Wednesday, February 12th 2020

Intel Core i7-10700K Features 5.30 GHz Turbo Boost

Intel's 10th generation Core "Comet Lake-S" desktop processor series inches chose to its probable April 2020 launch. Along the way we get this fascinating leak of the company's Core i7-10700K desktop processor, which could become a go-to chip for gamers if its specifications and pricing hold up. Thai PC enthusiast TUM_APISAK revealed what could be a Futuremark SystemInfo screenshot of the i7-10700K which confirms its clock speeds - 3.80 GHz nominal, with an impressive 5.30 GHz Turbo Boost. Intel is probably tapping into the series' increased maximum TDP of 125 W to clock these chips high across the board.

The Core i7-10700K features 8 cores, and HyperThreading enables 16 threads. It also features 16 MB of shared L3 cache. In essence, this chip has the same muscle as the company's current mainstream desktop flagship, the i9-9900K, but demoted to the Core i7 brand extension. This could give it a sub-$400 price, letting it compete with the likes of AMD's Ryzen 7 3800X and possibly even triggering a price-cut on the 3900X. The i7-10700K in APISAK's screenshot is shown running on an ECS Z490H6-A2 motherboard, marking the company's return to premium Intel chipsets. ECS lacks Z390 or Z370 based motherboards in its lineup, and caps out at B360.
Source: TUM_APISAK (Twitter)
Add your own comment

179 Comments on Intel Core i7-10700K Features 5.30 GHz Turbo Boost

#101
Kickus_assius
Super XP
This reminds me of the Pentium 4 days where Intel kept pushing higher clock speeds while AMD was innovating on CPU designs where AMD CPUs would beat P4's with up to 1000MHz lower clocks. That's how efficient and well designed the Athlon 64 was and beyond.
They would have been even more effective vs. Intel if they could have kept the temperatures down back then. Once they finally got the die shrink rolled out with Athlon 64, Intel struck back with Conroe (Core 2 duo) and took the crown back.
Posted on Reply
#102
JackCarver
Depends on the use case as always. For my gaming rig I wouldn't buy a Ryzen CPU as Intel is still on the top in this use case and I doubt this will be changing the next time...5.3 GHz boost clock and you probably get it on all core boost speed as most Intel cpus are capable doing so. For under 400 it's in 3800X price range and easily outperforms 3900X/3950X in gaming.

The new gaming consoles all have 8 core cpus on board, so the next gen games will be all optimized for 8 cores, more isn't that necessary here. This cpu could really be best choice for gaming.
Posted on Reply
#103
ppn
Kickus_assius
They would have been even more effective vs. Intel if they could have kept the temperatures down back then. Once they finally got the die shrink rolled out with Athlon 64, Intel struck back with Conroe (Core 2 duo) and took the crown back.
This is happening again. Intel strikes back with Alderlake-S, and AMD is back at 10% market in no time.

JackCarver
Depends on the use case as always. For my gaming rig I wouldn't buy a Ryzen CPU as Intel is still on the top in this use case and I doubt this will be changing the next time...5.3 GHz boost clock and you probably get it on all core boost speed as most Intel cpus are capable doing so. For under 400 it's in 3800X price range and easily outperforms 3900X/3950X in gaming.
Allcore on 5.3, sounds great but at 1.4 volts and 50% more power compared to 4.6.
Posted on Reply
#104
JackCarver
ppn
Allcore on 5.3, sounds great but at 1.4 volts and 50% more power compared to 4.6.
Not necessarily as my 8700K, which has 4.7 single core boost, gets easily on 4.7 GHz all core with below 1.3V. I have it stable at 5 GHz all Core speed with 1.35V. With -2 AVX Offset. I would say you could get it with 1.3 to 1.35 all core boost, more wouldn't be necessary.
Good cooling solution assumed.
Posted on Reply
#105
ToxicTaZ
With Intel new Turbo 3.0 approach is it all cores or is it 1 or 2 cores...

My 9900KS is all cores where the 9900K is 2 cores... Rest of the 6 are 4.7GHz

10700K would be interesting if it was all cores 5.3GHz.... But I doubt it
Posted on Reply
#106
JackCarver
ToxicTaZ
With Intel new Turbo 3.0 approach is it all cores or is it 1 or 2 cores...

My 9900KS is all cores where the 9900K is 2 cores... Rest of the 6 are 4.7GHz

10700K would be interesting if it was all cores 5.3GHz.... But I doubt it
But if it is 1 or 2 cores you will be able to set in in BIOS to all Core boost. I think that many 9900K users have it at 5 GHz all core boost.
Posted on Reply
#107
ToxicTaZ
ppn
This is happening again. Intel strikes back with Alderlake-S, and AMD is back at 10% market in no time.



Allcore on 5.3, sounds great but at 1.4 volts and 50% more power compared to 4.6.
Don't forget about Intel Meteor Lake there first 7nm on LGA 1700 socket PCIe 5.0...... Most likely vs AMD Zen 5 AM5 PCIe 5.0.....AM5 will stop future AM4 boards swop out upgrades first time in years.

Hopefully Intel Meteor Lake (7nm) is the big comeback.
Posted on Reply
#108
X828
0nm ........... LOL. they cant even get off 14nm.
Posted on Reply
#109
JackCarver
X828
0nm ........... LOL. they cant even get off 14nm.
Sure Ice Lake is in 10nm...
Posted on Reply
#110
ToxicTaZ
JackCarver
Sure Ice Lake is in 10nm...
10nm failed I get it! 10nm is dead.

Icelake-S 10nm+ had bad yields so they had to convert it onto 14nm++ Comet Lake with unfinished memory controller and Q1 2020 is 6 months late to the market. The finished fixed memory controller is in Rocket Lake made by Samsung scheduled Q4 2020. Intel 10th generation is very short lived.

Yes they are going straight from 14nm to 7nm with brand new Fab42 factory. Fab42 is 7nm from the start then upgraded to 5nm/3nm/1.4nm

Intel Meteor Lake-S is there first product from Fab42

New Fab42 factory with Trump approval cost $7 Billion to build more than AMD is worth.

Intel 10th & 11th gens are just a gap fillers....I suggest not using LGA 1200 socket.... Wait for Meteor Lake on LGA 1700 socket PCIe 5.0

So fanboys enjoy your less than 3 years window before your Extinction from the coming Intel Meteor lol
Posted on Reply
#111
efikkan
ToxicTaZ
10nm failed I get it! 10nm is dead.

Icelake-S 10nm+ had bad yields so they had to convert it onto 14nm++ Comet Lake with unfinished memory controller and Q1 2020 is 6 months late to the market. The finished fixed memory controller is in Rocket Lake made by Samsung scheduled Q4 2020. Intel 10th generation is very short lived.
Where did you get the information that Comet Lake is Sunny Cove?

Intel's 10nm might be very troubled and have struggled with poor yields (for now). But it's not dead, far from it. Ice Lake-Y and -U alone is probably close to or surpassing Zen 2 in shipped units (though Ice Lake only being low performance parts unfortunately). Many people fail to realize how incredible high volumes Intel ship on laptop and OEM parts.

But in terms of money spent, 10nm is certainly costly for Intel.
Posted on Reply
#112
bug
Kickus_assius
They would have been even more effective vs. Intel if they could have kept the temperatures down back then. Once they finally got the die shrink rolled out with Athlon 64, Intel struck back with Conroe (Core 2 duo) and took the crown back.
Well, doing a lot of work per clock tick will always be at odds with low temps.
Posted on Reply
#113
Prima.Vera
5.3 how many Cores again? 1 or 2?? At what Wattage??
Posted on Reply
#114
Melvis
:laugh: Oh intel you crack me up! Here i thought when i saw the heading it was your 10C20T CPU but nope its just another 9900K that should be called the 9900KSM Edition.
Posted on Reply
#115
TranceHead
ARF
The CPUs in the new consoles arriving later in 2020 will have 8 cores and 16 threads.
Games can use as many threads as you throw at them, because there are areas like physics, AI acceleration, ray-tracing acceleration all of which will greatly benefit from many cores.

I can't wait to try the 64-core Threadripper 3990X or its derivatives shrunk to lower TDP envelopes.
Not all 8 cores are going to be for gaming.
One will be locked onto hypervisor duties, another one or two will be locked onto OS for seamless transition between game and GUI, maybe keep one as a keyholder/decryptor.
Consoles run completely different to PC, the 2 are not comparable.
Posted on Reply
#116
ARF
TranceHead
Not all 8 cores are going to be for gaming.
One will be locked onto hypervisor duties, another one or two will be locked onto OS for seamless transition between game and GUI, maybe keep one as a keyholder/decryptor.
Consoles run completely different to PC, the 2 are not comparable.
That's not true. Consoles and PC run over the same basic platform - X86-64 CPU architecture and APIs found on Windows environment, too.

With next-gen consoles, we are going to see estimated 6X-8X CPU speed increase and between 95-110% higher GPU performance.

The Jaguar-based 4-module CPUs in PS4 and XBO will be completely obliterated.
It will be a new experience in the consoles world never seen before.

Which of course would mean that the requirements for the PC games will increase because they have always been more demanding and perhaps less optimised.

Read your homework - https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2019-we-built-a-zen-2-navi-pc-to-next-gen-console-specs
Posted on Reply
#117
TranceHead
ARF
That's not true. Consoles and PC run over the same basic platform - X86-64 CPU architecture and APIs found on Windows environment, too.

With next-gen consoles, we are going to see estimated 6X-8X CPU speed increase and between 95-110% higher GPU performance.

The Jaguar-based 4-module CPUs in PS4 and XBO will be completely obliterated.
It will be a new experience in the consoles world never seen before.

Which of course would mean that the requirements for the PC games will increase because they have always been more demanding and perhaps less optimised.

Read your homework - https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2019-we-built-a-zen-2-navi-pc-to-next-gen-console-specs
No shit, consoles split resources differently.
Not all 8 CPU cores will be used on gaming.
PS4 had 8 jaguar cores, not all of them were used for gaming, it's resources were split.
Posted on Reply
#118
Vayra86
JackCarver
Not necessarily as my 8700K, which has 4.7 single core boost, gets easily on 4.7 GHz all core with below 1.3V. I have it stable at 5 GHz all Core speed with 1.35V. With -2 AVX Offset. I would say you could get it with 1.3 to 1.35 all core boost, more wouldn't be necessary.
Good cooling solution assumed.
1.35v is also just about as far as you want to go and in reality you are running a 4.8 Ghz OC, not 5 Ghz. AVX offset effectively means that, because that is the hardest load scenario.

The chips that get 5 Ghz and up (6c12t or 8c and up) out of 1.3V are quite rare. Especially without an offset. It certainly isn't the norm.
Posted on Reply
#119
Camper7
And what cooler is required to cool the CPU at 5.3 GHz? Or does it require an effective water cooler?
Posted on Reply
#120
JackCarver
Vayra86
1.35v is also just about as far as you want to go and in reality you are running a 4.8 Ghz OC, not 5 Ghz. AVX offset effectively means that, because that is the hardest load scenario.

The chips that get 5 Ghz and up (6c12t or 8c and up) out of 1.3V are quite rare. Especially without an offset. It certainly isn't the norm.
That's true but if you only want to achieve all core boost speed, not beyond that, then it should be possible for most chips without AVX Offset. 4.7 GHz all core boost without AVX Offset wouldn't be a problem for my i7 8700K.
Posted on Reply
#121
Vayra86
ARF
That's not true. Consoles and PC run over the same basic platform - X86-64 CPU architecture and APIs found on Windows environment, too.

With next-gen consoles, we are going to see estimated 6X-8X CPU speed increase and between 95-110% higher GPU performance.

The Jaguar-based 4-module CPUs in PS4 and XBO will be completely obliterated.
It will be a new experience in the consoles world never seen before.

Which of course would mean that the requirements for the PC games will increase because they have always been more demanding and perhaps less optimised.

Read your homework - https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2019-we-built-a-zen-2-navi-pc-to-next-gen-console-specs
Hang on. First you say the two aren't comparable and to illustrate that, you bring an article that compares a PC with hardware equivalent to the new consoles, to the current console crop?

Does not compute.

In reality, what we see is that current consoles are both CPU and GPU limited and that even similar spec PCs with a faster CPU can get a better overall experience out of it. So no, there isn't a big plus to running console games on a console anymore. The only thing is high quality optimization, but that really only happens for a handful of first party titles. The cheaper devs haven't got time for that at all, they dev a console version on the PC and outsource any ports.

That said we don't disagree. Yes, the CPU demands for games will go up a bit. But I think you will find that CPU and its threads in use for many other things besides gaming, just like on a PC. In fact, the console is fast becoming the device that does more multitasking than your typical gamer PC. It has more readily integrated social apps, recording, media applications, etc. On a PC those are services you can control yourself.

What Zen will really do for the next consoles is bring the CPU part of it back up to balance with the GPU. It was much needed. It allows the consoles to support 60hz/120hz gaming better and this is not a coincidence with 4K120hz capable OLED out. 30 FPS is rapidly becoming something that is viewed as subpar, even in mainstream, and as panel diagonals increase, it becomes much more visible to have low refresh rate. Not pleasant to look at.

Camper7
And what cooler is required to cool the CPU at 5.3 GHz? Or does it require an effective water cooler?
This'll do I think. Just don't use the auto OC setting please. Intel does not support overclocking.

Posted on Reply
#122
JackCarver
One thing said to core count:
The guys of PC Games Hardware tested the new TR for their gaming capability and although they are not completely useless for gaming like the old one, they are not gaming cpus. That said you can play games with the new TR but they are at best in the middle of gaming performance compared to all cpus. An 8 core/16 thread cpu is definitely sufficient for gaming.

Vayra86
This'll do I think. Just don't use the auto OC setting please. Intel does not support overclocking.
Nice one :D
Posted on Reply
#123
ToxicTaZ
Camper7
And what cooler is required to cool the CPU at 5.3 GHz? Or does it require an effective water cooler?
Any AIR or Liquid coolers rated minimal 200w for stock 10700K

For manual OC all cores 5.3GHz you need a good aftermarket open loop rated 400w say SWIFTtech or EK etc etc...
Posted on Reply
#124
GlacierNine
ToxicTaZ
Any AIR or Liquid coolers rated minimal 200w for stock 10700K

For manual OC all cores 5.3GHz you need a good aftermarket open loop rated 400w say SWIFTtech or EK etc etc...
Posted on Reply
#125
JackCarver
ToxicTaZ
rated 400w
You mean it goes that high??? My i7 8700K draws in OCCT Benchmark with AVX512 and small dataset, the worst Situation ever and not a real world Situation, about 190W. 400W is double that amount.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment