Twitter user REHWK shared a screenshot of a Cinebench R23 result produced using an unidentified Intel CPU, which can be seen below. As reported by CPU-Z, it is an Intel Core model with 16 cores and 24 threads, which is consistent with Alder Lake Core i9-12900K.
In the multicore test, the unnamed processor earns a score of 30,549 points, which, according to the CPU-monkey database, is approximately 6.66 percent higher than the Ryzen 9 5950X. It also comes very near to the Threadripper 2990WX, which has 24 Zen+ cores and scores 8.7 percent (33,213 points) higher than the current benchmark result, despite having less cores. CPU-Z reports a clock speed of 5.3 GHz, which corresponds to the stated maximum turbo speed of the processor, however it is unclear in what frequency the chip has been tested.
The processor was tested on a Gigabyte Z690 AORUS ULTRA motherboard with DDR5-5200 CL38 memory. That result beat an overclocked Ryzen 9 5950X, fuelling reports that it will perform similarly to or better than AMD's flagship chip at frequencies. Interesting to note the processor's consumption at these speeds, as it is likely to approach 300W, generating a lot of heat in systems with limited cooling. It has better single-core performance than the Ryzen 9 5950X and the same multi-core performance as the Ryzen 9 5950X at a cheaper price.
New Intel Core 12th processors are expected. This generation of processors and 600 Series motherboards will be officially unveiled on October 27th at Intel's Innovation event, so expect many more leaks in the coming weeks (In fact today the complete line of Gigabyte Z690 motherboards ).
Update: A singlecore score of at least 810 and 2,050 points, attained in Cinebench R20 and R23, respectively, may be seen in the latest image leak. The i9-11900K obtains a score of 732 points in the cpu-monkey database, while the Ryzen 9 5950X achieves a score of 647 points in the same database. According to previously published benchmarks, the Core i9-12900K should be able to score 2,000 points in R23, which matches to the results of previously published tests. Once again, it is unclear under what conditions the unknown chip was tested; nonetheless, it cannot be ruled out that a (extreme) overclock has been applied in this instance.