WEBVTT 00:00:01.000 --> 00:00:06.040 AMD played you all for suckers played us 00:00:04.240 --> 00:00:12.799 all for suckers really I mean look at this they are releasing basically the 00:00:08.599 --> 00:00:15.040 same ryzen 7000 CPUs but for way cheaper 00:00:12.799 --> 00:00:19.240 not only that but they run way cooler and they draw way less power I wouldn't 00:00:17.600 --> 00:00:24.680 blame you for feeling pretty bad right now but don't feel bad this is exactly 00:00:23.080 --> 00:00:27.840 the kind of Sucker Punch that we've got to love because it means the whole 00:00:26.240 --> 00:00:31.720 Market is moving in a less costly Direction and it means that AMD is 00:00:29.759 --> 00:00:38.239 putting heavy pressure on Intel in a way that we wish they would do to NVIDIA I 00:00:34.520 --> 00:00:40.440 mean it's a good thing sameish CPUs 00:00:38.239 --> 00:00:45.000 lower price which I mean there's got to be more to 00:00:43.079 --> 00:00:49.239 this right what are we giving up an exchange and is it worth the buyer 00:00:47.360 --> 00:00:53.600 remorse that I know some of you are feeling right now let's find out right 00:00:52.120 --> 00:00:58.199 after I give you buyer remorse for not checking out our sponsor build Redux 00:00:56.280 --> 00:01:01.640 build Redux makes it easy to configure your new build with support guides to 00:00:59.760 --> 00:01:05.199 help along the way they also offer competitive pricing as compared to 00:01:03.160 --> 00:01:10.720 building a PC yourself head to build redoc.com Linus and start your new build 00:01:17.360 --> 00:01:24.880 today where the xlabel ryzen 7000 chips 00:01:20.520 --> 00:01:28.240 enjoyed TDP ratings of 170 and 105 Watts 00:01:24.880 --> 00:01:30.600 taking the uh X away leaves us with 00:01:28.240 --> 00:01:36.640 essentially the same CPUs with the same Core specs but at lower base clock 00:01:33.520 --> 00:01:40.240 speeds slightly lower boost clock speeds 00:01:36.640 --> 00:01:43.759 and a friendly 65 wat TDP with a stock 00:01:40.240 --> 00:01:46.360 socket power of just 88 Watts the cash 00:01:43.759 --> 00:01:51.920 thread counts and most importantly overclocking support are all identical 00:01:49.520 --> 00:01:56.560 and the accompanying 600 series platform keeps all of its capabilities no matter 00:01:54.240 --> 00:02:02.280 which CPU you plun into it you're still getting ddr5 PCI Express Gen 5 and the 00:01:59.560 --> 00:02:06.680 same rdna2 integrated Graphics cores although as with the X Series chips 00:02:04.640 --> 00:02:09.800 those two GPU compute units aren't going to do much more than light up your 00:02:08.319 --> 00:02:13.599 display and handle Hardware video encoding and decoding all of which 00:02:11.440 --> 00:02:18.239 sounds pretty good though what's the competition up to then good question we 00:02:16.280 --> 00:02:23.800 couldn't help noticing that Intel has already launched their nonk competitors 00:02:21.480 --> 00:02:27.200 to these chips we noticed when we read about it in the news and it looks like 00:02:25.800 --> 00:02:32.319 we weren't the only ones who got completely blindsided by this launch as 00:02:30.239 --> 00:02:36.599 far as we can tell there aren't any proper reviews for these chips anywhere 00:02:34.720 --> 00:02:41.200 as of the time of recording this could it be that Intel Maiden oopsy whoopsy 00:02:38.959 --> 00:02:46.040 underestimated AMD and doesn't really want anyone to talk about these honestly 00:02:43.560 --> 00:02:51.239 it kind of looks that way not only did until cut out overclocking support and 00:02:48.599 --> 00:02:56.599 cut down base and boost clocks but these chips dramatically exceed their 65 watt 00:02:54.640 --> 00:03:02.560 TDP in a way that we didn't observe with AMD and they won't opportunistically 00:02:59.440 --> 00:03:05.480 boost forever like the K series will and 00:03:02.560 --> 00:03:10.360 like AMD's entire 7000 series will what's worse the core i5 13600 00:03:08.040 --> 00:03:15.040 inexplicably loses a big chunk of level two cash that might not sound like a 00:03:12.760 --> 00:03:19.159 huge deal but cash can make a huge difference in performance across a wide 00:03:16.879 --> 00:03:24.720 variety of workloads