Intel i9 14900k slower then 13900k-- I need expert help

[M Nabil]

"Hello, everyone! I recently added a new PC with an i9-14k processor and 192 GB of RAM to my render farm. However, when I run tests with Corona Benchmark or Cinebench R23, the i9-13k processors consistently score higher or achieve similar results to the i9-14k. All the PCs have the same Z790 motherboard, but one of the i9-13k PCs with DDR4 RAM always outperforms those with DDR5 RAM. I've updated the 14k's BIOS to the latest microcode, which fixed some instability issues, but I still can't figure out why the 14k is slower than the 13k. Even in 3ds Max, the DDR4 PC consistently delivers faster render times.

The only noticeable difference between these PCs is the operating system version: the 14k runs Windows 11 Enterprise, while the others are the Pro version. Could the system version affect benchmark scores or render times, or could something else be causing this issue?"

Thank you so much for your attention and participation.

[Nejc Kilar]

Hmm hmm, based on the scores you are getting I'd say those seem like expected results? If I cross reference comparisons between the 13900k and 14900k on the V-Ray benchmark and websites like CPU Monkey then the two should generally score / perform ~about the same.

The Raptor Like chips (14th gen) seemingly did not impress the press either as they got more or less universally panned for not really being an improvement over 13th gen. It is basically a refresh line of CPUs and some of the reviewers called it "the 13th gen but with a higher number" type release.

I'd say some minor differences are to be expected based on BIOS settings, motherboards, drivers, OS funkiness and things like that but overall, looks to me like they should score about the same for the most part.

[Bzuco]

Operating systems does not matter, only the number of actively running processes and services. If you disable few running apps(near tray clock icon) some unneeded services, then you will see maybe 3-5% boost in score(depending on benchmark app).

You should monitor frequencies/voltage/temperature on both CPUs during cinebench in HWiNFO util to better understand why there is 5000cb points difference.

All processors last 10-15 years are running on much higher voltage then is needed, which is causing high temperatures and maybe 14900k is throttling a litte bit more than 13900k.

If you will see exactly same frequencies during test, then 5000cb diff can be caused also by memories. DDR4/DDR5 have different timings and different read/write/copy speeds. In bios you can set e.g. interval how often should be the data refreshed in memory chips. During refreshing operation, data cannot be read and write by any software. If you set this parameter to less often refresh data(still safe for data), then you can see immediately performance boost several % in all benchmarks.
Recently there were microcode updates for bioses fixing errors(when operating on highest freqv.)  for 13/14 gen. , so that could also affect the performance.

So there is not exact answer what is causing 5000cb difference until you at least monitor using HWiNFO app and check memory parameters like timings, data transfers,...

[M Nabil]

Operating systems does not matter, only the number of actively running processes and services. If you disable few running apps(near tray clock icon) some unneeded services, then you will see maybe 3-5% boost in score(depending on benchmark app).

You should monitor frequencies/voltage/temperature on both CPUs during cinebench in HWiNFO util to better understand why there is 5000cb points difference.

All processors last 10-15 years are running on much higher voltage then is needed, which is causing high temperatures and maybe 14900k is throttling a litte bit more than 13900k.

If you will see exactly same frequencies during test, then 5000cb diff can be caused also by memories. DDR4/DDR5 have different timings and different read/write/copy speeds. In bios you can set e.g. interval how often should be the data refreshed in memory chips. During refreshing operation, data cannot be read and write by any software. If you set this parameter to less often refresh data(still safe for data), then you can see immediately performance boost several % in all benchmarks.
Recently there were microcode updates for bioses fixing errors(when operating on highest freqv.)  for 13/14 gen. , so that could also affect the performance.

So there is not exact answer what is causing 5000cb difference until you at least monitor using HWiNFO app and check memory parameters like timings, data transfers,...

Thank you for your help.

I'm a bit of a Noob when it comes to memory timings and different read/write speeds. Here’s what I did: I closed all running applications on both PCs (versions 13 and 14) and ran the Corona Render benchmark test. I got almost identical scores for both PCs, and I’ve saved the HWiNFO logs for each.

Could you please take a look and let me know if I might be doing something wrong, or if, as Nejc Kilar suggested, there is no significant difference between the processors, and I should accept that as the reality?

Thank you very much for your time.

[Bzuco]

Those two CPUs will behave the same, because they are both on the same manufacturing process 0.010 micron "Intel 7", same count and type of cores, maximum frequencies does not matter much, because the only limit for modern processors is the temperature.

You could easily reach 13-14M points in corona bench if you would do undervolting for your CPUs in bios or in Intel Extreme Tuning Utility (Intel® XTU).
Undervolting is safe procedure of finding the lowest fully functional(without freezing PC) voltage for certain frequency. Result of undervolting is much lower temperature and power consumption at certain frequency. This gives you room for increasing all core frequencies. Without this you are running CPUs at not ideal conditions. It is like driving on highway 100km/h on 3. gear instead of 5. gear.

