Intel Core i9-14900K, Core i7-14700K and Core i5-14600K Review: Raptor Lake Refreshed
by Gavin Bonshor on October 17, 2023 9:00 AM ESTIntel AI Assist: A Better Guess At Auto Overclocking
Below, we'll give Intel's latest AI Assist feature via the Extreme Tuning Utility (XTU) software to see what it believes is the best overclock for our system and how it compares to default settings. After applying Intel's AI Assist to our Core i9-14900K, it concluded that the following settings are suitable for our test setup:
Intel's AI Assist believes our system and Core i9-14900K is capable of 6.1 GHz on the two of the P-cores and 6.0 GHz on the remaining 6 P-cores, which, based on some preliminary testing with XTU, is very ambitious, to say the least. When running a CineBench R23 MT, the system was as stable as a kite in a hurricane; not very stable at all. We did manage to get a couple of CineBench R23 MT runs in, but with thermal throttling happening instantaneously, we saw some regression in performance with a score of 39445; temperatures went straight into the red, and the system dialed back the core frequencies and CPU V-Core.
The feature is a good idea in principle, but once enabled, even though it's an Intel-marketed feature, it voids the CPU's warranty. The other element is that the additional heat and power make the applied settings under intense workloads unstable. While this is still an early feature, we would have expected more stability with the applied settings than we saw in our testing.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
57 Comments
View All Comments
cmdrdredd - Wednesday, October 18, 2023 - link
You aren't even the target market for any of this so your comment is useless and pointless. You are not an enthusiast, gamer, or need the power for work.ItsAdam - Wednesday, October 18, 2023 - link
I old a 4090 and I wouldn't want a CPU with the same power as it. I was waiting for Meteor Lake upgrading from my 5800X3D, but when I heard it was a refresh I was like oh no.Looks like I'm going to be a beta tester for AMDs 6000 series, and I'm quite frankly bored of AMD and it's crash test consumer development.
I know times are changing, I know, and I loved to tinker but it's getting too long in the tooth with AMD ATM with all the agesa "fixes" which is usually a big performance loss.
I really wanted INTEL to come out brawling,but all they're doing is digging their own grave.
They shouldn't have released ANOTHER refresh, especially one as bad as this.
lilo777 - Wednesday, October 18, 2023 - link
You do not pay the utility for peak power consumption. You pay for actual consumption which is much lower because power peaks are rare and short.mode_13h - Wednesday, October 18, 2023 - link
> power peaks are rare and short.Depends on what you're doing. If rendering, video encoding, or lots of software compilation, then not necessarily.
mode_13h - Wednesday, October 18, 2023 - link
Thanks for continuing to run SPEC2017, but I'm really missing the cumulative scores. Also, I wish we could get cumulative scores on E-cores only and P-cores only, as well as populating that graph with some other popular CPUs, as was done up to the i9-12900K review.For reference, please see the chart titled "SPEC2017 Rate-N Estimated Total", at the bottom of this page:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/17047/the-intel-12t...
The following page of that review goes on to explore the P & E cores.
Perhaps this would be good material for a follow-on article?
eloyard - Thursday, October 19, 2023 - link
2000s called, want their Net-Burst back.Reinforcer - Saturday, October 28, 2023 - link
Then don't let the motherboard run away with power lol, Honestly what is wrong with you reviewers fixated on how much power it can draw? Set it to Intel's 253w limit and enjoy almost the same performance as one that is consuming stupid amounts of power, It's not rocket science or do we not know how to set a motherboard up these days?