OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Intel Core i9-13900KS review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£480PassMark multi-core score:60528N. of physical cores:24CPU boost clock speed:6.0 GHzCPU socket:LGA1700TDP (Thermal design power):150 W

Intel Core i9-13900KS Review: Compare 74 technical specifications, 22 expert and video reviews and 2 best-of lists to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

Intel Core i9-13900KS
8.0/10

Overall score

Score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 93% of models
Score components

40%

8.5

Technical score

25%

7.3

Reviews score

25%

8.1

List score

10%

6.9

Sentiment score

★Better than 93% of processors
8.0

Value for money

Value for money
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 86% of models
Score components

70%

8.0

Overall score

30%

8.0

Price

▲Better than 86%
8.5

Technical score

Technical score
8.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 94% of models
Score components

60%

9.4

Performance

18%

7.6

Architecture

10%

9.0

Memory & PCIe

7%

3.0

Power & Thermal

4%

8.2

Platform

1%

7.4

Integrated graphics

★Better than 94%
7.3

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.3/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 57% of models

80%

6.9

Average grade

20%

9.2

Popularity

Grades by review (22)
12 reviews: 8 with a printed score, 4 estimated from the review. 10 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▼Worse than 57%
8.1

List score

List score
8.1/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (2)
List score: in 2 of 85 lists (2%)
★Better than 94%
  • intel-core-i9-13900ks
  • intel-core-i9-13900ks
  • intel-core-i9-13900ks
  • intel-core-i9-13900ks
  • intel-core-i9-13900ks
intel-core-i9-13900ks
intel-core-i9-13900ks
intel-core-i9-13900ks
intel-core-i9-13900ks
intel-core-i9-13900ks
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the Intel Core i9-13900KS

Based on 10 · 10

Reviewers like the high boost clocks and memory support, but heat, power draw and poor value draw consistent criticism.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the Intel Core i9-13900KS

Based on 67 owners sharing their experience in online comments

43%positive20%mixed37%negative

Owners praise its high performance and overclocking headroom, though heat, power draw, and stability issues often complicate ownership.

What owners dislike

  • Under heavy loads it can draw 320 to 370 watts, pushing temperatures to 90 to 100 C even on large all-in-one coolers.15
  • Aggressive overclocks can cause WHEA errors, blue screens, freezes at Windows sign-in, or failure to boot after changing BIOS settings.10
  • Pushing clocks to about 6 GHz can need around 1.4 to 1.6 V and draw 300 to 370 watts under all-core loads.8
  • Tuning is hard, BIOS updates can remove per-core ratio settings, and some chips top out near 5.9 GHz instead of 6.2 GHz.7
  • Memory overclocks or XMP profiles can fail memory tests or refuse to post on some boards, including 7200 MHz kits.4

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i9-13900KS

Technical score
Technical score
8.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 94% of models
Score components:

60%

9.4

Performance

18%

7.6

Architecture

10%

9.0

Memory & PCIe

7%

3.0

Power & Thermal

4%

8.2

Platform

1%

7.4

Integrated graphics

8.5
Reviews score
7.3
List score
8.1
Value for money
Value for money
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 86% of models
Score components:

70%

8.0

Overall score

30%

8.0

Price

8.0
Processor type
desktop
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 54.7% of processors and equal to that of 39.5% of processors.
CPU socket
LGA1700
This processor uses the LGA1700 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 84.5% of processors and equal to that of 8.4% of processors.
Chipset
Z790, H770, B760, Z690, H670, B660, H610, Q670, W680
This processor supports Z790, H770, B760, Z690, H670, B660, H610, Q670, W680 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 86.4% of processors and equal to that of 2.3% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2
This processor supports SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 instruction sets, which is narrower support than 88.2% of processors and equal to that of 9.7% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
24
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 24 CPU cores, which is more than 96.3% of processors and equal to 2.4% of processors.
CPU threads
32
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 32 CPU threads, which is more than 94.9% of processors and equal to 3.2% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
6 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 6 GHz which is higher than that of 99.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
8x 3.2 GHz & 16x 2.4 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 8x3.2 GHz & 16x2.4 GHz which is higher than that of 97.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
60,528
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 60,528 in PassMark, which is higher than 97.8% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Semiconductor size
10 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 10 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 50.8% of processors and equal to that of 19.5% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 7
This processor is built on the Intel 7 foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 64.8% of processors and equal to that of 15.7% of processors.
L3 cache
36 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 36 MB which is larger than that of 92.3% of processors and equal to that of 2.1% of processors.
L2 cache
32 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 32 MB which is larger than that of 96.1% of processors and equal to that of 2% of processors.
L1 cache
2,176 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 2,176 KB which is larger than that of 96.7% of processors and equal to that of 1.1% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4/DDR5
This processor supports DDR DDR4/DDR5, which is newer than that of 77.1% of processors and equal to that of 10.7% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
5,600 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 5,600 MHz, which is higher than that of 77.9% of processors and equal to 4.6% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR5-5600 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR5-5600 MHz, which is higher than that of 77.4% of processors and equal to 6.2% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
?
Maximum memory capacity
192 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 192 GB of memory, which is more than 82.2% of processors and equal to 6.8% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 770
This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 770 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 57.8% of processors and equal to that in 4.7% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
32
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 32 GPU execution units, which is more than 70.1% of processors and equal to 10.1% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
300 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 300 MHz which is lower than that of 57.8% of processors and equal to that of 38.4% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
AV1 (HW decode)
This processor supports AV1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is narrower support than 61.3% of processors and equal to 10.3% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
150 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 150 W which is higher than that of 95.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
150 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 150 W which is higher than that of 95.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
253 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 253 W which is higher than that of 98.3% of processors and equal to that of 1.6% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
N/A
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say

