13600K or 13700K
13600K or 13700K
If you have the budget for the additional 80 dollars and can't apply it to another component, it might be worthwhile in the long term—particularly if you often run multiple programs while gaming. You're getting two extra performance cores and a faster boost clock. However, you likely won't see a noticeable impact in most games unless another process is active during play.
You're wondering about its purpose. If you're just playing games, go for something pricier—like 13600K—and it won't add much value beyond extra CPU cache with minimal performance gains.
For video editing, an i7 processor works well. Remember that having more cores tends to perform better over time.
The 13700K would perform better, though the 13600K should also work well for this.
The 13700K shows a greater price rise compared to its multithreaded capabilities. Leveraging that extra parallel processing adds value. Single-threaded results are marginally better thanks to a slightly faster clock and larger L3 cache.
I've verified this. Using the TG contact frame, I maintain 12700K at 100°C with the beQuiet Dark Rock Pro 4, achieving about 210W instead of 185W with the regular ILM. The CPU can also handle spikes up to 250W, reaching 100°C at 215W before that.