Friday, December 27th 2019

Intel Enthusiast-Grade K Processors in the Comet Lake-S Family Rumored to Feature 125 W TDP

This piece of news shouldn't surprise anyone, except for the fact that Intel is apparently signing on a TDP of 125 W for even its K-series unlocked processors for their next-generation Comet Lake-S family. Intel's current Comet Lake 9900K CPU features a TDP of "only" 95 W - when compared to the rumored 125 W of the 10900K), whilst their current top offering, the i9-9900KS, features a 127 W TDP. Remember that Intel's 10900K should feature 10 cores and 20 threads, two extra cores than their current 9900K - this should explain the increased TDP, a mathematical necessity given that Intel can only count on marginal improvements to its 14 nm fabrication process to frequencies and power consumption of its CPUs.

A leaked slide from momomo on Twitter shows, if real, that Intel's future enthusiast-grade CPUs (likely i5-10600K, i7-10700K and i9-10900K) will feature this 125 W TDP, while other launches in that family will make do with the more traditional 65 W TDP (interesting to see that Intel has some 10-core CPUs with 65 W TDP, the same as their current 9900, despite two more cores). A footnote on the leaked slide shows that these K processors can be configured for a 95 W TDP, but this would likely come at a significant cost to operating frequency. Intel seems to be bringing a knife to a gunfight (in terms of core counts and TDP) with AMD's Ryzen 3000 and perhaps Ryzen 4000 CPUs, should those and Intel's future offerings actually coexist in the market.
Sources: user momomo @ Twitter, via Videocardz
Add your own comment

96 Comments on Intel Enthusiast-Grade K Processors in the Comet Lake-S Family Rumored to Feature 125 W TDP

#51
cucker tarlson
cdawall
Load temps don’t really matter though.
riiiiiiight,temperatures don't matter,but tdp is so important people are arguing over it constantly.

Berfs1
So if I understand this correctly, a 95W cpu has more cooling efficiency than a 65W chip?
no,but 9700k runs good 10 degrees cooler than 3700x in gaming.
check out some in game youtube comparisons.
same testing methodology for the two,the 9700k is 10 degrees cooler at least.

like here,9700k 5ghz vs 3700x 4.3ghz,9700k runs cooler by 10 degrees despite higher OC and higher usage



you seem to be bothered by everything intel does and none that amd does.
Posted on Reply
#52
oxrufiioxo
cucker tarlson
riiiiiiight,temperatures don't matter,but tdp is so important people are arguing over it constantly.


no,but 9700k runs good 10 degrees cooler than 3700x in gaming.
check out some in game youtube comparisons.
same testing methodology for the two,the 9700k is 10 degrees cooler at least.

like here,9700k 5ghz vs 3700x 4.3ghz,9700k runs cooler by 10 degrees despite higher OC and higher usage



you seem to be bothered by everything intel does and none that amd does.
My 9900k At 5ghz runs cooler than my stock 3900X in gaming as well with similar coolers at the same ambient..... The 9900k is getting pushed harder as far as FPS so it really isn't even a fair comparison. Rendering the 3900x is 20c cooler though lol.
Posted on Reply
#53
cucker tarlson
oxrufiioxo
My 9900k At 5ghz runs cooler than my stock 3900X in gaming as well with similar coolers at the same ambient..... The 9900k is getting pushed harder as far as FPS so it really isn't even a fair comparison. Rendering the 3900x is 20c cooler though lol.
absolutely.
these cpus are on far ends of spectrum.
9900k is to gaming what 3900x is to rendering.
I strongly believe in picking what cpu suits your usage scenario not going by purely cost per core or synthetic benchmarks.