including you guessed it gaming so did they kneecap 00:03:22.239 --> 00:03:27.720 this chip on purpose unfortunately we don't have any of them on hand so we're 00:03:26.560 --> 00:03:31.760 going to have to look into them at a later date and we will look into them in 00:03:29.879 --> 00:03:37.000 tell even if I have to personally camp out in front of the store to buy one I'm 00:03:34.239 --> 00:03:41.439 kidding nobody's camping out for these coming back to team exciting though AMD 00:03:39.599 --> 00:03:44.640 they claim that by simply dropping the TDP they're able to achieve 00:03:43.040 --> 00:03:47.599 industry-leading performance per watt which obviously we're going to be 00:03:46.040 --> 00:03:51.840 putting to the test today we're going to be using a Noctua nhd15 for cooling in 00:03:50.000 --> 00:03:56.200 order to let all of our chips stretch their legs but it should be noted that 00:03:53.640 --> 00:04:00.239 the entire non-x lineup ships with a box cooler and you should expect to get 00:03:58.040 --> 00:04:04.200 maximum performance out of these ones without spending any extra money on an 00:04:02.200 --> 00:04:09.920 exotic cooling solution as with our previous ryzen 7000 review our Intel 00:04:06.560 --> 00:04:13.200 bench is using ddr5 6800 and our AMD 00:04:09.920 --> 00:04:15.560 bench will be using ddr5 6000 this is 00:04:13.200 --> 00:04:20.479 not to give Intel an advantage but rather to keep our comparison Fair AMD 00:04:18.479 --> 00:04:24.600 benefits more from running tighter timings and keeping the infinity fabric 00:04:22.520 --> 00:04:28.400 clock synced to the RAM even if that is a little lower if you want to learn more 00:04:26.639 --> 00:04:32.000 about the infinity Fabric's relationship with RAM we did a whole video on RAM 00:04:30.199 --> 00:04:36.960 speed on ryzen a little while ago that is still relevant to the current gen in 00:04:34.639 --> 00:04:41.360 CPU bound 1080p gaming shadow of the Tomb Raider starts the non-x chips off 00:04:38.759 --> 00:04:47.320 pretty decently with the ryzen 9 7900 and ryzen 77700 falling behind their ex- 00:04:44.240 --> 00:04:50.240 cousins by about 8% while the 7600 00:04:47.320 --> 00:04:55.880 managed exactly the same performance we tested csgo next but modern chips have 00:04:53.240 --> 00:05:00.960 actually gotten so fast that it's quickly becoming irrelevant the lowest 00:04:58.199 --> 00:05:04.199 result is450 FPS meaning that the differences basically don't matter and 00:05:02.919 --> 00:05:09.440 sometimes the results are even contradictory moving on then cyberpunk 00:05:06.720 --> 00:05:12.680 is a slightly worse story for our x-free chips than Tomb Raider was with the dip 00:05:11.400 --> 00:05:18.160 and performance sitting at anywhere between 8 and 15% for the higher core 00:05:15.800 --> 00:05:21.919 count parts and between 2 to 3% for the ryzen 00:05:19.080 --> 00:05:26.560 57600 it's clear then that demanding multi-core optimized games are going to 00:05:24.160 --> 00:05:29.759 take better advantage of the X Series much higher allcore turbo 00:05:28.160 --> 00:05:33.880 characteristics 1222 brings better news to the non-x 00:05:31.639 --> 00:05:38.800 chips though where the 7900 comes within 5 to 6% of its X counterpart while the 00:05:36.520 --> 00:05:43.600 ryzen 5 meanwhile manages once again to match its X counterpart which at this 00:05:41.199 --> 00:05:47.800 point is becoming a bit of a pattern Far Cry 6 shows a bit more of a gap between 00:05:45.479 --> 00:05:52.280 the non-x and X chips though with the 77 in particular falling behind in average 00:05:49.720 --> 00:05:57.240 FPS while the 7900 falls behind in minimums and for as the Horizon 5 sees 00:05:54.680 --> 00:06:01.440 the 7900 falling further behind thanks to its higher core count and thus low 00:05:59.639 --> 00:06:06.919 lower relative clock speeds compared to the 7700 and the 7600 which are mostly 00:06:04.319 --> 00:06:11.160 in line with their X counterparts Modern Warfare 2 evens the playing field a lot 00:06:09.080 --> 00:06:17.280 though hinting that perhaps the game is a little more GPU bound at 1080p than we 00:06:13.840 --> 00:06:18.759 initially realized still the ryzen 57600 00:06:17.280 --> 00:06:24.720 seems to fall behind a little here compared to the others hinting that perhaps thread count to a point is more 00:06:22.479 --> 00:06:28.319 important for this title the same can't be said for Total War Warhammer 3 though 00:06:26.720 --> 00:06:33.160 where we actually got some weird data that looks like a bug with High thread 00:06:30.039 --> 00:06:35.639 count chips the 7950 X ends up slower 00:06:33.160 --> 00:06:40.560 than the 7900 for example and look at the 13900 K but it seems like it's okay 00:06:38.880 --> 00:06:46.000 on the lower core count chips where we see about a 2 to 9% performance gap 00:06:42.599 --> 00:06:47.360 between X and non- X's perhaps the most 00:06:46.000 --> 00:06:53.000 interesting game we tested though is factorio which is lightly threaded but 00:06:49.840 --> 00:06:55.560 still highly demanding in this the non-x 00:06:53.000 --> 00:06:59.759 chips performed admirably within 5% of their X counterparts and nearly on par 00:06:57.800 --> 00:07:03.160 with Team blue keep in mind as you're looking through these charts guys that 00:07:01.199 --> 00:07:07.000 we don't have the price competitive Intel chips on our charts because they 00:07:05.160 --> 00:07:12.960 paper launched them you can't actually get them overall then none of our tested 00:07:10.039 --> 00:07:18.120 CPUs performed poorly I counted only 17 occasions where any frame rate dipped 00:07:14.680 --> 00:07:20.879 below 120 FPS these are all capable 00:07:18.120 --> 00:07:26.280 gaming CPUs but more importantly for these new ryzen processors the 7900 came 00:07:23.800 --> 00:07:32.759 within 5% of its X counterpart with the 7700 coming within 4% and the ryzen 57 00:07:29.520 --> 00:07:37.960 7600 being on average bang on with the 00:07:32.759 --> 00:07:41.080 7600 X that is incredibly impressive now 00:07:37.960 --> 00:07:42.919 the 5800 X 3D still stands out for the 00:07:41.080 --> 00:07:48.879 impressive performance that it delivers on a last gen ddr4 platform but with the 00:07:46.039 --> 00:07:54.919 way that ddr5 has come down in price and not to mention the upcoming x3d 7000 00:07:51.759 --> 00:07:56.479 series chips am5 is starting to look 00:07:54.919 --> 00:08:00.520 like the place to be if you want an upgrade path kind of like our plaid 00:07:58.720 --> 00:08:05.319 flannel shirts the place to be they're super comfy and warm and they come in 00:08:02.240 --> 00:08:07.080 more fun colors than ever if you're less 00:08:05.319 --> 00:08:11.759 concerned with gaming and more concerned with work though you might be a little 00:08:09.319 --> 00:08:19.199 disappointed cinebench puts the ryzen 9 7900 at just 88% of its X variant and 00:08:15.680 --> 00:08:22.159 the 7700 manages just 80% compared to 00:08:19.199 --> 00:08:27.599 the X thankfully with fewer cores to feed the 7600 manages to stick closer to 00:08:25.159 --> 00:08:31.599 its unthrottled counterpart which is a pattern that you'll see repeated through 00:08:28.960 --> 00:08:36.080 a lot of the tests well a lot of them not all blender is another blood bath 00:08:33.880 --> 00:08:41.320 for the new Chips clearly they are power constrained except for the 7600 and 00:08:38.880 --> 00:08:46.760 handbrakes av1 encoder has all the non-x chips trailing their almost equivalence 00:08:44.320 --> 00:08:52.480 our chromium compile is an example of one of those um for the most Parts where 00:08:49.519 --> 00:08:56.959 the 7600 shorter power leash does hold it back and it took a good 7 minutes 00:08:54.560 --> 00:09:01.480 longer to finish meanwhile the rest of the non's stayed within spitting 00:08:58.920 --> 00:09:06.720 distance of of the X Series none of them it should be noted are going to threaten 00:09:02.920 --> 00:09:09.360 Intel since as we'll see their chips are 00:09:06.720 --> 00:09:13.760 very liberal with power consumption even compared to the ryzen X Series and in 00:09:12.160 --> 00:09:17.880 spite of their power chugging ways they don't manage to win everywhere anyway 00:09:16.040 --> 00:09:22.560 even the x-less variants managed to outperform Intel in very light tasks 00:09:20.200 --> 00:09:26.440 like Flack en coding other more lightly threaded workloads such as