Tuesday, November 19th 2019

Benchmarks Surface on Intel's Next-Gen Comet Lake-S 10-Core, 6-Core CPUs

Benchmarks have been uploaded to popular benchmarking utility Geekbench's servers, and they seemingly allow us to look into Intel's next-gen Comet Lake-S processors. The results, which have likely been taken from pre-release hardware (which means benchmarks and even proper identification of features on the CPUs shouldn't be taken as guarantees), help paint a picture on Intel's next release all the same.

Processor information for the 10-core, 20-thread CPU gives us a 1.51 GHz base clock and 3.19 GHz boost, with the chip featuring 32 Kb each for L1 instruction and L1 data caches (x10 cores, 640 KB total) 256 KB L2 cache (x10 cores, for a total of 2.5 MB) and 20 MB L3 cache. The six-core part, on the other hand, is reported as featuring a 1.99 GHz base clock and 2.89 GHz boost clock, 384 KB total L1 instruction and data caches (32 KB x 6 cores), 256 KB L2 cache (x6 cores, for a total of 1.5 MB) and 12 MB L3 cache. This means each core is in Comet Lake-S is paired with 2 MB of L3 cache, which is being cut-down alongside cores. Like almost all other Intel desktop CPU releases, these CPU cores will be paired with an IGP in the form of Intel UHD Graphics 630, which features up to 24 Execution Units (EUs). With Intel's 10-core CPU being expected to be the cream of the crop on the company's mainstream CPU lineup come Comet Lake-S, comparisons to AMD's own core density are moot, in that there is no real competition available, should that top core count actually materialize.
Sources: Tom's Hardware, Geekbench Intel 6-core, Geekbench Intel 10-core, WCCFTech
Add your own comment

14 Comments on Benchmarks Surface on Intel's Next-Gen Comet Lake-S 10-Core, 6-Core CPUs

#1
kapone32
Are not those speed a little low for a Comet Lake CPU especially the 6 core variant?
Posted on Reply
#2
ShurikN
kapone32
Are not those speed a little low for a Comet Lake CPU especially the 6 core variant?
It's an all-in-one PC, so I'm guessing an iMac type of device where everything is within the monitor. Cooling that is not that as easy as with a desktop case, that's why you're probably seeing those clocks.
Posted on Reply
#3
techguymaxc
Geekbench is utterly useless as a desktop CPU benchmark.

Remember those leaks from a week or two ago that showed the 3950x "dominating" Intel's 18-core HEDT parts? Then the reviews come out and while the 3950x does well against e.g. the 9980xe, the 3950x by no means dominates the 9980xe in ANY workload.

https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2297?vs=2558

The 3950x is on average about 10% faster, which is very good, and kudos to AMD! Only Geekbench shows anything like a "domination" though, where the 3950x is up to twice as fast in some subtests.

So my point is not about AMD vs. Intel, only that Geekbench is a horrible analog to desktop workloads.
Posted on Reply
#4
cucker tarlson
techguymaxc
Geekbench is utterly useless as a desktop CPU benchmark.

Remember those leaks from a week or two ago that showed the 3950x "dominating" Intel's 18-core HEDT parts? Then the reviews come out and while the 3950x does well against e.g. the 9980xe, the 3950x by no means dominates the 9980xe in ANY workload.

https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2297?vs=2558

The 3950x is on average about 10% faster, which is very good, and kudos to AMD! Only Geekbench shows anything like a "domination" though, where the 3950x is up to twice as fast in some subtests.

So my point is not about AMD vs. Intel, only that Geekbench is a horrible analog to desktop workloads.
https://pclab.pl/zdjecia/artykuly/mbrzostek/2019/amd_zen2/3950x/versus/sane_3950x_vs_9980xe.svg
Posted on Reply
#5
phanbuey
That 6 core literally looks like an 8700K...

Just another Covfefe lake refresh.

Which is fine, I can hold one or two more gens.... as long as my games are smooth and dont drop frames im fine. Although a 10 core i7 with no HT might be pretty fast (if they release one)...
Posted on Reply
#6
cucker tarlson
phanbuey
that 10 core i7 with no HT
is this happening ?
Posted on Reply
#7
phanbuey
cucker tarlson
is this happening ?
No idea; just FUD and speculation (and hopes). Modified my first post :/
Posted on Reply
#9
cucker tarlson
lemonadesoda
Thx for that. My polish isnt too good, is that a one off review, or an autographic created by their cpu benchmark database? If database, could you please link to the cpu selection tool/page.
https://pclab.pl/art82350.html
Posted on Reply
#10
Cheeseball
Intel UHD Graphics 630
So still no Iris Plus and Iris Pro love in their desktop CPUs?

Iris Plus (G4) with 48 EUs works surprisingly damn well on the laptop-side. It performs just as good as a 940MX (512 core Maxwell)/MX150 (384 core Pascal) without having to use a separate heatpipe/fan. I can only imagine how the Iris Pro (G7) is like with 64 EUs.
Posted on Reply
#11
Darmok N Jalad
ShurikN
It's an all-in-one PC, so I'm guessing an iMac type of device where everything is within the monitor. Cooling that is not that as easy as with a desktop case, that's why you're probably seeing those clocks.
iMacs run 65W CPUs, but Apple could still bump up the cooling to something higher, like they did with the iMac Pro. That cooling system can handle 500W in the 27” chassis.
Posted on Reply
#12
InVasMani
So is 640 KB total L1 cache all you'll ever need total of L1 cache? Can anyone can confirm this with Bill Gates!!?
Posted on Reply
#13
rutra80
No, we need 640kb of registers.
Posted on Reply
#14
Mark Little
Darmok N Jalad
iMacs run 65W CPUs, but Apple could still bump up the cooling to something higher, like they did with the iMac Pro. That cooling system can handle 500W in the 27” chassis.
iMacs run all the way up to 95W CPUs. The iMac Pro runs up to 140W CPUs.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment