Intel says it has tuned the two die to offer the same level of performance, but it is yet to be seen if some of Raptor Lake's finer-grained MCU tuning is present in the B0 stepping chips. The Raptor Lake processors have a vastly improved voltage/frequency curve compared to Alder Lake, making them more efficient, and a special microcontroller unit (MCU) firmware that imparts caching and prefetching advantages ( deep dive here). In contrast, the B0 stepping die comes with the Raptor Cove chip architecture, but has a cut-down cache configuration to match the Alder Lake silicon. The C0 die is the same silicon that Intel uses for the Alder Lake Core i5 processors, making the Core i5-13400 mostly identical to the Core i5-12600K (our test subject is C0). That stands in contrast to the higher-end Raptor models that come with 2MB of L2 per p-core and 4MB of L2 for each e-core cluster. Instead, each p-core has 1.25 MB of L2 cache, and the quad-core e-core cluster has only 2MB of cache - the same as Alder Lake. The two types of dies come with different core architectures, but are designed to offer the same level of performance.Īs such, the Core i5-13400/F doesn't have the same amount of cache per core as the Raptor Lake Core i7 and i9 chips. Most other features, like the supported DDR4-3200 and DDR5-5600 transfer rates, 9.5 MB of L2, and 20 MB of 元 cache, are the same as the previous-gen 12600K, and with good reason - Intel uses repurposed Alder Lake silicon for some of the Core i5-13400 chips, just as it did with the Core i5-12400 processors. As you'll see in our power testing, we didn't see the chip exceed 110W in any of our testing, so the MTP rating is higher than needed. The 13400 has a 65W Processor Base Power (PBP) and 148W Maximum Turbo Power (MTP) rating. The e-cores kick in for background and multi-threaded tasks with a 1.8 GHz base and 3.3 GHz boost, a 300 MHz lower boost than the 12600K. That's 200 MHz faster than the previous-gen 12400 but 300 MHz slower than the 12600K. The Core i5-13400's p-cores have a 2.5 GHz base clock and boost up to 4.6 GHz on two cores in latency-sensitive work. Perhaps most importantly, you can drop down to the $196 Core i5-13400F and receive the same performance - you just lose the 24-EU integrated UHD Graphics 730 engine, so you'll need a discrete GPU. In effect, this makes the 13400 very comparable to the $289 previous-gen Core i5-12600K, which also came with six p-cores and four e-cores. The 13400 has a $22 markup over the previous-gen Core i5-12400's $199 debut price, but now you get four e-cores instead of zero. The $221 Core i5-13400 comes with six performance cores (p-cores) and four efficiency cores (e-cores) etched onto the 'Intel 7' process node, for a total of 10 cores and 16 threads. Intel Core i5-13400 Header Cell - Column 0 Like AMD, Intel also throws in a bundled cooler with its lower-end 65W chips to sweeten the deal, and even though we generally recommend buying a better cooler than the bundled models, the Core i5-13400 cooler is at least serviceable for most users. Additionally, DDR5 overclocking gains come with eye-pricing markups that largely aren't worth the small uplift. As our tests show, you should only buy the latter if you intend to splurge on a heavily-overclocked kit - at stock settings, a cheap DDR4 memory kit will give you roughly the same gaming performance as a pricey DDR5 kit. In contrast, Intel's motherboard ecosystem remains less expensive, and the Raptor Lake chips support either value-centric DDR4 or the pricier DDR5. when going into a basement.Despite Ryzen's impressive performance, the chips have been plagued by high B-series motherboard pricing and Ryzen's strict requirement for DDR5 memory, both of which lead to higher platform costs. What I was really trying to to was:Ī) Hide roofs/floors/above of buildings when the player enters them (3rd top-down person game) / hide ground, etc. With all that said, while I'll probably need global variables later regardless, this particular problem might be better solved with some sort of occlusion. When I set the property, do I have to set it on a specific GameObject, or can I set it globally for all of Unity? I'd prefer to do the later, because my gut feeling is that running Update loops on every single game object with a material (to set the variable on it) would be terrible for performance. I did try changing them before (to EnvironmentAlbedo f.ex.), but it resulted in my editor-chain-crashing until I manually edited the graph file to remove the input and all references to it within that file. Should I ever change the reference reference ids? (Vector1_71B9E5F1, f.ex.).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |