**Intel 14900K Review: A New Gaming King**

The battle for CPU supremacy has long been dominated by Intel, with AMD's Ryzen 5000 series struggling to keep up. However, with the release of the 14900K, Intel is making a strong case for itself as the top dog in gaming performance. This latest processor takes the crown from its predecessor, the 13900K, and extends its lead over AMD's 14700K by a whopping 23%. The margin may seem small, but it's a testament to Intel's commitment to innovation and performance.

**Gaming Performance: A Tale of Two Scenarios**

In terms of gaming performance, the 14900K is in a league of its own. When CPU-bound, the processor crushes the competition, leaving AMD's Ryzen 7800X2D in its dust. However, when it comes to scaling, the picture becomes more nuanced. At 1440p high, the 14900K offers a modest 5.47% lead over the 14700K, and just 3.05% over the 13900K. While these margins may seem small, they're significant in the world of gaming, where every little bit counts.

**Stellaris: A Test of Intel's Scalability**

One game that has proven to be a challenge for even the best processors is Stellaris. In this turn-based strategy game, simulation time becomes the metric by which we measure performance. The 14900K excels in this area, offering a significant lead over AMD's offerings. However, as simulation times approach 30 seconds, the differences between processors become less pronounced. It seems that even Intel's latest and greatest processor is bound by other limitations in the game.

**Starfield: A New Hope for Intel**

In Starfield, a new game from Bethesda Softworks, Intel manages to eke out a lead over AMD's Ryzen 7300X. The 14900K averages 132 FPS, while the 1300X trails behind at 126 FPS. While these margins may not be dramatic, they're still significant in the world of gaming. It's clear that Intel has managed to optimize its processor for this particular game.

**The Short Version: More of the Same**

In terms of overall performance, the 14900K is a continuation of Intel's existing lineup. If you were considering purchasing one of these processors before, and it was significantly cheaper than the 14900K, then there's little reason to upgrade now. The processor that was previously on offer still offers excellent performance for its price.

**The Long Version: Grasping at Straws**

But here's the thing - Intel has released another high-performance processor without making a compelling case for it. It feels like they're grasping at straws, trying to justify the higher price point of the 14900K over its predecessor and AMD's offerings. In short, there's little reason to upgrade from the 13900K unless you need the latest and greatest.

**The Verdict: A Mixed Bag**

Overall, the 14900K is a solid processor that offers excellent performance in gaming applications. However, it's clear that Intel has struggled to innovate and differentiate its products from one another. The price point of this processor is significantly higher than its predecessor, making it less attractive to consumers who are on a budget.

**Conclusion**

In conclusion, the 14900K is a good processor that offers excellent performance in gaming applications. However, it's clear that Intel has struggled to innovate and differentiate its products from one another. If you're in the market for a high-performance CPU, there may be better options available. The 7800X3D or 7900X are both worth considering, while the 1300K is still an excellent value at this price point.

**Recommendation**

If you're looking to purchase a new processor, we would recommend waiting for a sale on the 13900K. If you do need to upgrade, then Intel's latest and greatest processor may be worth considering. However, if you're on a budget, there are still excellent options available at lower price points.

**Where to Buy**

You can purchase the Intel 14900K from various retailers, including Newegg, Amazon, and Best Buy.

**Patronage**

If you'd like to support our testing efforts, please consider patronizing us through Patreon or buying products from our store.

**Next Review**

Stay tuned for our review of the AMD Ryzen 6000 series, which promises to bring significant improvements over its predecessors.

