Addressing your issue with the i9-12900 and the mentioned numbers. Let's resolve this.
Addressing your issue with the i9-12900 and the mentioned numbers. Let's resolve this.
Hi Myspace. I bought a 4090 to pair with my i9-12900 nonK CPU on a Gigabyte Z690 DDR4 motherboard. Because it's a nonK chip, I'm only getting a 4.7GHz boost clock, not the full 5.1GHz the K model offers. I’m currently playing games at 4K 120Hz. The issue is, I can’t find any comparisons between my nonK CPU and newer AMD or Intel chips. All the reviews I see are for the 12900K, so I’m unsure if upgrading to an 7800X3D would help or if switching to a 14700K—capable of nearly a full GHz jump to 5.6—would be worth it. Am I really hitting a bottleneck? Would adding more GHz actually improve performance at 4K, or is there better value in upgrading the CPU? Should I consider a used 12900K and push it further, or is it time for a bigger upgrade?
The 7800X3D stands out as a top choice in the market, making it potentially worthwhile. Alternatively, a 13700K might be more practical if you prioritize cost over extra performance, especially since it lacks the additional efficiency cores. The 12900 offers similar performance to the 12900K in both Cinebench and Geekbench, so differences in gaming results are likely minimal. If the 12900K doesn’t cause bottlenecks with the 4090 at 4K resolution, then the non-K 12900 should perform similarly.
At 4K resolution it really doesn’t make much difference. The jump from 12.9M to 14.7M isn’t huge, and 13.9M would be enough. A 4090 with decent CPU power should handle 4K on a 120Hz monitor just fine.
4K "bottleneck" simply means high resolution paired with a slower processor, resulting in identical performance and frame rates.
From my own discussion and Intel's marketing style, the 12900 nonK doesn't raise to 5.1 across all cores. The claimed speed is meant for single-core tasks only. For multi-core performance, the K version is required. I own a 64GB DDR4 4000 kit and a 360mm Arctic cooling AIO cooler.