those in 00:09:24.200 --> 00:09:31.240 proon are a little easier on the x-less CPUs with the 7900 dropping just over 00:09:28.920 --> 00:09:37.399 10% in photo editing and coming within 3% NVIDIA which isn't bad at all the 00:09:33.959 --> 00:09:40.320 77 does even better and the 7600 manages 00:09:37.399 --> 00:09:45.360 to evenly match its X Series equivalent NVIDIA editing performance pretty cool 00:09:43.560 --> 00:09:48.839 now let's take a detour into synthetics to look at seven zip where that same 00:09:47.200 --> 00:09:52.959 pattern we saw with heavily threaded loads makes a return it's worth noting 00:09:51.480 --> 00:09:57.160 though that in the real world this would be a lot more limited by storage speed 00:09:54.839 --> 00:10:02.279 than it would by your CPU so it's mostly academic like w cruncher hey hey segue 00:10:00.680 --> 00:10:07.720 why cruncher is interesting though because it lets ryzen Flex its AVX 512 00:10:05.240 --> 00:10:12.880 muscles while Intel's chips only have avx2 they still manage to beat the lower 00:10:10.440 --> 00:10:17.519 power ryzen chips and this is in part thanks to the absurd amount of energy 00:10:14.920 --> 00:10:22.079 that AVX 512 requires causing them to throttle hard to their comparatively low 00:10:19.720 --> 00:10:26.680 base clocks now let's head back to the real world with spec work station I'm 00:10:24.600 --> 00:10:30.880 not going to lie none of these tests are exactly a win for the new lower-end 00:10:28.640 --> 00:10:35.240 Chips and a lot of the performance differences are similar across the field 00:10:33.600 --> 00:10:38.839 but there are some cases where they at least come close to their high 00:10:36.760 --> 00:10:44.320 performance Intel counterparts like calculu overall then the productivity 00:10:41.320 --> 00:10:46.120 performance for the 7900 and 7700 are 00:10:44.320 --> 00:10:51.240 only slightly better than their price difference would suggest but the 7600 00:10:48.720 --> 00:10:57.959 manages to stand out at an impressive 96% of the 7600 X's performance 00:10:54.519 --> 00:11:00.480 effectively making the 7600 X obsolete 00:10:57.959 --> 00:11:04.680 it seems like six Z four cores are perfectly happy then running it under 00:11:02.320 --> 00:11:09.160 100 Watts speaking of which are you ready for a magic trick what do you get 00:11:07.160 --> 00:11:15.839 when you have two processor dieses and a power Target that's under 100 Watts 40° 00:11:13.000 --> 00:11:21.600 in Prime 95 that's what that is ridiculous yes before you ask CPU 00:11:18.800 --> 00:11:27.959 utilization was at 100% And as you'll see the power draw was as expected 00:11:24.440 --> 00:11:30.399 that's just how it is the ryzen 9 7900 00:11:27.959 --> 00:11:35.240 then would make an a awesome small form factor CPU not that the others are 00:11:32.200 --> 00:11:36.920 slouches either the 7700 does get a bit 00:11:35.240 --> 00:11:41.600 toastier thanks to its higher core clocks and single CCD but it's 00:11:39.480 --> 00:11:48.320 absolutely in another class than its xlabel twin and the core i7 13700 K the 00:11:45.800 --> 00:11:52.519 ryzen 57600 is very much the same story as the 7700 embarrassing both of its 00:11:50.720 --> 00:11:56.480 competitors in our lineup here even though it has slightly higher thermals 00:11:54.519 --> 00:12:00.000 again thanks to its High Core clocks and single CCD here's all of them on the 00:11:58.800 --> 00:12:04.480 same graph that is hilarious I mean why does the 00:12:02.040 --> 00:12:10.320 scale even need to go up to 120° right because of the core I9 yeses 00:12:08.560 --> 00:12:15.320 core clocks are interesting because while thermals were very low clocks 00:12:12.560 --> 00:12:21.079 remained at or above base clock on all of our chips the ryzen 9 7900 while much 00:12:18.839 --> 00:12:25.920 lower than its X twin managed to hover around 3.9 GHz before dropping to base 00:12:23.720 --> 00:12:31.199 clocks after the first half of the run that is frankly really impressive the 00:12:28.160 --> 00:12:33.360 ryzen 777 00 meanwhile is significantly 00:12:31.199 --> 00:12:40.160 closer to its twin and hangs around the 4.5 GHz range or about 700 MHz over base 00:12:38.000 --> 00:12:45.880 that is phenomenal remember guys that Prime 95 is an unreasonably heavy load 00:12:43.480 --> 00:12:50.880 it's a stress test that is designed to make chips choke the ryzen 57600 00:12:48.760 --> 00:12:57.279 meanwhile has the same base clock as the 7700 but manages to boost 200 MHz above 00:12:54.519 --> 00:13:01.120 and beyond even that chip which you can see when we stack them all together on 00:12:58.800 --> 00:13:06.079 the same graph like this it's hard to believe that these are all staying 00:13:02.800 --> 00:13:09.680 within 90 Watts but they are here's the 00:13:06.079 --> 00:13:11.760 ryzen 9 7900 just embarrassing the 13900 00:13:09.680 --> 00:13:18.160 K when you consider the relatively small difference in performance I mean is that 00:13:13.839 --> 00:13:19.880 a spike to 350 Watts this same story 00:13:18.160 --> 00:13:25.279 keeps playing out because each of these chips maxed out their 90 wat power 00:13:21.800 --> 00:13:27.480 Target while Intel shot to the moon the 00:13:25.279 --> 00:13:31.560 core i5 is a little less of a power Gremlin and managed to keep things under 00:13:29.399 --> 00:13:36.360 200 Watts but I mean just look at this combined graph here it's just a single 00:13:33.839 --> 00:13:41.680 line all things considered especially with the energy crisis going on right 00:13:38.160 --> 00:13:44.040 now this is an absolute win for AMD how 00:13:41.680 --> 00:13:50.160 could we forget performance per watt well we did but in f-122 the ryzen 9 00:13:47.720 --> 00:13:55.519 7900 remained at its maximum power throughout the run which just happens to 00:13:52.800 --> 00:13:59.639 be much lower than either of the other nine series CPUs and when we capped it 00:13:58.240 --> 00:14:03.279 to 100 fpm its power consumption drops even further 00:14:01.920 --> 00:14:08.160 while remaining roughly the same distance away from its X counterpart the 00:14:05.440 --> 00:14:12.240 7700 isn't that much less power hungry in gaming than its X sibling and we can 00:14:10.480 --> 00:14:18.320 see that in action when we cap the frame rate the lines match up pretty well the 00:14:15.079 --> 00:14:20.040 ryzen 57600 was already very close in 00:14:18.320 --> 00:14:24.600 terms of power and performance to its ex sibling and capping the frame rate gives 00:14:22.000 --> 00:14:29.560 us basically the same line which just so happens to be roughly half the power 00:14:27.440 --> 00:14:34.000 draw of the core i5 this all works out to a watts per FPS 00:14:31.560 --> 00:14:40.040 nearly 3/4 that of the X Series for both the ryzen 9 and 7 while the ryzen 57600 00:14:37.759 --> 00:14:45.279 somewhat predictably is roughly the same as the 7600 X for enthusiasts though 00:14:43.519 --> 00:14:50.079 stock performance is only part of the story we couldn't run our entire test 00:14:47.399 --> 00:14:54.480 Suite on all of the new Chips but we did run the 7900 in a handful of 00:14:52.079 --> 00:14:59.040 applications to see if you can simply save a few bucks by altering the power 00:14:56.759 --> 00:15:03.639 Targets in the BIOS yourself and then scribbling your own little X onto the 00:15:00.480 --> 00:15:08.440 heat spreader and it looks like you kind 00:15:03.639 --> 00:15:10.880 of can is that a 1% difference in cine 00:15:08.440 --> 00:15:15.880 bench considering the fact that we are not even manually overclocking the chip 00:15:13.600 --> 00:15:22.000 all we're doing is letting it draw more power this is phenomenal I mean I can't 00:15:19.560 --> 00:15:26.680 speak to what overclocking potential Above and Beyond stock boost operation 00:15:25.079 --> 00:15:31.399 whatever you want to call that would be there you know maybe the axes are better 00:15:28.560 --> 00:15:36.959 Bend chips but if all you want is for it to run out of the 00:15:33.720 --> 00:15:39.199 box these things look great especially 00:15:36.959 --> 00:15:43.959 for the money although it should be noted that cost comparisons are 00:15:41.680 --> 00:15:49.560 complicated somewhat by the underlying platforms today while the non x7000 00:15:47.399 --> 00:15:54.880 series chips are significantly less expensive than even Intel's KF skes not 00:15:52.519 --> 00:15:59.199 to mention