Intel Core i9-13900KS vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 5.28x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (60,528 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    60,528 vs 11,469
  • 4.18x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (21,764 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    21,764 vs 5,209
  • 18 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (24 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    24 vs 6
  • 84.3% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,715 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,715 vs 2,558
  • 2.03x higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (3,123 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    3,123 vs 1,535
  • 36.4% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 24 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (32 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    32 vs 8
  • 10.67x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (32 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    32 MB vs 3 MB
  • 9.0% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.3/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 57% of models

    80%

    6.9

    Average grade

    20%

    9.2

    Popularity

    Grades by review (22)
    12 reviews: 8 with a printed score, 4 estimated from the review. 10 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    7.3 vs 6.7
  • 9.4% better value for money
    Intel Core i9-13900KS has better value for money than the average processor (7.97 vs 7.3).
    7.97 vs 7.29
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1700 vs FP5).
    LGA1700 vs FP5
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • 3 years newer release date
    This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2023 vs 2020).
    January 2023
    2023 vs 2020
  • 5.28x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (60,528 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    60,528 vs 11,469
  • 4.18x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (21,764 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    21,764 vs 5,209
  • 18 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (24 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    24 vs 6
  • 84.3% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,715 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,715 vs 2,558
  • 2.03x higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (3,123 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    3,123 vs 1,535
  • 36.4% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 24 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (32 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    32 vs 8
  • 84.1% higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (902 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    902 vs 490
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x3.2 GHz & 16x2.4 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x3.2 GHz & 16x2.4 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 2 wider front-end design
    This processor has a higher front-end width than the average processor (6 vs 4). The average processor uses front-end width of 4.
    6 vs 4
  • 52.5% faster classroom rendering
    This processor has a lower Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (518.6 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    518.58 vs 340.075
  • 2x higher bus transfer rate
    This processor has a higher bus transfer rate than the average processor (16 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor offers bus transfer rate of 8 GT/s.
    16 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
  • 10.67x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (32 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    32 MB vs 3 MB
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Raptor Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Raptor Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 4x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    E-core cluster: 4 MB shared by 4 cores
    2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 4x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (36 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    36 MB vs 9 MB
  • 5.67x larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (2,176 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    2,176 KB vs 384 KB
  • Mixed big and small cores
    This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors use one.
    P-cores + E-cores
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 + 4 vs 3).
    5.0 + 4.0 vs 3.0
  • 3x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (192 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    192 GB vs 64 GB
  • 91% higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (89.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    89.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 75% higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (5,600 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    5,600 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • 4 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (20 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 vs 16
  • Supports ECC memory
    This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
  • Higher JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a higher JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR5-5600 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    DDR5-5,600 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • 1 more supported displays
    This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
    4 vs 3
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 3.95x higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (253 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    253 W vs 64 W
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 3.33x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (150 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    150 W vs 45 W
  • 45.2% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (257 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    257 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 3.33x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (150 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    150 W vs 45 W
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 92% more expensive
    Intel Core i9-13900KS is more expensive than the average processor (£480 vs £250).
    £480 vs £250
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, TME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, TME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 45.2% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (257 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    257 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 18.9% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 3.95x higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (253 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    253 W vs 64 W
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 3.33x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (150 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    150 W vs 45 W
  • 3.33x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (150 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    150 W vs 45 W