"WEBVTTKind: captionsLanguage: enthe Brilliance of int's 14th generation is limited only by its ability to believe that they were worth launching now we're reviewing the in I9 14900 K uh they have incremented the number from 13 to 14 and the frequency's gone up a little bit now it's 6 GHz for the maximum turbo on the 14900 K which is just high enough to clear the bar for something that marketing can grasp at to talk about its promotional materials now we were so disappointed in the iso 14 700k in our last review that we made a whole weird intro it went a little off the rails this enables companies everywhere to make bigger number better but without all of the hard work of making the number bigger better but that's the trade for spending a week on products like these uh now we're back to trock with the 13900 14900 K and this thing it pulls a ton of power just like the 13900 K did but that hasn't really changed much uh and it now runs it again 6 GHz so we're going to be talking about if the 14900 K is worth considering and some of its competitors the closest ones being probably the 78 x 3D and gaming which is a lot cheaper right now but anyway let's get started with the Raptor Lake refresh 149 before that this video is brought to you by lean Lee and the o1d Evo XL the o1d Evo XL builds upon the longstanding strength of the o1d series by adding new features like rotated GPU layout to showcase the most important part of a build the Evo XL also uses a removable motherboard tray that can adjust for different heights making it tunable for every style additionally these cases use lean Le's compartmentalized approach to design to keep cables cleanly hidden behind the back of the case learn more at the link in the description below quick overview in specs first so the 1400k is for sale right now the day before you all will see this video day before launch for $600 on new EG it's kind of imply that that's maybe like a pre-order low price we've seen it for 625 elsewhere so by the time this video posts the CPU will be out and it should be 600 to 625 or so the 14900 k at 600 most directly competes with Intel's own 13900 K which is $550 and then AMD strongest gaming competitor is the 7800 x3d which has been around 350 to 400 all week the strongest production competitor from AMD is the 7950 X commonly priced under $600 the AMD r9700 X is another competitive option that's 425 to 450 right now depending on where you look we've already detailed the basics for the 14 series just a reminder again it's going to be hard to break this Habit For Us and other reviewers too but this isn't really a generation so 14th gen is kind of just a shorthand way to say 14 series But ultimately this is the same architecture uh this is not deserving of a new generational number we will sometimes refer to it as 14th gen but that's really not what it is so don't expect that much unfortunately Intel has misbranded this in a way where it will lead people to expect more than what they're getting we're going to start with power draw power consumption is insane on the I9 CPUs and we have some cool numbers we can share looking back at just I9 which haven't actually existed that long on Intel's history so let's start there let's start with thermals a quick reminder here the temperature that comes out of a data log for a CPU is not like a synthetic bench Mark score it's going to change a lot and that's entirely based on the motherboard and the cooler plus the workload used for testing in our test we use blender rendering for a realistic and heavy daily use case we also test with a 360 mm Arctic liquid freezer 2 at 100% fan and pump speeds you can find our acoustic and other thermal data and our cooler reviews for that finally other than controlling the board to not blast MCE or something we basically let it do its thing with regard to voltages and operate under Intel's official guidance for how these CPS are supposed to behave the Asus z790 dark hero served as the test platform for the 14900 K here's the chart first with the 14900 K logging every core at steady state and tested in a 21c environment we end up put temperatures that were shockingly consistent core to core this is a lot better than we've seen in the past from Intel that much is typically the assembly quality and how the IHS is attached to the Silicon our peak-to Peak Delta for peor is around 4° where the 70s that's with a 360 mil liquid cooler and a 100% core workload for blender now it's at least mostly under control here in gaming scenarios this would be lower in a prime type scenario it would be higher we've seen others that have been in the 9s and depending on the cooler that was used by the reviewer and the motherboard that's completely possible the dark hero is logging via software as having 1.72 VC core if that number can be trusted from Hardware info that'd be low enough to explain some of this relatively low theral performance compared to some of the other figures that we've seen but sometimes this number isn't an accurate representation looking at some other temperatures the 14700 K ran higher overall in this workload despite being in the same board and under the same cooler some of this is likely the stem quality though and the lid attachment by Intel we've seen that this can change a lot unit to unit in the past and uh this this difference would easily be explained by that given our years of data we've collected on CPUs with the same methods we can provide some interesting perspective using a look back at all the I9 CPUs we've tested recently remember that the i7 existed as the top end before this but we have that generational comparison chart in our 14700 K review here's the I9 chart the 14900 K is 287 watts is close to the highest we've tested and aside from the 13900 K it is the highest stock draw we've tested the 13900 K isn't far off though they're about the same dating back to the original Intel I9 desktop CPU the I9 9900 K power consumption was as low as 94 Watts for all core and blender the 11 900k was 127 watt it's about the same as the 10900k before it the Intel HDT CPUs like the 10900x and the 10980xe pushed closer to 200 Watts that the 10980xe was lower power consumption than the 14900 K is crazy considering how the 10980xe was received at the time it was seen as this mind blowingly power hungry chip but also a top performer with its 18 cores we see a generational climb with the 12900 K going to 244 Watts then 275 Watts with the basically pre KS skew and there's a clear trend line here and it's going up the difference between the 139 and 149 could be process maturity it's just as likely though a slight change in the voltage provisioned by the motherboard could also Al be error we're really not that far apart here they're basically the same here's a look at the more comparative power numbers we measured the 14900 K again at 287 Watts at EPS 12vt cables meaning that the CPU and vrm efficiency losses are the only things measured here that has it about the same as our 13900 K which was 295 Watts previously the 14700 K's 284 watts is about the same amd's 7800 x3d meanwhile Max is out at 86 Watts all core although to be fair Intel won't be at 100% CPU load in games like it is here but neither will AMD AMD still overall here is advantaged though the 750x CPU pulls 251 Watts without eco mode also below int's 14900 K this is a power hungry CPU and they're only going to get harder to cool if intel keeps going this direction overclocking also becomes more challenging although maybe in a new way in this case the new way is that the cooling begins to hit diminishing abilities to tame this power drop undervolting makes way more sense to do that instead and Intel boards traditionally have run way too high voltage even at stock so there's room for improvement power efficiency testing will help us understand what all this really means for this number we're calculating the energy consumption during a blender workload our metric is Watt hours which allows us to see how much energy consumption there is for a CPU to complete the same work that means we're normalizing for the workload not the time and lower is better the 14900 K is at the lower end of the chart it's more icient than the 13900 K the 14700 K 129k and the 137k and AMD is 5800 a barely but it's far below top performers like the 5950 X or 7950 X for efficiency it's not the least efficient we've tested but Intel is pushing its thermal envelope and power draw increasingly High blender is up next because this one spawns one render tile per threat on the CPU it scales well with higher thread count processors and that is why the 14900 k is 100% identical to the last generation 13900 K great that's super exciting thanks Intel thanks Steve this has the 795x and its 6.4 minute result ahead of the 14900 K with a 12% time reduction against the semi h00 X Intel's lead is 15% and against its own 14700 K it leads by 8.8% time reduced this would be interesting if all of those numbers weren't already exactly the same by comparing it to the 139900 K this difference is massive you can literally see it in szip file compression testing the 14900 K completed 191,000 mips or millions of instructions per second it's ahead of the 13900 K by get ready for it 0.6% we're actually going to throw it over to Intel to ask them what they think of this Improvement back to you Steve so again we're basically re-reviewing the 139k against the 147 100K that's an 11% Improvement if you can call Total and utter stagnation an improvement in decompression it's a little bit better at least the 14900 K improves over the 13900 K by 4% here not too distant from the 5950 X and leading the 14700 K by 23% Adobe Premier benchmarking via the Puget Suite is up now this one has the 14900 k at 842 points in aggregate leading the 13900 K by 1.7% so nearly margin of error basically truly irrevocably an engineering Masterpiece Marvels like this are what Intel will be remembered for when the Improvement is so large that we need a decimal place just to illustrate that it's not within our own test variants that's when you know it's a good generational uplift in fact it's so exciting that we're not even going to talk about any other production tests time to move on to games the production numbers were just so staggering and impressive we couldn't bear to look at them anymore more it was overwhelming us with some kind of emotion and almost brought us to tears just how CPU the CPU is so we're going to move to games now and we expect great results in Rainbow Six Siege at 1080p the 14900 K ran at 656 FPS average that has it ahead of the 13900 K by 1. 6584 z49 59702 4% a world record for length of a percentage number in a gamer's Nexus review video remarkable the positioning has it just ahead of the 5800 x3d so Intel gets its wish it is now technically ahead of the last gen AMD x3d CPU the 7,000 series still leads but it's the small steps that count like beating something based on an architecture from a few years ago against the 14700 K the 14900 K is also under a 2% benefit at 1440p it's it's even more riveting the 14900 K leads the 13900 K by 0.2 FPS average as you all know Rainbow 6 is a highly competitive game so that 0.2 FPS matters we should give some perspective here the extra 0.2 FPS average means your average frame time is shorter by about 0.00008 milliseconds since the average redditor's reaction time is actually 0.001 milliseconds which is at least 1 .4 million milliseconds faster than their thought processing time this is a difference that the most advanced Among Us can feel in F1 2023 the 14900 K measured at 422 FPS average ahead of the 13900 K by 1.1% the difference genuinely actually is impressively Tiny if you're picking between this and a 14700 K you'd be looking at about a 3.7% Improvement moving to the I9 in this game so not worth thinking too much about Intel is struggling to meet amd's 5800 x3d performance which sits 7% ahead of the new I9 and the 7800 xpd is 21% ahead at 1440p we get the usual reduction of scaling as a result of imposing a GPU limitation at the top end of the stack so let's move forward folders Gate 3 is up now in this one we see again that the x2d CPUs are soaring to the top of the chart the 14900 K landed at 110 FPS average gracing us with a 2 2% uplift over the 13900 K while allowing the 7800 xpd a lead of 10.4% the ladder here actually a meaningful number the 5800 xpd isn't far behind Intel and it ends up about tied with the 14700 K 1440p predictably is the same we're CPU bound even at the higher resolutions in this game so the 14900 K positioning remains largely unchanged in Phantom Liberty at 1080p the 14900 K is a 168 FPS average result headed ahead of the 13900 K by 3.2% the 14700 K and the 13700 K are within runto run variance of each other as we mentioned last round all the Intel CPUs are getting clustered around the same spot here but the 7800 x3d the 5800 x3d and the 7700x remain stronger options in this one you can learn more about the other data and the testing for this one for Phantom Liberty in our 14700 K review we'll skip 1440 BS and it's more the same Final Fantasy gives Intel some hope it tends to do well in this game the 14900 K is now forly the chart leader they've done it Intel wins we'll stop here review over the headline is now clear for us Intel I9 14900 K is the new gaming king with a crushing 3.05% lead over the 13900 k and a likewise mindbending 5.47% lead over the 14700 K this battle has long been decided but to be fair this is a title where you want to favor intel if you expect to be CPU bound the lead is a more meaningful 23% over the 7800 x2d for the 14900 K it's just that that lead isn't that much different than what they already had the 1440p scaling is about the same for this game the frame rate has marginally changed but we're still CPU bound and they still stack up largely the same way Stellaris is up now measuring simulation time instead of FPS we mentioned this in our 14700 K review but the game isn't scaling much once we're at around 30 seconds for simulation time they're all jumbling up to look the same due to other limitations in our 14700 K review we asked those of you who are serious players to email us your most complex late game save file to our tips at Gamers nexus.net inbox so we can see if we can find more scaling in the game for the next round in this Stellaris chart though there's no difference but for once it's not the fault of in's at so-called 14th so-called gen it's just that we're bound elsewhere it might be hard to tell 0% generational scaling from 0% test scaling but it's just 0% test scaling Starfield is another one that shows scaling for Intel sort of or at least Intel has managed to wedge itself at the top of the chart to supplant those pesky x2d CPUs the 14900 K is 132 FPS average has it 2.8% ahead of the 1300k with the 14700 K not meaningfully far behind you'd never notice the difference between 126 and 132 FPS average especially in this game so selecting between them isn't that important the lead over the 7800 x2d is at least more meaningful at 15% improved scaling is similar at 1080p high with a lower FPS due to a heavier workload but overall the lineup is mostly unchanged so wrapping up the 13 1400k review then oh we're we're just disappointed I mean it's not there's very little change in stock performance this isn't deserving of a new number uh it's going to be confusing for consumers who don't follow this stuff as closely as you all do and we would say it's pretty simple where if you're in the market for for a CPU like this if it's significantly cheaper like $50 or whatever it is right now cheaper just get the 3900k if you were already going to buy that one and use the $50 somewhere else um if you were not set on which CPU to buy well then all these charts have brand new numbers and data that we've just collected with a brand new test Suite so you have all the tools you need to look through amds competitors and we would say the 78 x3d deserves the most attention in gaming 58 x3d still deserves attention if you're on am4 wouldn't necessarily build a new platform with it right now but yeah am4 boards can be found pretty cheap too so maybe that's all right depending on where you are those are the the kind of top gaming competitors for production 750x kind of 7900x but realistically the 1300k has done pretty well in production over the years and the 14900 is just another one of those so the short version of this is anywhere we or or other reviewers would have recommended a 13900 k it's the same thing so the same rules apply the difference being the price if it's more expensive you get the cheaper one that's it so this whole product launch just feels kind of like grasping at straws and probably in the 14 600k review uh I'm going to open it with more of a monologue talking about that because otherwise it's just going to be more of the same uh lackluster performance Improvement and we have some things to talk about so check back for that one otherwise that's it for this one thanks for watching go to store. cam texas.net to help support our testing efforts this kind of work takes a lot of Hands-On time from the whole team for the past week now and you buying things like our mod mats our solder mats coaster packs shirts anything from the store or going to patreon.com gamer Nexus and throwing us a few bucks that helps us out with the next one subscribe for more thanks for watching we'll see you all next timethe Brilliance of int's 14th generation is limited only by its ability to believe that they were worth launching now we're reviewing the in I9 14900 K uh they have incremented the number from 13 to 14 and the frequency's gone up a little bit now it's 6 GHz for the maximum turbo on the 14900 K which is just high enough to clear the bar for something that marketing can grasp at to talk about its promotional materials now we were so disappointed in the iso 14 700k in our last review that we made a whole weird intro it went a little off the rails this enables companies everywhere to make bigger number better but without all of the hard work of making the number bigger better but that's the trade for spending a week on products like these uh now we're back to trock with the 13900 14900 K and this thing it pulls a ton of power just like the 13900 K did but that hasn't really changed much uh and it now runs it again 6 GHz so we're going to be talking about if the 14900 K is worth considering and some of its competitors the closest ones being probably the 78 x 3D and gaming which is a lot cheaper right now but anyway let's get started with the Raptor Lake refresh 149 before that this video is brought to you by lean Lee and the o1d Evo XL the o1d Evo XL builds upon the longstanding strength of the o1d series by adding new features like rotated GPU layout to showcase the most important part of a build the Evo XL also uses a removable motherboard tray that can adjust for different heights making it tunable for every style additionally these cases use lean Le's compartmentalized approach to design to keep cables cleanly hidden behind the back of the case learn more at the link in the description below quick overview in specs first so the 1400k is for sale right now the day before you all will see this video day before launch for $600 on new EG it's kind of imply that that's maybe like a pre-order low price we've seen it for 625 elsewhere so by the time this video posts the CPU will be out and it should be 600 to 625 or so the 14900 k at 600 most directly competes with Intel's own 13900 K which is $550 and then AMD strongest gaming competitor is the 7800 x3d which has been around 350 to 400 all week the strongest production competitor from AMD is the 7950 X commonly priced under $600 the AMD r9700 X is another competitive option that's 425 to 450 right now depending on where you look we've already detailed the basics for the 14 series just a reminder again it's going to be hard to break this Habit For Us and other reviewers too but this isn't really a generation so 14th gen is kind of just a shorthand way to say 14 series But ultimately this is the same architecture uh this is not deserving of a new generational number we will sometimes refer to it as 14th gen but that's really not what it is so don't expect that much unfortunately Intel has misbranded this in a way where it will lead people to expect more than what they're getting we're going to start with power draw power consumption is insane on the I9 CPUs and we have some cool numbers we can share looking back at just I9 which haven't actually existed that long on Intel's history so let's start there let's start with thermals a quick reminder here the temperature that comes out of a data log for a CPU is not like a synthetic bench Mark score it's going to change a lot and that's entirely based on the motherboard and the cooler plus the workload used for testing in our test we use blender rendering for a realistic and heavy daily use case we also test with a 360 mm Arctic liquid freezer 2 at 100% fan and pump speeds you can find our acoustic and other thermal data and our cooler reviews for that finally other than controlling the board to not blast MCE or something we basically let it do its thing with regard to voltages and operate under Intel's official guidance for how these CPS are supposed to behave the Asus z790 dark hero served as the test platform for the 14900 K here's the chart first with the 14900 K logging every core at steady state and tested in a 21c environment we end up put temperatures that were shockingly consistent core to core this is a lot better than we've seen in the past from Intel that much is typically the assembly quality and how the IHS is attached to the Silicon our peak-to Peak Delta for peor is around 4° where the 70s that's with a 360 mil liquid cooler and a 100% core workload for blender now it's at least mostly under control here in gaming scenarios this would be lower in a prime type scenario it would be higher we've seen others that have been in the 9s and depending on the cooler that was used by the reviewer and the motherboard that's completely possible the dark hero is logging via software as having 1.72 VC core if that number can be trusted from Hardware info that'd be low enough to explain some of this relatively low theral performance compared to some of the other figures that we've seen but sometimes this number isn't an accurate representation looking at some other temperatures the 14700 K ran higher overall in this workload despite being in the same board and under the same cooler some of this is likely the stem quality though and the lid attachment by Intel we've seen that this can change a lot unit to unit in the past and uh this this difference would easily be explained by that given our years of data we've collected on CPUs with the same methods we can provide some interesting perspective using a look back at all the I9 CPUs we've tested recently remember that the i7 existed as the top end before this but we have that generational comparison chart in our 14700 K review here's the I9 chart the 14900 K is 287 watts is close to the highest we've tested and aside from the 13900 K it is the highest stock draw we've tested the 13900 K isn't far off though they're about the same dating back to the original Intel I9 desktop CPU the I9 9900 K power consumption was as low as 94 Watts for all core and blender the 11 900k was 127 watt it's about the same as the 10900k before it the Intel HDT CPUs like the 10900x and the 10980xe pushed closer to 200 Watts that the 10980xe was lower power consumption than the 14900 K is crazy considering how the 10980xe was received at the time it was seen as this mind blowingly power hungry chip but also a top performer with its 18 cores we see a generational climb with the 12900 K going to 244 Watts then 275 Watts with the basically pre KS skew and there's a clear trend line here and it's going up the difference between the 139 and 149 could be process maturity it's just as likely though a slight change in the voltage provisioned by the motherboard could also Al be error we're really not that far apart here they're basically the same here's a look at the more comparative power numbers we measured the 14900 K again at 287 Watts at EPS 12vt cables meaning that the CPU and vrm efficiency losses are the only things measured here that has it about the same as our 13900 K which was 295 Watts previously the 14700 K's 284 watts is about the same amd's 7800 x3d meanwhile Max is out at 86 Watts all core although to be fair Intel won't be at 100% CPU load in games like it is here but neither will AMD AMD still overall here is advantaged though the 750x CPU pulls 251 Watts without eco mode also below int's 14900 K this is a power hungry CPU and they're only going to get harder to cool if intel keeps going this direction overclocking also becomes more challenging although maybe in a new way in this case the new way is that the cooling begins to hit diminishing abilities to tame this power drop undervolting makes way more sense to do that instead and Intel boards traditionally have run way too high voltage even at stock so there's room for improvement power efficiency testing will help us understand what all this really means for this number we're calculating the energy consumption during a blender workload our metric is Watt hours which allows us to see how much energy consumption there is for a CPU to complete the same work that means we're normalizing for the workload not the time and lower is better the 14900 K is at the lower end of the chart it's more icient than the 13900 K the 14700 K 129k and the 137k and AMD is 5800 a barely but it's far below top performers like the 5950 X or 7950 X for efficiency it's not the least efficient we've tested but Intel is pushing its thermal envelope and power draw increasingly High blender is up next because this one spawns one render tile per threat on the CPU it scales well with higher thread count processors and that is why the 14900 k is 100% identical to the last generation 13900 K great that's super exciting thanks Intel thanks Steve this has the 795x and its 6.4 minute result ahead of the 14900 K with a 12% time reduction against the semi h00 X Intel's lead is 15% and against its own 14700 K it leads by 8.8% time reduced this would be interesting if all of those numbers weren't already exactly the same by comparing it to the 139900 K this difference is massive you can literally see it in szip file compression testing the 14900 K completed 191,000 mips or millions of instructions per second it's ahead of the 13900 K by get ready for it 0.6% we're actually going to throw it over to Intel to ask them what they think of this Improvement back to you Steve so again we're basically re-reviewing the 139k against the 147 100K that's an 11% Improvement if you can call Total and utter stagnation an improvement in decompression it's a little bit better at least the 14900 K improves over the 13900 K by 4% here not too distant from the 5950 X and leading the 14700 K by 23% Adobe Premier benchmarking via the Puget Suite is up now this one has the 14900 k at 842 points in aggregate leading the 13900 K by 1.7% so nearly margin of error basically truly irrevocably an engineering Masterpiece Marvels like this are what Intel will be remembered for when the Improvement is so large that we need a decimal place just to illustrate that it's not within our own test variants that's when you know it's a good generational uplift in fact it's so exciting that we're not even going to talk about any other production tests time to move on to games the production numbers were just so staggering and impressive we couldn't bear to look at them anymore more it was overwhelming us with some kind of emotion and almost brought us to tears just how CPU the CPU is so we're going to move to games now and we expect great results in Rainbow Six Siege at 1080p the 14900 K ran at 656 FPS average that has it ahead of the 13900 K by 1. 6584 z49 59702 4% a world record for length of a percentage number in a gamer's Nexus review video remarkable the positioning has it just ahead of the 5800 x3d so Intel gets its wish it is now technically ahead of the last gen AMD x3d CPU the 7,000 series still leads but it's the small steps that count like beating something based on an architecture from a few years ago against the 14700 K the 14900 K is also under a 2% benefit at 1440p it's it's even more riveting the 14900 K leads the 13900 K by 0.2 FPS average as you all know Rainbow 6 is a highly competitive game so that 0.2 FPS matters we should give some perspective here the extra 0.2 FPS average means your average frame time is shorter by about 0.00008 milliseconds since the average redditor's reaction time is actually 0.001 milliseconds which is at least 1 .4 million milliseconds faster than their thought processing time this is a difference that the most advanced Among Us can feel in F1 2023 the 14900 K measured at 422 FPS average ahead of the 13900 K by 1.1% the difference genuinely actually is impressively Tiny if you're picking between this and a 14700 K you'd be looking at about a 3.7% Improvement moving to the I9 in this game so not worth thinking too much about Intel is struggling to meet amd's 5800 x3d performance which sits 7% ahead of the new I9 and the 7800 xpd is 21% ahead at 1440p we get the usual reduction of scaling as a result of imposing a GPU limitation at the top end of the stack so let's move forward folders Gate 3 is up now in this one we see again that the x2d CPUs are soaring to the top of the chart the 14900 K landed at 110 FPS average gracing us with a 2 2% uplift over the 13900 K while allowing the 7800 xpd a lead of 10.4% the ladder here actually a meaningful number the 5800 xpd isn't far behind Intel and it ends up about tied with the 14700 K 1440p predictably