I’ve compared Intel’s Core i7-13700K against AMD’s Ryzen 7 7700X in 24 games and applications
to find out which CPU is best!
The 7700X is a 8 core 16 thread part, and while the 13700K also has 8 performance cores
with 16 threads, it’s also got an extra 8 efficient cores that don’t have hyperthreading,
making it a 16 core 24 thread part.
Intel also has more L2 cache, but not quite as much L3 cache, and both have the same 5.4GHz
single core turbo boost clock speed.
Right now the 7700X goes for $399 USD, while the 13700K costs $50 more at $450, however
you can also get the KF version if you don’t need integrated graphics for $20 less.
This close $30 to $50 price difference is the main reason I wanted to compare both of
these CPUs.
Although AMD’s next best CPU, the 7900X, has 12 cores and 24 threads, putting it closer
in terms of specs to the 13700K, that CPU costs $100 more than the i7.
Anyway, prices will of course change over time though, so you can check out current
updates with those links below the video.
I’ve compared both CPUs in this system to find out if it’s worth paying more for Intel.
I’ve tested with the exact same memory kit with the same timings for both Intel and AMD,
so literally the only differences here are the CPUs and motherboards.
The latest Windows 11 22H2 was used with core isolation off, the same Nvidia drivers with
resizable BAR enabled, and neither CPU was subject to any power limits.
Just before the 24 games, let’s start out with Cinebench R23, as it’s an easy way
to get a general idea of where single and multi threaded performance are at.
The 13700K was ahead in both tests, with only a 6% lead in single core score, however the
higher thread count thanks to its E cores put the 13700K 56% ahead of the 7700X here.
Although the 13700K was performing 56% better in multicore performance in Cinebench, it’s
using 67% more power to achieve this.
This results in the 7700X coming out ahead in terms of power efficiency, as it was using
155 watts less power in my test.
Despite Intel using plenty more power, the temperatures weren’t actually that different,
though to be fair, these results aren’t really directly comparable as the way both
processors use sensors to measure thermals varies.
Both processors were running beyond 5GHz on their big cores, while the E cores in the
i7 were hitting their maximum turbo boost speed.
Just a quick spoiler before you write off the 7700X based on this one test, but the
7700X does actually do better in games.
But before we get into the 24 game comparison, let’s see how both CPUs compare in more
productivity workloads.
There’s more to life than just Cinebench!
Blender was tested with the Open Data benchmark, and as a test that relies on multicore performance,
it wasn’t a surprise to see the 13700K scoring around 45% higher than the 7700X in all three
tests, but again keep in mind it’s using more power to do this.
The 13700K was also winning in V-Ray, another rendering workload, with a 38% higher score
compared to the 7700X, while the Corona renderer was 49% faster with the i7 chip.
Linux kernel compilation was tested under Ubuntu 22.04, whereas all other tests were
done with Windows 11, and again the 13700K was completing this workload in less time,
making it 33% faster than the 7700X.
LLVM compilation is the only other workload I’ve tested with Linux, and there was a
similar gap between the two CPUs despite this test running for a longer amount of time.
Back into Windows and Handbrake was used to convert one of my 4K 60FPS review videos to
1080p h.265.
Lower times are better here too, and the 13700K was 33% faster here.
Adobe Premiere was tested with the Puget Systems benchmark, which tests things like video playback,
exporting, effects and more.
The 13700K was scoring 11% higher than the 7700X here, so less of a difference compared
to the previous workloads.
The gap gets even smaller in DaVinci Resolve, another video editing program, with the 13700K
scoring just 7% higher than the 7700X in this one.
The differences were even smaller in Adobe Photoshop.
This test seems to like single core performance, and as we saw earlier in Cinebench, the 13700K
had a 6% lead there.
Here in Photoshop, we’re looking at a 5% higher score with the i7 which matches that.
Interestingly in the Microsoft office tests, only Excel was doing better with Intel.
AMD was scoring higher in Word, Outlook and PowerPoint, but let’s be real, either of
these CPUs will be overkill for office work anyway.
7-Zip was used to test compression and decompression, and this is a test where AMD has traditionally
beat Intel, but now the tables turn with the 13700K being 31% faster in compression and
21% faster in decompression.
Intel was better in terms of AES cryptography too, around 20% faster in decryption and 17%
faster for encryption.
Geekbench tests a bunch of various workloads, but unlike Cinebench earlier, the 7700X had
a slight lead in single core performance.
This boost seems to be due to the cryptography scores, as AMD’s Zen 4 offers AVX512 support,
while Intel’s Raptor Lake does not.
The i7 still had a big 46% lead in multicore though, thanks to its extra cores and threads.
On average out of all applications tested, Intel’s Core i7-13700K was around 23% faster
than AMD’s Ryzen 7 7700X in these specific workloads.
Of course this number alone doesn’t mean much as I’ve got a random combination of
both single and multi threaded workloads which behave differently, but we can see that most
workloads favor Intel, while just a few were doing better with AMD.
If we factor in CPU cost, Intel is also offering better value in terms of multicore performance.
Yeah the i7 costs $50 more for the 13700K or $30 more for the 13700KF, but the extra
performance it’s able to offer here makes it worth it.
At least in terms of raw CPU cost, I’m not comparing full platform cost and you could
argue that using cheaper DDR4 memory with Intel would lower its cost basis.
Cinebench was the best performing workload in favor of Intel though, if we instead look
at something else like Adobe Premiere which was just 11% higher on Intel, they’re much
closer together from a cost versus performance perspective, so it really does depend on the
specific workload you care about.
Alright now let’s compare some games.
I’ve compared both processors in 24 games at 1080p, 1440p and 4K resolutions to show
you all the differences!
Let’s start out with Red Dead Redemption 2.
I’ve got the 1080p results down the bottom, 1440p in the middle, and 4K up the top, with
the 7700X underneath the 13700K, just like before.
AMD was ahead in all regards here, with a 26% higher average frame rate at 1080p, but
then only a minor difference at 4K.
Intel was ahead in Marvel’s Spider-Man Remastered, at least at 1080p and 1440p where it had an
8% lead.
The i7 still had fewer dips in performance at 4K, as measured by the 1% low, but its
average FPS was a little behind the 7700X, though this isn’t really enough of a change
that anyone would notice it when actually playing.
Metro Exodus Enhanced was back on AMD’s side, with the 7700X delivering a 16% higher
average frame rate compared to the 13700K at 1080p.
The differences at 4K were smaller, as most games are heavily GPU bound there, so CPU
selection matters far less.
Halo Infinite on the other hand was back to favoring the 13700K, with a 20% boost to average
FPS at 1080p and 1440p, the biggest difference in favor of Intel out of all 24 games tested
at these resolutions.
Like most other games though, CPU selection hardly matters at the higher 4K resolution.
The ball is back in AMD’s court for Forza Horizon 5.
Although the differences in average FPS were on the smaller side, the dips in performance
as measured by the 1% lows were a fair bit higher with the 7700X, so a more stable experience
with AMD in this game.
Total War: WARHAMMER III barely had a difference between the two processors.
Intel had a slight lead at 1080p, but then AMD had a higher 1% low at 1440p and 4K with
about the same average frame rates.
CS:GO is sensitive to CPU performance, and was a game that favored the 7700X regardless
of the resolution tested.
Speaking of eSports games, the 7700X had an edge in Fortnite, reaching a 17% higher average
frame rate at 1080p, 11% higher at 1440p, and then there’s almost no difference at
4K.
Meanwhile Far Cry 6 had above average gains with Intel, but as we can see here, it’s
not exactly a big difference.
We’re talking about a 5 to 6 FPS increase best case, which comes out as a 3% lead at
1080p and 1440p.
Microsoft Flight Simulator was doing a bit better on AMD, but again it’s not really
that much of a difference.
The 7700X was just 5% ahead in average FPS at 1080p, 8% ahead at 1440p, and then 4% ahead
at 4K.
The rest of the 14 games generally didn’t have as big of a difference between the two
CPUs, I chose to spend time talking through what I thought were the 10 most interesting
results, so rather than waste your time we’ll just quickly skip through the rest of the
games tested.
Feel free to pause the video if you want a closer look at any of the test results.
The reason I chose to test so many different titles is so that we can get a well rounded
average that better represents a wider selection of games, instead of making our conclusion
based on fewer data points.
On average over all 24 games tested, at 1080p Intel’s Core i7-13700K was 2 and a half
percent slower compared to AMD’s Ryzen 7 7700X.
Only 5 of the games tested had more than a 2% FPS boost with Intel, while 11 games had
a 2% or bigger difference the other way in favor of AMD.
8 of the games had less than a percent difference in either direction, so well within the margin
of error range.
Stepping up to the higher 1440p resolution and the 13700K was now just 1% slower than
the 7700X on average in our 24 game selection.
Halo Infinite and Spiderman had the biggest lead with Intel at this resolution, but many
more games were doing better with AMD.
There’s far less of a difference between the two CPUs at the higher 4K resolution.
We’re so GPU bound now that CPU choice hardly matters, with 19 of the 24 games tested having
less than a 2% margin one way or the other.
The outliers were Apex Legends which still seemed to prefer Intel, while CS:GO, Flight
Slim and Forza lean towards AMD, but again we’re talking small differences.
Here’s what we’re looking at when we take the average frame rates from all 24 games
tested to try and spot some overall trends.
I think this better illustrates just how close the two are at 4K and 1440p, while 1080p had
a more noticeable gap in favor of AMD’s Ryzen 7 7700X.
With the 7700X both having a lower price and performing better in most of the games, it’s
no surprise to see that it’s offering better value in terms of cost per frame.
Even if you save some money and get the cheaper 13700KF without the integrated graphics, the
7700X is still a better deal.
Of course this is only factoring in CPU price alone and not total platform costs like motherboards
or DDR4 memory with Intel as I’ve only tested with DDR5 to fairly compare performance.
Ultimately, either of these two processors are going to run games very well, and although
the 7700X was winning in gaming, we can’t forget that the 13700K offered some nice improvements
in productivity workloads thanks to its extra cores and threads.
If the workloads that you’re running would benefit from extra single or multi threaded
performance, then the i7 could be the way to go.
Just don’t forget the higher power usage needed in order to pull it off, those gains
aren’t for free.
Although the Intel CPU does cost more money, you could offset the processor price difference
by instead using better value DDR4 memory.
Not to mention Intel motherboards seem to be cheaper at the moment.
That said, Intel’s 13th gen is the end of the line for the current socket, so by spending
more on an AM5 motherboard today you’ll be able to do a drop-in CPU upgrade in the
future, as AMD have said they plan on supporting AM5 through 2025.
Intel 14th gen or newer on the other hand would need a new motherboard upgrade.
So although Intel’s platform might be cheaper initially, you will need to pay more if you
plan on upgrading in a few years time.
Personally, I’m willing to pay the extra money to get the future upgradeability, but
that’s me.
Let me know which of these two CPUs you’d pick down in the comments, and if these CPUs
are out of your budget then check out this video over here next, where I’ve compared
Intel’s Core i5-13600K against AMD’s Ryzen 5 7600X.
Both are around the $300 price point and offer great performance.
Or if you’ve got a higher budget then find out which CPU is the best over here next!