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

6.0
TechPowerUp
≈ estimated
15/05/2023
Hands-on review · gaming, application and power tests
Verdict
Intel Core i9-13900KS is the fastest for applications, but it is power-hungry, hot and poor value; a 13900K with better memory and cooling makes more sense.
7.0
Tally Ho Tech
≈ estimated
25/01/2023
Hands-on review · power draw and voltage tests
Verdict
Intel Core i9-13900KS uses less power at the same clocks, a good buy for enthusiasts but not for most upgraders.
4.0
OC3D TV
≈ estimated
22/01/2023
Hands-on review · clock speeds, temperatures and gaming tests
Verdict
Intel Core i9-13900KS reaches 6 GHz out of the box, but heat and noise make the 13900K the better choice.
5.0
Frame Chasers
≈ estimated
18/01/2023
Benchmark comparison · 13900KS vs overclocked 13900K
Verdict
Intel Core i9-13900KS is fun for extreme overclockers, but probably not worth the premium for gaming or most users.
5.0
Level1Techs
≈ estimated
16/01/2023
Quick review · gaming tests and comparison with 13900K
Verdict
Intel Core i9-13900KS offers only a small real gain over the 13900K; its 6 GHz boost is mostly a thermal effect.
9.0
SkatterBencher
≈ estimated
12/01/2023
Overclocking review · BIOS setup and benchmark clocks
Verdict
Intel Core i9-13900KS is the best Raptor Lake chip, with strong overclocking headroom for enthusiasts who find a good sample.
3.0
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
12/01/2023
Hands-on review · gaming and productivity benchmarks, power and heat
Verdict
Intel Core i9-13900KS is barely faster than the 13900K for a big price premium, so most buyers should skip it.
5.0
Frame Chasers
≈ estimated
18/01/2023
Comparison · 13900KS vs 13900K maximum overclock benchmarks
Verdict
Intel Core i9-13900KS is only a few percent faster than the 13900K, so it isn't worth the premium unless you enjoy overclocking.
Overview video
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

7.0
tomshardware.com
✓ explicit
29/01/2023
Lab test · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-13900KS is the first desktop chip to hit 6 GHz at stock, but it draws a lot of power for a small gain over the 13900K.
8.0
techpowerup.com
✓ explicit
21/04/2023
Lab test · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-13900KS is the fastest gaming processor at stock speeds, with a 6 GHz peak and 32 threads, but it can draw up to 320W.
7.0
uk.pcmag.com
✓ explicit
08/03/2023
Lab test · Clock speed comparison
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-13900KS is a 13900K with a 6GHz single-core boost, performing the same in real use, so it's not worth the extra price.
6.0
pugetsystems.com
≈ estimated
12/01/2023
Lab test · Content creation
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-13900KS is a niche chip that beats the 13900K only in Cinebench and V-Ray, by just 3–7%.
6.0
club386.com
≈ estimated
07/02/2023
Lab test · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-13900KS reaches 6 GHz out of the box and tops most charts, but its 320W power draw and cooling needs make the regular 13900K the better buy.
7.0
techspot.com
✓ explicit
13/01/2023
Lab test · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-13900KS is only a small step up from the 13900K, running hot and drawing a lot of power, so only extreme overclockers should consider it.
9.5
hothardware.com
✓ explicit
20/01/2023
Lab test · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-13900KS is the fastest desktop chip Intel sells, with a 6 GHz peak boost, but its high power draw and extreme cooling needs hold it back.
9.5
overclock3d.net
≈ estimated
22/01/2023
Lab test · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-13900KS is the top desktop chip for creative work, but it only sometimes hits 6 GHz and needs serious cooling.
5.0
computerbase.de
≈ estimated
31/01/2023
Lab test · Clock speeds and power
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-13900KS is the first mass-market chip to reach 6.0GHz, but only two cores hit it and it draws far more power.
8.6
pcgameshardware.de
✓ explicit
20/01/2023
Lab test · Gaming and efficiency
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-13900KS tops its K-series sibling in overall performance, but its 200MHz gain over the 13900K is small.
10
geeknetic.es
✓ explicit
19/02/2023
Overview · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-13900KS is the fastest 13th-gen Core chip, a faster-clocked 13900K that draws more power and suits buyers who want peak speed.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i9-13900KS

  • World's first consumer desktop processor to hit a 6GHz boost clock out of the box
  • Highest-quality 'binned' silicon allows for better stability and lower voltage at high frequencies
  • Excellent single-threaded performance, topping most benchmark charts
  • Ideal for extreme overclocking enthusiasts seeking the absolute performance ceiling
  • Slightly better 1% low frame rates in gaming compared to the standard 13900K

What customers don't like about Intel Core i9-13900KS

  • Extremely high power consumption, reaching up to 320W-400W+ under full load
  • Requires high-end cooling solutions (360mm/420mm AIOs) to prevent immediate thermal throttling
  • Poor value proposition with a significant price premium for only 1-3% real-world performance gains
  • Recent reports of a microcode bug causing system instability and crashes in high-wattage 13th/14th Gen CPUs
  • Virtually indistinguishable gaming performance from the cheaper Core i9-13900K at 1440p and 4K resolutions

Verdict

The Intel Core i9-13900KS is a high-performance Special Edition desktop processor featuring 24 cores (8 Performance-cores and 16 Efficient-cores), 32 threads, and a record-breaking max turbo frequency of 6.0 GHz out of the box. Built on the Raptor Lake architecture for the LGA 1700 socket, it includes 36MB of Intel Smart Cache and supports both DDR5-5600 and DDR4-3200 memory. Its primary pros include industry-leading single-core speeds and elite multi-threaded performance for gaming and intensive content creation, achieved through superior silicon binning. However, its significant cons include extreme power consumption—peaking at 320W in its extreme power profile—along with intense thermal output that requires high-end cooling solutions and a high price premium for only marginal performance gains over the standard i9-13900K.

Compare Intel Core i9-13900KS with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel Core i9-13900KS and other processors

No results found