is the same we're CPU bound even at the higher resolutions in this game so the 14900 K positioning remains largely unchanged in Phantom Liberty at 1080p the 14900 K is a 168 FPS average result headed ahead of the 13900 K by 3.2% the 14700 K and the 13700 K are within runto run variance of each other as we mentioned last round all the Intel CPUs are getting clustered around the same spot here but the 7800 x3d the 5800 x3d and the 7700x remain stronger options in this one you can learn more about the other data and the testing for this one for Phantom Liberty in our 14700 K review we'll skip 1440 BS and it's more the same Final Fantasy gives Intel some hope it tends to do well in this game the 14900 K is now forly the chart leader they've done it Intel wins we'll stop here review over the headline is now clear for us Intel I9 14900 K is the new gaming king with a crushing 3.05% lead over the 13900 k and a likewise mindbending 5.47% lead over the 14700 K this battle has long been decided but to be fair this is a title where you want to favor intel if you expect to be CPU bound the lead is a more meaningful 23% over the 7800 x2d for the 14900 K it's just that that lead isn't that much different than what they already had the 1440p scaling is about the same for this game the frame rate has marginally changed but we're still CPU bound and they still stack up largely the same way Stellaris is up now measuring simulation time instead of FPS we mentioned this in our 14700 K review but the game isn't scaling much once we're at around 30 seconds for simulation time they're all jumbling up to look the same due to other limitations in our 14700 K review we asked those of you who are serious players to email us your most complex late game save file to our tips at Gamers nexus.net inbox so we can see if we can find more scaling in the game for the next round in this Stellaris chart though there's no difference but for once it's not the fault of in's at so-called 14th so-called gen it's just that we're bound elsewhere it might be hard to tell 0% generational scaling from 0% test scaling but it's just 0% test scaling Starfield is another one that shows scaling for Intel sort of or at least Intel has managed to wedge itself at the top of the chart to supplant those pesky x2d CPUs the 14900 K is 132 FPS average has it 2.8% ahead of the 1300k with the 14700 K not meaningfully far behind you'd never notice the difference between 126 and 132 FPS average especially in this game so selecting between them isn't that important the lead over the 7800 x2d is at least more meaningful at 15% improved scaling is similar at 1080p high with a lower FPS due to a heavier workload but overall the lineup is mostly unchanged so wrapping up the 13 1400k review then oh we're we're just disappointed I mean it's not there's very little change in stock performance this isn't deserving of a new number uh it's going to be confusing for consumers who don't follow this stuff as closely as you all do and we would say it's pretty simple where if you're in the market for for a CPU like this if it's significantly cheaper like $50 or whatever it is right now cheaper just get the 3900k if you were already going to buy that one and use the $50 somewhere else um if you were not set on which CPU to buy well then all these charts have brand new numbers and data that we've just collected with a brand new test Suite so you have all the tools you need to look through amds competitors and we would say the 78 x3d deserves the most attention in gaming 58 x3d still deserves attention if you're on am4 wouldn't necessarily build a new platform with it right now but yeah am4 boards can be found pretty cheap too so maybe that's all right depending on where you are those are the the kind of top gaming competitors for production 750x kind of 7900x but realistically the 1300k has done pretty well in production over the years and the 14900 is just another one of those so the short version of this is anywhere we or or other reviewers would have recommended a 13900 k it's the same thing so the same rules apply the difference being the price if it's more expensive you get the cheaper one that's it so this whole product launch just feels kind of like grasping at straws and probably in the 14 600k review uh I'm going to open it with more of a monologue talking about that because otherwise it's just going to be more of the same uh lackluster performance Improvement and we have some things to talk about so check back for that one otherwise that's it for this one thanks for watching go to store. cam texas.net to help support our testing efforts this kind of work takes a lot of Hands-On time from the whole team for the past week now and you buying things like our mod mats our solder mats coaster packs shirts anything from the store or going to patreon.com gamer Nexus and throwing us a few bucks that helps us out with the next one subscribe for more thanks for watching we'll see you all next time\n"