of when a device was released, if you can still buy it, it's on our radar.

Read more about how we test

First reviewed September 2023

Next Page »