9900k is cooler in gaming despite having fewer cores,higher tdp and older process.3900x is cooler in rendering because of more cores.all in all,it's the end result that matters.
Posted on Reply
#54
Dredi
cucker tarlson
lol,another tdp debate.
why doesn't anyone pay attention to what actually matters


You have it all wrong. You need a less efficient cooler to dissipate the same amount of watts from an object that has a higher temperature, making the AMD design better in terms of noise. The scaling is even linear, so assuming that the 9900k in the graph uses the same amount of power as the 3900X, you would need 72% as efficient cooler for the 3900X. Just don’t go above the thermal limits set by the manufacturer. ;)
Posted on Reply
#55
efikkan
davideneco
Love see people argument to TDP

Its easy

TDP intel = base clock
TDP amd = all core boost

Simple
You claim it's simple, yet you get it 100% incorrect. :rolleyes:

Intel TDP is power consumption for sustained loads, not base clock. According to Intel's specs the CPU will throttle to the TDP, but allow short bursts above TDP, unless you disable the power limit. E.g. for i9-9900K it allows bursts up to ~28 seconds. Even the 127W i9-9900KS does consume only 127W sustained (at ~4.7 GHz all core) (unless the power limit is removed), with bursts up to ~185W where it achieves 5.0 GHz all core.

AMD's TDP rating for Zen has nothing to do with power at all. Their formula is the following:
TDP = (tCase - tAmbient) / HSF
tCase is usually 60-70°C - the max temperature between the silicon and the IHS before it will throttle.
tAmbient may be 42 or 32°C - maximum temperature at the heatsink inlet.
HSF - minimum required heatsink resistance ("heatsink quality").
All of these may vary from product to product.

AMD will boost their CPU cores individually until they reach a heat or voltage limit, per core individually. So Ryzen 3000 chips can easily use quite a bit more power than their TDP rating, but will work "fine" at a cooler matching their TDP rating, you may just loose some boosting potential.

The big difference here is that Intel will only exceed TDP in bursts but will throttle to TDP, even if you have cooling capacity for 300W. While Zen 2 may will have a sustained power draw that is more unpredictable, and is more dependent on the efficiency of the cooler and the ambient temperature. Zen 2 CPUs may use more power sustained than their TDP rating if the cooling is sufficient. On top of that Zen have the XFR which boosts above this in very tiny bursts.

Regardless of brand, I always recommend having at least 20-30% cooler headroom when building a PC; because of TDP meaning discrepancies, and obviously to get the maximum burst speed, but also to keep the noise at acceptable levels and since temperature affects longevity. Having a decent cooler is especially important for Ryzen 3000 series if you want all the performance you paid for. This doesn't mean you need an overkill water cooler though, just pick a good Noctua cooler and ensure good case airflow(!).
Posted on Reply
#56
qcmadness
efikkan
You claim it's simple, yet you get it 100% incorrect. :rolleyes:

Intel TDP is power consumption for sustained loads, not base clock. According to Intel's specs the CPU will throttle to the TDP, but allow short bursts above TDP, unless you disable the power limit. E.g. for i9-9900K it allows bursts up to ~28 seconds. Even the 127W i9-9900KS does consume only 127W sustained (at ~4.7 GHz all core) (unless the power limit is removed), with bursts up to ~185W where it achieves 5.0 GHz all core.

AMD's TDP rating for Zen has nothing to do with power at all. Their formula is the following:
TDP = (tCase - tAmbient) / HSF
tCase is usually 60-70°C - the max temperature between the silicon and the IHS before it will throttle.
tAmbient may be 42 or 32°C - maximum temperature at the heatsink inlet.
HSF - minimum required heatsink resistance ("heatsink quality").
All of these may vary from product to product.

AMD will boost their CPU cores individually until they reach a heat or voltage limit, per core individually. So Ryzen 3000 chips can easily use quite a bit more power than their TDP rating, but will work "fine" at a cooler matching their TDP rating, you may just loose some boosting potential.