You can do screenshot of HWiNFO during benchmarking before end, so we would know exactly what are current frequencies of all cores, what is the actual temperature and power consumption in watts.
HWiNFO has plenty of rows, but if you hit delete key on the row, which you do not need to be monitored, then you can fit all useful information on one page like on my screenshot.
Or you can simply keep something rendering on background and after one minute start record video with mobile and scroll with mouse through all rows in HWiNFO, this will be much better.

For undervolting process you can invite some person who will show you in bios where to set voltage value and where set fixed all core frequencies, where to disable power limit restriction, e.t.c. It is worth to do if you will be rendering a lot in the future, otherwise you are overpaying what you bought :).
The same story applies to graphics cards :).

[M Nabil]

Those two CPUs will behave the same, because they are both on the same manufacturing process 0.010 micron "Intel 7", same count and type of cores, maximum frequencies does not matter much, because the only limit for modern processors is the temperature.

You could easily reach 13-14M points in corona bench if you would do undervolting for your CPUs in bios or in Intel Extreme Tuning Utility (Intel® XTU).
Undervolting is safe procedure of finding the lowest fully functional(without freezing PC) voltage for certain frequency. Result of undervolting is much lower temperature and power consumption at certain frequency. This gives you room for increasing all core frequencies. Without this you are running CPUs at not ideal conditions. It is like driving on highway 100km/h on 3. gear instead of 5. gear.

You can do screenshot of HWiNFO during benchmarking before end, so we would know exactly what are current frequencies of all cores, what is the actual temperature and power consumption in watts.
HWiNFO has plenty of rows, but if you hit delete key on the row, which you do not need to be monitored, then you can fit all useful information on one page like on my screenshot.
Or you can simply keep something rendering on background and after one minute start record video with mobile and scroll with mouse through all rows in HWiNFO, this will be much better.

For undervolting process you can invite some person who will show you in bios where to set voltage value and where set fixed all core frequencies, where to disable power limit restriction, e.t.c. It is worth to do if you will be rendering a lot in the future, otherwise you are overpaying what you bought :).
The same story applies to graphics cards :).

Thanks for the detailed explanation and advice on undervolting! It’s really beneficial. I appreciate the tips on using HWiNFO for monitoring. I’ve attached a screenshot showing the results after rendering and overclocking using Intel Extreme Tuning Utility (Intel® XTU).

Thanks again for the guidance!

[Bzuco]

So as you can see you are reaching 100°C, that's the maximum operating temperature for this processor...and that is with water cooling, 2150rpm radiator fans.
You can expand Core Clocks row to see what are the frequencies of 8 Performance cores and what are on 16 Efficiency cores.

304-309W is too high consumption thanks to high default voltage set by Intel. You should be able to keep it on more resonably values for your cooling solution and location where you live... so something max. 250W.

Sadly I do not have these new generation of processors, I am on older rocket lake 11700F cpu, but the principles how to undervolt are the same.

In bios you should be able to find something like:
P-Core Ratio Apply mode - All Core
P-Core Ratio - change Auto to value you want to have for Performance cores, e.g. "50" which means 50x100MHz  = 5GHz
The same for E cores, but E cores have maximum turbo frequencies just 4.4GHz, so you will set Auto to "44", because those are efficiency cores and you want use them on max.
Next find Long Duration Power Limit(W), Short Duration Power Limit(W) and set it to max. values, or at least over 250W. Long Duration Maintained(s) set to max value.
It was also adviced to disable Enhanced Turbo, because you will be using fixed frequencies and you don't wanna CPU to affect this.

Next step is set the voltage. For this purpose you can use Intel Extreme Tuning Utility and use slider to set negative voltage offset. You can start with values -50mVolts, -75mV, -100mV, ...and always remember what is the current value, e.g. 1.243V. As you will be decreasing the voltage value you will find the value when PC freezes or some BSOD will appears. Then you need to set that value one step back(to higher voltage). Then you should run some rendering tests to see if that voltage value is safe even after few seconds/minutes of rendering. Intel XTU has built-in benchmark which is utilizinx AVX instructions, which needs slightly higher voltage.
If everything will be stable, you can mark the voltage value for this 5.0GH frequency and you will see what are the resulted temperatures and power consumption and then you can decide, if you have reserves for higher frequencies or not.
When you will be satisfied, you can set the voltage value in bios. You should be able to find something like CPU Core Voltage Mode - set it from auto to Override Mode and set the resulted voltage, e.g. 1.162V.
In most of the undervolting videos it is advised to set only negative offset voltage, e.g. -0.1V. The problem is, that offset is universal for all frequencies and your undervolting will be not so efficient as if you will use fixed frequency for all cores and exact lowest voltage.

I am not sure if it is possible to set different voltage also for E-cores. Dependence between frequency and voltage is not linear. With increasing frequency the value of voltage is behaving exponencialy. Every +0.1GHz needs a lot more and more voltage. So those E-cores can run at voltage ~1.0V or maybe even less...so you can save a lot of power for Performance cores.

This way I found the lowest functional voltage for my 11700F CPU for several frequencies (3.6GHz, 3.8, 4.0, 4.2, 4.4), and I am using 4.4 in winter and only 4.0 in summer when outdoor temperatures are higher, otherwise I would be not able to cool enough my CPU with air cooler.

EDIT: Voltage values you can see in HWiNFO (Core VIDs) are slightly different then values you will set in bios. e.g. if you set 1.170V in bios, you will see ~1.194V in HWiNFO Core VIDs.

[M Nabil]

So as you can see you are reaching 100°C, that's the maximum operating temperature for this processor...and that is with water cooling, 2150rpm radiator fans.
You can expand Core Clocks row to see what are the frequencies of 8 Performance cores and what are on 16 Efficiency cores.

304-309W is too high consumption thanks to high default voltage set by Intel. You should be able to keep it on more resonably values for your cooling solution and location where you live... so something max. 250W.

Sadly I do not have these new generation of processors, I am on older rocket lake 11700F cpu, but the principles how to undervolt are the same.

In bios you should be able to find something like:
P-Core Ratio Apply mode - All Core
P-Core Ratio - change Auto to value you want to have for Performance cores, e.g. "50" which means 50x100MHz  = 5GHz
The same for E cores, but E cores have maximum turbo frequencies just 4.4GHz, so you will set Auto to "44", because those are efficiency cores and you want use them on max.
Next find Long Duration Power Limit(W), Short Duration Power Limit(W) and set it to max. values, or at least over 250W. Long Duration Maintained(s) set to max value.
It was also adviced to disable Enhanced Turbo, because you will be using fixed frequencies and you don't wanna CPU to affect this.

Next step is set the voltage. For this purpose you can use Intel Extreme Tuning Utility and use slider to set negative voltage offset. You can start with values -50mVolts, -75mV, -100mV, ...and always remember what is the current value, e.g. 1.243V. As you will be decreasing the voltage value you will find the value when PC freezes or some BSOD will appears. Then you need to set that value one step back(to higher voltage). Then you should run some rendering tests to see if that voltage value is safe even after few seconds/minutes of rendering. Intel XTU has built-in benchmark which is utilizinx AVX instructions, which needs slightly higher voltage.
If everything will be stable, you can mark the voltage value for this 5.0GH frequency and you will see what are the resulted temperatures and power consumption and then you can decide, if you have reserves for higher frequencies or not.
When you will be satisfied, you can set the voltage value in bios. You should be able to find something like CPU Core Voltage Mode - set it from auto to Override Mode and set the resulted voltage, e.g. 1.162V.
In most of the undervolting videos it is advised to set only negative offset voltage, e.g. -0.1V. The problem is, that offset is universal for all frequencies and your undervolting will be not so efficient as if you will use fixed frequency for all cores and exact lowest voltage.

I am not sure if it is possible to set different voltage also for E-cores. Dependence between frequency and voltage is not linear. With increasing frequency the value of voltage is behaving exponencialy. Every +0.1GHz needs a lot more and more voltage. So those E-cores can run at voltage ~1.0V or maybe even less...so you can save a lot of power for Performance cores.

This way I found the lowest functional voltage for my 11700F CPU for several frequencies (3.6GHz, 3.8, 4.0, 4.2, 4.4), and I am using 4.4 in winter and only 4.0 in summer when outdoor temperatures are higher, otherwise I would be not able to cool enough my CPU with air cooler.

EDIT: Voltage values you can see in HWiNFO (Core VIDs) are slightly different then values you will set in bios. e.g. if you set 1.170V in bios, you will see ~1.194V in HWiNFO Core VIDs.

Thank you for the detailed advice on undervolting and optimizing CPU performance. Your explanation is incredibly thorough and will definitely help me get better control over my processor’s temperature and power consumption.

Thanks again for sharing your expertise! I’ll apply these strategies and keep you on track of how they impact performance and temperatures.

[Bzuco]

Okay, I can't wait for your results 🙂.
Just some motivation video(play at 7:46s) what can be done with 7950x, all core 4.8GHz, 0.995V, 131W, ~65°c, 36k cinebench points without running monitoring tools. Plenty of room to run on 5.0 or maybe 5.2GHz with his cooling.