Monday, April 20th 2020
Intel Core i7-10700K and i5-10600K Geekbenched, Inch Ahead of 3800X and 3600X
The week has begun with sporadic leaks about Intel's upcoming 10th generation Core "Comet Lake-S" desktop processor family, be it pictures of various socket LGA1200 motherboards, or leaked performance scores. Thai PC enthusiast TUM_APISAK posted links to Geekbench V4 entries of a handful 10th gen Core processors. These include the Core i7-10700K (8-core/16-thread), and the Core i5-10600K (6-core/12-thread). Comparisons with incumbent AMD offerings are inescapable. The i7-10700K locks horns with the Ryzen 7 3800X, while the i5-10600K takes the battle to the Ryzen 5 3600X.
The Core i7-10700K scores 34133 points in the multi-core test, and 5989 in the single-core one. The i5-10600K, on the other hand, puts out 28523 points in the multi-threaded test, and 6081 points in the single-core test. Both scores appear to be a single-digit percentage ahead of the AMD rivals in the multi-threaded test. The Intel chips appear to offer slightly better less-parallelized performance owing to higher boost frequencies for single-threaded or less parallelized workloads. These include an impressive 5.10 GHz max boost frequency for the i7-10700K, and 4.80 GHz for the i5-10600K. APISAK also posted scores of the iGPU-disabled Core i5-10600KF, which is roughly on par with the i5-10600K since it's basically the same chip with its eyes poked out.
Source:
TUM_APISAK (Twitter)
The Core i7-10700K scores 34133 points in the multi-core test, and 5989 in the single-core one. The i5-10600K, on the other hand, puts out 28523 points in the multi-threaded test, and 6081 points in the single-core test. Both scores appear to be a single-digit percentage ahead of the AMD rivals in the multi-threaded test. The Intel chips appear to offer slightly better less-parallelized performance owing to higher boost frequencies for single-threaded or less parallelized workloads. These include an impressive 5.10 GHz max boost frequency for the i7-10700K, and 4.80 GHz for the i5-10600K. APISAK also posted scores of the iGPU-disabled Core i5-10600KF, which is roughly on par with the i5-10600K since it's basically the same chip with its eyes poked out.
80 Comments on Intel Core i7-10700K and i5-10600K Geekbenched, Inch Ahead of 3800X and 3600X
If you care for the earth you can't buy Intel, :p
No I jest at least Intel are competing on some points.
We wouldn't want a one horse race again.
Why is the 10600k better in single core? higher clock speeds due to less cores?
Also how does Geekbench evne work because if I look it up I find different scores, some better then what is posted here, some worse, the title says it inches out the 3800x but I see scores of it losing to the 3700x sooo what gives?
atleast now it I think addresses some of the platform concerns I have, just so little bandwidth with 4 lanes of 3.0 pci-e bandwidth for all usb, storage, network, and such.
it's improved a lot in that area but, the 10600k is gonna use more power than a 3950x and inch ahead of a year old cpu which is more efficient ?
if the leaked prices are anything to go by they're not even priced competitively as well as probably locked B460 boards so need z490 for 10600K which is The best cpu in this lineup imho and coulda been a big hit if they price right, give affordable B motherboards with unlocked atleast memory as these won't clock much higher anyways.
So I checked how much the Core i9-10980XE is going for over at Newegg. This processor is competitive against the Ryzen 3950X.
www.newegg.com/intel-core-i9-10th-gen-core-i9-10980xe/p/N82E16819118112?&quicklink=true
It's out of stock and last sold for $3500!!!!
My point is that no matter what Intel releases on paper it will be damn hard getting anywhere close in reality.
Edit: As a similar exercise, I looked at Newegg for Core i9 Coffee Lake and Ryzen 7 3000 series. These are all 8 cores with hyperthreading.
www.newegg.com/p/pl?N=100007671+601321946+601350549+4814&Order=PRICE
The Intel processors are all way above the MSRP. As insanely high power draw configs are being pushed on the 14 nm process by Intel gen after gen, again how close to reality will these Comet Lake offerings be available to buy and at the MSRP?
Still, I wonder how they tested the Intel CPUs with regards to what cooling.. I'd rather not hear they have to have a chiller to keep the thing under what we'd hope is normal temps :) That and the RAM speeds as well... All interesting stuff tho... Would be good to see the reviews when they come through :)
Or an Intel pressure cookerYeah... its remarkably similar to that Final Fantasy GPU bench where every run its a total surprise if you might get on the leaderboards...Shit bench, ignore Geekbench is the gist of it. For ballpark performance comparison, maybe. For anything more, pointless. These minor gaps are meaningless and the ST score gap is margin of error territory, You're talking 100 points out of 6000 here.
A horse can't outlast the environment it's in and if you keep flogging a lame horse the feckers going to fall down dead eventually, this is Intel and 14nm IMHO.
I think we're really in a three horse race anyway ,arm part's are actually taking over from x86 for some workloads, a debacle Intel have little answer for even on they're 10nm node.
I see a reorganization on the cards personally ,since these new parts are not priced to really succeed again imho.
And how long are people going to keep paying for what amounts to minimal performance gains for such high prices.
Their competition is starting to open up such an efficiency gap that some shouldn't even be considering them viable, looking at all those mentioning TCO for AMD GPUs compared to Nvidia here.
You can often do the same work on a 35watt laptop ffs! 180/250 watts for a CPU alone in 2020 just to game on is preposterous.
browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=10600K
browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=10600KF
browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=10700K
browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=10700KF
browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=10900KF
Also, the editor didn't mention the fact that GB4 test is quite sensitive to RAM speed (the higher the memory speed is the better results are) which often doesn't relate to real world applications performance that's why the memory speed test was removed from GB5.
Oh, and I've just found you some 10900KF results as well. The CPU as predicted boosts to 5.3GHz which is simply astonishing. You may mention it in the news.
Looks like the Core i9 10900KF is thermally limited - 39K points vs Ryzen 3900X 49K points (i.e. 25% faster). Considering the former has 10 cores and the latter 12, the difference should have been smaller (20% faster). Intel desperately needs a high performance low power node to start reigning again.
You're welcome.
:)
6261 SC | 38377 MC.
Seems like their benchmarking is flawed or the Geekbench version might be cherry picked to give Intel a slight favor. Wouldn't surprise me.
gaming wise & specific workloads, Intel is fine on those fronts. But once you go for something else, AMD does the rest much better. 14nm+++++ is no longer deemed as competitive in 2020.