The big difference here is that Intel will only exceed TDP in bursts but will throttle to TDP, even if you have cooling capacity for 300W. While Zen 2 may will have a sustained power draw that is more unpredictable, and is more dependent on the efficiency of the cooler and the ambient temperature. Zen 2 CPUs may use more power sustained than their TDP rating if the cooling is sufficient. On top of that Zen have the XFR which boosts above this in very tiny bursts.

Regardless of brand, I always recommend having at least 20-30% cooler headroom when building a PC; because of TDP meaning discrepancies, and obviously to get the maximum burst speed, but also to keep the noise at acceptable levels and since temperature affects longevity. Having a decent cooler is especially important for Ryzen 3000 series if you want all the performance you paid for. This doesn't mean you need an overkill water cooler though, just pick a good Noctua cooler and ensure good case airflow(!).
But all consumer motherboards remove the limit.
Posted on Reply
#58
Darmok N Jalad
hat
You... can't be serious. You expect me to look at a chip like the 9900k with a base clock of 3.6GHz and a turbo clock of 5.0GHz and take that 5GHz speed as a bonus for loading web pages faster? I can open web pages and open files pretty quickly with even a 15 year old computer. I don't need to be at 5GHz for a fraction of a second to do that only to slow down to 3.6GHz the moment I put any real load on the system. A lot of people are building systems with Intel processors for gaming, these days. It's one of their last few advantages, being able to get a few more FPS in games. As you know, running a game can be a pretty demanding task... and typically lasts for hours, not seconds. This is just one example of something very common that might happen with such a system. What about other examples of prolonged load? I hope you're not going to suggest we should be building workstations or servers to do transcoding, or running applications such as World Community Grid?
I find that gaming is less demanding than other sustained loads for me. Maybe it’s just cause I’m not pushing high FPS, just going 1080p, but my 2700X won’t go over 60C in games, but will bump 75C in something like encoding. I think that’s why boost clocks are so beneficial for everyday users (or at least gamers), as modern CPUs like to boost a lot in games.
Posted on Reply
#59
ppn
Not really, 5-8 core boost is 4.6Ghz under all kinds of loads. At least level1tech claimed that the 65 watt limit was non existent for the 8700 and the boost stays at 4.3 all day, never droping to base clock. So this may be the norm now for any solid motherboard at least. Can't imagine H410 with 4 phases surviving without some limits being set. Who knows.
Posted on Reply
#60
Berfs1
ppn
Not really, 5-8 core boost is 4.6Ghz under all kinds of loads. At least level1tech claimed that the 65 watt limit was non existent for the 8700 and the boost stays at 4.3 all day, never droping to base clock. So this may be the norm now for any solid motherboard at least. Can't imagine H410 with 4 phases surviving without some limits being set. Who knows.
9700K is 46x for 6-8 core turbo.

efikkan
You claim it's simple, yet you get it 100% incorrect. :rolleyes:

Intel TDP is power consumption for sustained loads, not base clock. According to Intel's specs the CPU will throttle to the TDP, but allow short bursts above TDP, unless you disable the power limit. E.g. for i9-9900K it allows bursts up to ~28 seconds. Even the 127W i9-9900KS does consume only 127W sustained (at ~4.7 GHz all core) (unless the power limit is removed), with bursts up to ~185W where it achieves 5.0 GHz all core.

AMD's TDP rating for Zen has nothing to do with power at all. Their formula is the following:
TDP = (tCase - tAmbient) / HSF
tCase is usually 60-70°C - the max temperature between the silicon and the IHS before it will throttle.
tAmbient may be 42 or 32°C - maximum temperature at the heatsink inlet.
HSF - minimum required heatsink resistance ("heatsink quality").
All of these may vary from product to product.

AMD will boost their CPU cores individually until they reach a heat or voltage limit, per core individually. So Ryzen 3000 chips can easily use quite a bit more power than their TDP rating, but will work "fine" at a cooler matching their TDP rating, you may just loose some boosting potential.

The big difference here is that Intel will only exceed TDP in bursts but will throttle to TDP, even if you have cooling capacity for 300W. While Zen 2 may will have a sustained power draw that is more unpredictable, and is more dependent on the efficiency of the cooler and the ambient temperature. Zen 2 CPUs may use more power sustained than their TDP rating if the cooling is sufficient. On top of that Zen have the XFR which boosts above this in very tiny bursts.

Regardless of brand, I always recommend having at least 20-30% cooler headroom when building a PC; because of TDP meaning discrepancies, and obviously to get the maximum burst speed, but also to keep the noise at acceptable levels and since temperature affects longevity. Having a decent cooler is especially important for Ryzen 3000 series if you want all the performance you paid for. This doesn't mean you need an overkill water cooler though, just pick a good Noctua cooler and ensure good case airflow(!).
So basically Intel’s TDP is a super complicated and useless metric. Ok, got my answer, thanks a lot!
Posted on Reply
#61
Midland Dog
KarymidoN
since neither intel/amd can be trusted on TDP if it follows the trend prepare youselves for a power hungry chip... geez
for a company people like to hate nvidia have the best tdp
Posted on Reply
#63
qcmadness
ppn
Not really, 5-8 core boost is 4.6Ghz under all kinds of loads. At least level1tech claimed that the 65 watt limit was non existent for the 8700 and the boost stays at 4.3 all day, never droping to base clock. So this may be the norm now for any solid motherboard at least. Can't imagine H410 with 4 phases surviving without some limits being set. Who knows.
Try AVX2 codes
Posted on Reply
#64
MrAMD
Berfs1
I don’t think the 10 core chips were supposed to come with iGPUs, I believe those were all F/KF cpus, but I may be wrong. Then again, if you need 10 cores, ur probs gonna get urself a GPU anyways.
Think it's backwards, F/KF don't have iGPUs. K/KS do. Seems the leak mentions it having UHD 630 integrated graphics. I use it for accelerated video rendering via quicksync. Quicksync is a huge perf cheat not known by most people. Makes my 9900K render like it's a 14 core HEDT while only having 8 cores. Also have the 2080 Ti for CUDA acceleration in the same render job.

Quicksync - H.264 rendering
CUDA - Effects rendering

For me it's the best of both worlds. Can game uncompromised and can render like no tomorrow. Yes please.
Posted on Reply
#65
cucker tarlson
MrAMD
Think it's backwards, F/KF don't have iGPUs. K/KS do. Seems the leak mentions it having UHD 630 integrated graphics. I use it for accelerated video rendering via quicksync. Quicksync is a huge perf cheat not known by most people. Makes my 9900K render like it's a 14 core HEDT while only having 8 cores. Also have the 2080 Ti for CUDA acceleration in the same render job.