they come with coolers Intel does still hold the crown here in raw 00:15:56.920 --> 00:16:06.240 performance and maybe more more importantly the LGA 17700 platform 00:16:01.920 --> 00:16:08.600 supports both ddr5 and ddr4 making it 00:16:06.240 --> 00:16:12.759 somewhat more versatile and cheaper to build on especially if you go with an 00:16:10.600 --> 00:16:18.360 older 600 series Intel chipset motherboard instead of a 700 series one 00:16:15.880 --> 00:16:22.959 ddr5 may no longer be a scalper item and its price premium has been coming down 00:16:20.399 --> 00:16:28.279 but a kit of ddr5 6000 is still going to set you back about double what a low 00:16:25.000 --> 00:16:30.759 latency ddr4 3600 kit would if your 00:16:28.279 --> 00:16:35.480 angle is the F-word future proofing AMD's socket am5 platform is newer and 00:16:33.639 --> 00:16:40.600 AMD has committed to supporting it through 2025 and Beyond which normally 00:16:38.959 --> 00:16:46.279 is the kind of claim that I wouldn't take at face value but with AMD's 00:16:43.240 --> 00:16:49.079 history with socket am4 and am3 before 00:16:46.279 --> 00:16:53.120 that I at least want to trust them Intel's pattern meanwhile though is to 00:16:50.920 --> 00:16:58.079 just release two CPU Generations per platform and that is it so that money 00:16:55.720 --> 00:17:02.959 that you're saving today by going ddr4 on Intel could end up costing you down 00:17:00.279 --> 00:17:07.760 the road if you're a frequent upgrader so then is this the shot in the ARM that 00:17:04.559 --> 00:17:09.400 AMD needed post rptor Lake I think so 00:17:07.760 --> 00:17:13.880 while it's a step in the opposite direction to competing in terms of 00:17:11.199 --> 00:17:18.120 performance it is a leap in the right direction in terms of value not only 00:17:16.520 --> 00:17:22.079 that but the thermal output of these CPUs is low enough that you could put 00:17:20.039 --> 00:17:27.000 any one of them into a small form factor rig with a lowprofile cooler and get 00:17:24.600 --> 00:17:31.160 stock performance out of them I mean you'd need to drop to a non-case to do 00:17:29.320 --> 00:17:34.640 that on Intel right now and even then things could get pretty toasty we don't 00:17:33.120 --> 00:17:39.120 know for sure because Intel evidently doesn't want anyone to look too closely 00:17:36.360 --> 00:17:42.000 hopefully that changes for now though I guess it doesn't really matter what 00:17:40.440 --> 00:17:47.120 Intel's doing because with these new Chips AMD has something in their lineup 00:17:44.160 --> 00:17:51.679 for just about everyone just like I have this segue for everyone to our sponsor 00:17:49.919 --> 00:17:56.600 Squarespace if you're building your brand online in 2022 you should 00:17:53.960 --> 00:18:01.720 absolutely have a website and if you need a tool to help build that brand and 00:17:59.240 --> 00:18:06.400 website look no further than Squarespace Squarespace is the all-in-one platform 00:18:03.799 --> 00:18:10.280 to make expanding your brand online easy you can make a beautiful website engage 00:18:08.320 --> 00:18:14.320 with your audience and you can sell anything and everything from products to 00:18:12.039 --> 00:18:18.559 content we love Squarespace so much we use it here at Linus Media Group its 00:18:16.679 --> 00:18:21.840 custom templates make it easy to stand out with a beautiful site that fits your 00:18:20.120 --> 00:18:25.880 needs and you can maximize your visibility thanks to their Suite of 00:18:23.559 --> 00:18:29.000 integrated SEO features their analytic insights help you optimize your 00:18:27.400 --> 00:18:32.440 performance so you can see what's going well and What needs a little work so get 00:18:31.440 --> 00:18:39.080 started today and head to squarespace.com to get 10% off your first purchase if 00:18:37.440 --> 00:18:43.440 you guys enjoyed this video go check out our review on Intel's 13th gen K series 00:18:41.480 --> 00:18:47.039 core processors for more details on the Raptor Lake platform here's the hoping 00:18:45.480 --> 00:18:53.679 that Intel and AMD keep one uping each other like this man even lowcost 00:18:49.440 --> 00:18:53.679 processors are cool again it's great