Quicksync - H.264 rendering
CUDA - Effects rendering

For me it's the best of both worlds. Can game uncompromised and can render like no tomorrow. Yes please.
funny how much value an igpu can have while so many people scoff.
I've had 4 gpus on my current z97 platform,always had to fall back on my igpu in between cards.
mighty useful when troubleshooting my pc too.
Posted on Reply
#66
MrAMD
cucker tarlson
funny how much value an igpu can have while so many people scoff.
I've had 4 gpus on my current z97 platform,always had to fall back on my igpu in between cards.
mighty useful when troubleshooting my pc too.
Yep that is also a big saver. Don't have any backup gpus so I would be SOL if anything happened during work / maintenance.
Posted on Reply
#67
Object55
Can we just stop talking about TDP, nobody cares.
Posted on Reply
#68
oxrufiioxo
qcmadness
But all consumer motherboards remove the limit.
All the ROG Asus boards and probably the lesser boards as well all default to Intel's spec for TDP. When you enable XMP it asked if you want to disable all limits or not and warns you about having adequate cooling.
Posted on Reply
#69
GoldenX
Looks nice, decent clocks, HT, exactly as it should have been 4 years ago.
Posted on Reply
#70
hat
Enthusiast
Darmok N Jalad
I find that gaming is less demanding than other sustained loads for me. Maybe it’s just cause I’m not pushing high FPS, just going 1080p, but my 2700X won’t go over 60C in games, but will bump 75C in something like encoding. I think that’s why boost clocks are so beneficial for everyday users (or at least gamers), as modern CPUs like to boost a lot in games.
Of course. I wouldn't expect any game to load an 8 core, 16 thread processor to 100% sustained load, even though games these days are starting to take advantage of more and more cores after quad cores were the norm for so long. Encoding, on the other hand, is a heavy, consistent load that scales well even on systems with tons of cores. However, gaming is one scenario that does impose a relatively heavy, consistent load for a prolonged period of time... it will last for far longer and is going to be much heavier than opening a webpage. It's also something that someone who is buying a chip like a 9900k would want the most out of their systems...
Posted on Reply
#71
Darmok N Jalad
hat
Of course. I wouldn't expect any game to load an 8 core, 16 thread processor to 100% sustained load, even though games these days are starting to take advantage of more and more cores after quad cores were the norm for so long. Encoding, on the other hand, is a heavy, consistent load that scales well even on systems with tons of cores. However, gaming is one scenario that does impose a relatively heavy, consistent load for a prolonged period of time... it will last for far longer and is going to be much heavier than opening a webpage. It's also something that someone who is buying a chip like a 9900k would want the most out of their systems...
Yes, like you said, in games the load doesn't max an 8 core. Instead the work is spread around across all the cores at random, which allows for more boosting of the clocks. My 2700X seems to hover around 4.1-4.2GHz in games, but an all core sustained load is more like 3.9-4.0GHz. I think that's a good thing about boost clocks--you do get more performance than had AMD (or Intel) capped the clocks to the rated--or even the boosted--all-core speed. I get an extra 200MHz in games (or in Lightroom), and another 150MHz in short bursts. There are efficiencies to be had for a CPU to boost up and complete a task and return to idle sooner. Smartphone SOCs have been doing this for years now, and it's mainly done to improve battery life. I don't see an issue with this approach at all--give me the most my CPU can do, depending on the task. I suppose it's all in how it is advertised though. I always get more than the base rated speed, but I usually get less than the max boost.
Posted on Reply
#72
hat
Enthusiast
AMD has been doing some work on that with "preferred cores" or whatnot... when it can it will shift workload to the better cores.
Posted on Reply
#73
GoldenX
hat
AMD has been doing some work on that with "preferred cores" or whatnot... when it can it will shift workload to the better cores.
It also applies to the Intel HEDT platform, not just Zen2.
Posted on Reply
#74
Berfs1
MrAMD
Think it's backwards, F/KF don't have iGPUs. K/KS do. Seems the leak mentions it having UHD 630 integrated graphics. I use it for accelerated video rendering via quicksync. Quicksync is a huge perf cheat not known by most people. Makes my 9900K render like it's a 14 core HEDT while only having 8 cores. Also have the 2080 Ti for CUDA acceleration in the same render job.

Quicksync - H.264 rendering
CUDA - Effects rendering

For me it's the best of both worlds. Can game uncompromised and can render like no tomorrow. Yes please.
I meant what I said, and I originally meant that I thought the 10 core cpus wouldn’t have iGPUs. I may have been wrong if those leaks are correct. And the reason many people don’t know how QuickSync works is because it’s useless to them, as they usually are gamers. For normal people, iGPU is a rather handy thing to have, it saves a bunch of electricity.
Posted on Reply
#75
DeathtoGnomes
Now that this thread is mostly dead, I'd like to thank everyone for the TDP "discussion", it was a very "pass the popcorn" read. I do think that building around heat is a very niche market, which means 99% of everyone else buys a cpu and then buys an appropriate cooler, not the other way around. I for one dont care about the TDP as long as the chip does its job and wears the right hat.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment