Thursday, April 30th 2020

Intel 10th Generation Comet Lake Desktop Processors and 400-Series Chipsets Announced, Here's what's New

Intel today launched its 10th generation Core desktop processor family and its companion Intel 400-series chipsets. Based on the 14 nm++ silicon fabrication process and built in the new LGA1200 package, the processors are based on the "Comet Lake" microarchitecture. The core design of "Comet Lake" and its IPC are identical to those of "Skylake," however Intel brought significant enhancements to the processor's clock-speed boosting algorithm, increased core- or thread counts across the board, and introduced new features that could interest enthusiasts and overclockers. The uncore component remains largely unchanged from the previous-generation, with support for DDR4 memory and PCI-Express gen 3.0. Use of these processors requires a new socket LGA1200 motherboard, they won't work on older LGA1151 motherboards. You can install any LGA115x-compatible cooler on LGA1200, provided it meets the thermal requirements of the processor you're using.

At the heart of the 10th generation Core processor family is a new 10-core monolithic processor die, which retains the same basic structure as the previous-generation 8-core "Coffee Lake Refresh" die, and 4-core "Skylake." The cores are arranged in two rows, sandwiched by the processor's uncore and iGPU blocks. A ring-bus interconnect binds the various components. The cache hierarchy is unchanged from previous generations as well, with 32 KB each of L1I and L1D caches; 256 KB of dedicated L2 cache per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The iGPU is the same Gen 9.5 based UHD 630 graphics. As we mentioned earlier, much of Intel's innovation for the 10th generation is with the processor's microcode (boosting algorithms).
Intel Core i9-10900K 10th Gen Intel Core Desktop Comet Lake Lineup 10th Gen Intel Core Desktop Comet Lake Lineup 10th Gen Intel Core Desktop Comet Lake Lineup

The 10-core die with all its cores enabled is the backbone of the new 10th generation Core i9 series, including the flagship part, the Core i9-10900K, a 10-core/20-thread processor with maximum clock speeds running as high as 5.30 GHz, which Intel claims is the "fastest processor for gaming." All Core i9 SKUs in the series are 10-core/20-thread. The Core i9-10900K is unlocked and features an iGPU. The i9-10900KF is unlocked, but lacks an integrated graphics (it is physically present in the silicon, but disabled). The i9-10900 has an iGPU, but isn't unlocked. The i9-10900F both lacks an iGPU and is multiplier-locked. These chips are priced between $422 and $488 (1,000-unit tray quantities).
Comet Lake Performance in Games and Creating Optimized for Total War Three Kingdoms Optimized to win Remnant from the Ashes Gaming Partners about Intel 10th Gen
The 10th generation Core i7 series, sold at price points under $400, consists of 8-core/16-thread parts with 16 MB of shared L3 cache - the same amount of muscle as the 9th generation Core i9 series. Leading this line is the Core i7-10700K, clocked up to 5.10 GHz. Among the SKUs are the i7-10700K, the i7-10700KF, i7-10700, and i7-10700F.

The 10th generation Core i5 series sees the most bolstering, in our opinion. The popular middle-of-the-market chips are now 6-core/12-thread, with 12 MB of shared L3 cache, across the board (same amount as the 8th generation Core i7 series). Leading the pack is the Core i5-10600K, followed by the i5-10600KF, and i5-10600, i5-10500, i5-10400, and the i5-10400F. These SKUs cover the broadest range of price-points starting at just $157 for the i5-10400F, going up to $262 for the unlocked i5-10600K.

The 10th generation Core i3 series also sees a hefty bit of hardware enhancement. These are 4-core/8-thread parts, with up to 8 MB of shared L3 cache (same as the 7th generation Core i7 series). The i3-10300 and i3-10320 feature 8 MB of L3 cache, while the entry-level i3-10100 features 6 MB of it. The i3-10100 is priced at $122, the i3-10300 at $143, and the i3-10320 at $154. There is no unlocked part in the Core i3 series.

At the bottom of the pile are Pentium Gold socket LGA1200 G6000-series 2-core/4-thread processors with 4 MB of L3 cache, and Celeron G5900 series 2-core/2-thread parts with 3 MB L3 cache.

Intel sticking with 14 nm comes with heavy costs on the energy-efficiency front. All unlocked K-SKUs in the series come with an unprecedented 125 W TDP rating (older generations of Intel LGA115x processors almost never had a TDP rating higher than 95 W). Almost all socket LGA1200 motherboards we've seen so far, barring the Mini-ITX designs, feature at least an 8+4 pin EPS (CPU power) input configuration. The higher-end boards even have dual 8-pin EPS setups akin to HEDT motherboards.
10th Gen Intel Core Desktop Comet Lake Lineup

What's Really New

As we explained earlier, the core IPC of the 10th generation "Comet Lake" microarchitecture is unchanged from the previous generation, much of Intel's innovation is focused on getting the most out of their existing core design. The following is a list of what's really new:
  • HyperThreading across the board: Intel extended HyperThreading to be available across most of their product line. HT was originally reserved for only top-tier parts, but can now be found on the Core i9, Core i7, Core i5, Core i3, and Pentium Gold parts. SMT is a proven way to dial up multi-threaded application performance by leveraging idle hardware resources in a CPU core, and brings about tangible multi-threaded performance uplifts.
  • Up to Three Different Boosting Algorithms: Intel has up to three different clock speed boosting algorithms deployed on various SKUs in the series:
    • Turbo Boost 2.0: This is the most basic boosting technology, available across all 10th gen Core i9, Core i7, Core i5, and Core i3 SKUs
    • Turbo Boost MAX 3.0: Carried over from the Core X HEDT processor family, Turbo Boost Max 3.0 is now available on 10th Gen Core i9 and Core i7 SKUs, enabling higher notches of clock speed than Turbo Boost 2.0, and it also adds "Favored Cores". This makes the operating system aware the two physically-best cores, which can sustain higher boost frequencies better than the rest of the CPU. The goal is to have the OS scheduler prioritize running workloads on these cores, so they can run faster. Windows 10 has had Favored Core awareness since 1609, and Linux x64 kernels since January 2018 have supported it.
    • Thermal Velocity Boost: Carried over from its 9th and 10th generation Core mobile processors, Thermal Velocity Boost is available to 10th generation Core i9 SKUs. The feature enables clock boost speeds even higher than Turbo Boost MAX 3.0, in short bursts, provided your processor's cooling solution is able to consistently keep temperatures below a threshold, and provided a few power targets are met. We confirmed with Intel that for the 10th gen desktop chips, this threshold is set at 70 °C (for the mobile parts it is 65 °C).
  • New Core and Memory overclocking features, including:
    • The ability to enable or disable HyperThreading for individual cores. Until now, you could disable or enable HTT only globally. This comes as a boon for gamers who want to set a few of their cores without HTT, and a few with HTT for streaming applications
    • Enhanced, finer grained voltage/frequency curve controls. Intel is launching a major update to XTU alongside these processors, which lets you set the voltage at individual frequencies, for much finer control of overclocking parameters. This technique was pioneered by GPU vendors and helps reduce power in situations when the CPU is not running at highest frequency. Traditionally you could either program a voltage offset that shifts the whole V-F curve in one direction, or program an override voltage that runs the CPU at the same voltage all the time, wasting tons of energy in the process. Now you may change the shape of the curve, too: undervolt when idle or lightly loaded, but higher voltage when loaded, to reach higher overclocking? It's possible now.
    • The ability to overclock the PCI-Express 3.0 x16 graphics bus (PEG), and DMI chipset-bus. We're not entirely sure how this is accomplished. Both are PCIe-based interfaces, which can only tolerate a few MHz clock variance for high-bandwidth devices such as GPUs. We asked Intel how this works, and they confirmed that "DMI and PCIe are linked. By overclocking one, you are overclocking the other".
  • Physical, packaging improvements: Intel made some improvements to the processor package with an aim of improving heat transfer between the die and the cooling solution. Without changing the Z-height of the package, Intel found a way to thicken the copper IHS, by thinning the silicon die (from 800 µm down to 500 µm; and the fiberglass substrate. Soldered TIM (STIM) sits between the die and the IHS. This should improve heat transfer significantly, as silicon is a thermal insulator, whereas the copper IHS is highly conductive.
  • Native support for DDR4-2933 and higher memory clocks across the board: up to DDR4-4000 for two dual-rank modules, over DDR4-4800 for two single-rank modules, and beyond DDR4-5000 for one single-rank module.
Intel Comet Lake Overclocking Enhancements Intel Comet Lake Thinner die, improved IHS Intel Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0 New Comet Lake Desktop Processor Features

The Intel Z490 Chipset

Intel is launching its latest top-tier desktop chipset, the Z490. The Intel 400-series chipset family includes other models, including the B460, and H410, although we're not sure if the latter two will be available at launch. The Z490 leads the pack with maxed out connectivity.

We asked Intel and they confirmed that Z490 is built on a 14 nm production process. It connects to the LGA1200 processor over a conventional DMI 3.0 chipset bus (32 Gbps per direction). Connectivity is an impressive 24 PCI-Express 3.0 downstream lanes, which combined with the 16 PEG lanes from the processor add up to 40 lanes on this platform. Motherboard designers utilize this PCIe lane budget to deploy up to three M.2 NVMe slots, and several high-bandwidth devices such as additional USB 3.2 host controllers, Thunderbolt 3 controllers, 10 GbE networking, etc.

The Z490 integrates a 6-port SATA 6 Gbps AHCI/RAID controller, a 4-port USB 3.2 gen 2 controller with Gen 2 x2 (20 Gbps) capability, up to 12 USB 3.2 gen 1 (5 Gbps) ports, a HD Audio bus with Intel Smart Sound (low-power audio encoding/decoding) capability, which lets you issue voice commands to your PC even in standby mode; and one integrated MAC for either an i225-V "Foxville" 2.5 GbE or cheaper i219-V "Jacksonville" 1 GbE controller. The chipset also comes with preparation for Intel AX201 WLAN card over CNVi interface (802.11ax Wi-Fi + Bluetooth 5).

Availability

Although announced today, the 10th generation Core desktop processors and compatible LGA1200 motherboards should reach markets around the world starting May-June—the K SKUs will reach the market first.

The Complete Slide Deck

New 10th gen Intel Core S-Series Processor Launch Intel 10th Gen, worlds fastest gaming processor Best Overclocking Experience Comet Lake Why Frequency Matters Intel Comet Lake Overclocking Enhancements Intel Comet Lake Thinner die, improved IHS Intel Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0 Intel Core i9-10900K Comet Lake Performance in Games and Creating Optimized for Total War Three Kingdoms Optimized to win Remnant from the Ashes Gaming Partners about Intel 10th Gen Gaming Partners about Intel 10th Gen New Comet Lake Desktop Processor Features 10th Gen Intel Core Desktop Comet Lake Lineup 10th Gen Intel Core Desktop Comet Lake Lineup 10th Gen Intel Core Desktop Comet Lake Lineup 10th Gen Intel Core Desktop Comet Lake Lineup
Add your own comment

203 Comments on Intel 10th Generation Comet Lake Desktop Processors and 400-Series Chipsets Announced, Here's what's New

#101
kapone32
ARF
You will never see 25% higher performance per clock in gaming. Ryzen 5 1500X is up to 3.7 GHz. Ryzen 3 3100 is up to 3.9 GHz. :D
But Ryzen 5 1500X has 384 KB L1 cache, while Ryzen 3 1300 has only 256 KB L1 cache.

All performance metrics are already there:
www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-intel_core_i3_10300-1155
www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-intel_core_i7_7700k-664

www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-ryzen-5-1500x
www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-ryzen-3-3100
All is said was IPC not gaming and that could easily mitigate less L1 cache. We don't have anything concrete on any of the new CPUs until reviews or self testing. Any comment making one seem better than the other without this data can be considered obtuse. There are a ton of variables to these as well. As an example which is faster using the IGPU the 2400G or 7700K? Will the 10300K be faster in IGPU gaming than the 3400G (Which can't seem to found in Canada for decent prices). Will a 3900X with super fast memory and tight timings perform similar to 5 GHZ 9900K. Those 2 scenarios are known to improve performance on the perspective platforms. Then when the Ryzen chips launch will they have the clock speed to make Intel obsolete (In the words of fan boys on both side depending on the year and decade).
Posted on Reply
#102
EarthDog
AnarchoPrimitiv
Have you ever considered that "most people don't need more than four cores", because they didn't have an option to buy more than four cores up until ryzen?
weight wut? rukiddingmeh? For Intel, X58 platform had Hexcores out almost 10 years ago. AMD bulldozer was more than that 'on paper' 10 years ago.
Posted on Reply
#103
birdie
Yeah, multicore benchmarks for less than 0.5% of the world's population and suddenly Zen 2 is the only architecture that matters and Sky Lake v5 is BAAAAAAAD. AMD fans cannot really be rational. If it's MOAR cores AMD is automatically better than Intel and NVIDIA combined. Doesn't matter if those cores go underutilized or not utilized at all for 98% of people out there who run nothing but a web browser (because to be honest most people don't run anything else nowadays as you can do pretty much everything in it, including spread sheets/taxes/banking/viewing PDFs, listening to music and playing videos). What's not covered by the web browser? Viewing photos (but given that most people store their photos in the cloud that becomes murky). Some fill out PDFs in Adobe Acrobat or run full blown Microsoft Office - both these tasks barely require more than two cores. Oh, and BTW browsers have extensively used GPU acceleration for quite some time which means the CPU isn't that important.

Still, "My super duper 3950X runs Cinebench 20 benchmark faster than the Core i9 10900KF which means INTEL IS BAD DO NOT BUY IT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES". It gets even more laughable when most AMD fans can't even name day-to-day tasks they are performing on their 16-core overpowered CPUs. Looks like someone has a lot more money than rationale. Or and "every user must have a CPU with as many cores as possible". Hasn't AMD announced four-cores Ryzen CPUs recently? Oh, wait, they have.
Posted on Reply
#104
Bee9
birdie
Hasn't AMD announced four-cores Ryzen CPUs recently? Oh, wait, they have.
Can you inform us the price of Ryzen 4 cores and to which Intel processors it compete with?
Posted on Reply
#105
trparky
AnarchoPrimitiv
You have individuals in this comments section talking about using a build for 5+ years.
I was one of them, I had a 3570K build for nearly five years. Why? Oh yeah... that's because Intel was shoveling the same tired warmed over four core garbage for years that I didn't see a need to upgrade. Why? So, I could get another four core CPU? But then AMD came along and actually forced Intel to innovate and then the 8700K came along with six cores, to which I said... "Self, now is the time to upgrade. There's actually something new here."

Funny how a lack of innovation results in people not wanting to upgrade and thus spend money.
Posted on Reply
#106
birdie
Bee9
Can you inform us the price of Ryzen 4 cores and to which Intel processors it compete with?
Ryzen 3 3300X $120
Ryzen 3 3100 $99

both require a discrete GPU which adds at the very least $80 to the bill (the cheapest modern GPU that I could find on NewEgg).

Intel Core i3 10100: $122 (integrated graphics included).
Posted on Reply
#107
trparky
birdie
(integrated graphics included).
Which is damn near useless.
Posted on Reply
#108
birdie
trparky
Which is damn near useless.
Intel HD graphics works for absolute most people out there who don't play AAA games. I personally know a dozen people who have nothing but Intel HD graphics on their PCs/laptops and they have nothing to report.
Posted on Reply
#109
EarthDog
trparky
Which is damn near useless.
It will put an image on the screen....which is the point. It wont play a ton of games well, but most of those buying these things arent trying to AAA game.
Posted on Reply
#110
trparky
EarthDog
It will put an image on the screen... which is the point. It won't play a ton of games well, but most of those buying these things aren't trying to AAA game.
Yes, but if you get either a Ryzen 3200G or 3400G you get the best of both worlds, Ryzen with integrated VEGA graphics that kicks the snot out of anything Intel has as far as integrated graphics.
Posted on Reply
#111
EarthDog
trparky
Yes, but if you get either a Ryzen 3200G or 3400G you get the best of both worlds, Ryzen with integrated VEGA graphics that kicks the snot out of anything Intel has as far as integrated graphics.
Good point. 3400G is also like $180 though...
Posted on Reply
#112
trparky
EarthDog
Good point. 3400G is also like $180 though...
But for about $70 more you actually get graphics hardware that's worth more than a bucket of warm spit.
Posted on Reply
#113
birdie
trparky
But for about $70 more you actually get graphics hardware that's worth more than a bucket of warm spit.
$70 is how much people are earning in some African countries in a month. Sometimes it helps to leave the cozy vacuum of your rich american life and realize there's a world outside with actual people and for many of them $70 is a ton of money. In seemingly democratic claiming to be 1st-world country Russia the average montly salary is just $450. In Ukraine it's even less.

Lastly a discrete GPU adds complexity and weight to your build which, shockingly(!) even many Europeans/Americans love to avoid.
Posted on Reply
#114
EarthDog
trparky
But for about $70 more you actually get graphics hardware that's worth more than a bucket of warm spit.
And for $10 more than that, you've got a discrete card that will walk that iGPU.

But seriously, if you are buying potato, cpus, you arent AAA gaming in the first place.
Posted on Reply
#115
medi01
Bee9
66% of the population in the US are consider themselves gamers (1).
Citation needed.

I could imagine "clowns with agenda decided to count everyone who has ever played a computer game, even if just once in his/her life, a gamer".
Posted on Reply
#116
kapone32
birdie
Ryzen 3 3300X $120
Ryzen 3 3100 $99

both require a discrete GPU which adds at the very least $80 to the bill (the cheapest modern GPU that I could find on NewEgg).

Intel Core i3 10100: $122 (integrated graphics included).
So you should compare it to the 3400G then to be fair. but a RX570 new or used would benefit both CPUs (not that you could do anything other than watch Netflix or Disney +) I doubt you could even run Total War Rome (not Rome 2) on that IGPU. But it does help with Adobe Premiere (If you use that) since for the last 2 years Vegas has been $20 on Humble Bundle.
Posted on Reply
#117
birdie
kapone32
So you should compare it to the 3400G then to be fair. but a RX570 new or used would benefit both CPUs (not that you could do anything other than watch Netflix or Disney +) I doubt you could even run Total War Rome (not Rome 2) on that IGPU. But it does help with Adobe Premiere (If you use that) since for the last 2 years Vegas has been $20 on Humble Bundle.
Let me quote myself: "Intel HD graphics works for absolute most people out there who don't play AAA games. I personally know a dozen people who have nothing but Intel HD graphics on their PCs/laptops and they have nothing to report". And 3400G is quite slower CPU-wise than Core i3 10100 because it's Zen+, not Zen 2.
Posted on Reply
#118
kapone32
birdie
$70 is how much people are earning in some African countries in a month. Sometimes it helps to leave the cozy vacuum of your rich american life and realize there's a world outside with actual people and for many of them $70 is a ton of money. In seemingly democratic claiming to be 1st-world country Russia the average montly salary is just $450. In Ukraine it's even less.

Lastly a discrete GPU adds complexity and weight to your build which, shockingly(!) even many Europeans/Americans love to avoid.
Just buy a 7950 for $50 and be happy.:toast: It's Friday the only thing we have to with our PCs in a couple hours is game or encode. Your argument speaks to Ryzen APUs though as if I was looking for a build without a GPU the 2400G and assumedly 3400G are great for that application.
Posted on Reply
#119
birdie
kapone32
Just buy a 7950 for $50 and be happy.:toast: It's Friday the only thing we have to with our PCs in a couple hours is game or encode. Your argument speaks to Ryzen APUs though as if I was looking for a build without a GPU the 2400G and assumedly 3400G are great for that application.
Let me quote myself again because probably you're not paying attention:

"Lastly a discrete GPU adds complexity and weight to your build which, shockingly(!) even many Europeans/Americans love to avoid". :)
Posted on Reply
#120
IamEzio
birdie
Yeah, multicore benchmarks for less than 0.5% of the world's population and suddenly Zen 2 is the only architecture that matters and Sky Lake v5 is BAAAAAAAD. AMD fans cannot really be rational. If it's MOAR cores AMD is automatically better than Intel and NVIDIA combined. Doesn't matter if those cores go underutilized or not utilized at all for 98% of people out there who run nothing but a web browser (because to be honest most people don't run anything else nowadays as you can do pretty much everything in it, including spread sheets/taxes/banking/viewing PDFs, listening to music and playing videos). What's not covered by the web browser? Viewing photos (but given that most people store their photos in the cloud that becomes murky). Some fill out PDFs in Adobe Acrobat or run full blown Microsoft Office - both these tasks barely require more than two cores. Oh, and BTW browsers have extensively used GPU acceleration for quite some time which means the CPU isn't that important.

Still, "My super duper 3950X runs Cinebench 20 benchmark faster than the Core i9 10900KF which means INTEL IS BAD DO NOT BUY IT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES". It gets even more laughable when most AMD fans can't even name day-to-day tasks they are performing on their 16-core overpowered CPUs. Looks like someone has a lot more money than rationale. Or and "every user must have a CPU with as many cores as possible". Hasn't AMD announced four-cores Ryzen CPUs recently? Oh, wait, they have.
yes you could consider skylake vX as "BAAAAAAAD", its a stop gap because every other products on the road map never made it to production and was rushed even more so by Zen release.
The only thing that makes it relevant is gaming and some specific applications that it will run better on it thanks to the higher clocks. how can a product that shouldn't had existed in the first place be considered a success? its a success as in Intel has a somewhat competitive and relevant product. as a PRODUCT - sorry but no. And for all of the flack AMD got when they released the pointless FX 9570, Didn't intel recently released a thing they called i9 9900KS ? is that a great product


As for the rest of your comment, you wrote
Or and "every user must have a CPU with as many cores as possible". Hasn't AMD announced four-cores Ryzen CPUs recently? Oh, wait, they have.
instead of repeating the broken record, The statement should be more like this:
every user should have a CPU with as many cores as possible for their respective price bracket
Obviously the cores themselves should be also competitive, and you cant ignore the fact the core(zen2) - core (9th Gen) are very competitive.

Most people don't need Ryzen 7/9 or any i7. its funny that people only focus on the high end while the low and mid range is where it at.
And the fact is that thanks to Ryzen we have better mid range CPU's, if intel wouldn't follow AMD in core count, would you still for example buy an 4c/8t i5 in 2020 when you have competitive 6c/12t cpu from AMD, that has similar gaming performance and better overall performance? I would not. Intel is the one playing catch-up and people should want to buy the better product. if someone buys intel because he doesn't care and want to buy "only Intel" "cuz i herd its better and moar fps" then let it be. but it doesn't make it the better product overall.

And on the last note. if multi-core is really that irrelevant, Why is an 8c/16t 5GHz CPU is better than 4c/8t 5GHz at pure gaming if "maor cores" is pointless ? maybe we should all use i7-7700Ks and want nothing better. because it is the Intel mindset. they complain about AMD and note how high core count CPU's are pointless, but on the other hand, their "BEST CPU EVER" on the market is the 8c/16t 9900K, that has that much cores only thanks to AMD stepping up the game and becoming competitive again. And after the 10900KF will be out, it would be the "Intel Holy Grail", the 10c20t CPU, and we will still hear how AMD's high core count CPU's are pointless and how every AMD fanboy is a Cinebench **. did these people never hear about the saying "Don't Piss In The Well From Which You Drink"?
Posted on Reply
#121
kapone32
birdie
Let me quote myself: "Intel HD graphics works for absolute most people out there who don't play AAA games. I personally know a dozen people who have nothing but Intel HD graphics on their PCs/laptops and they have nothing to report". And 3400G is quite slower CPU-wise than Core i3 10100 because it's Zen+, not Zen 2.
The GPU on a 3400G is in the CPU package so no added "weight" (I can;t imagine having a PCIe slot and not using it)
Posted on Reply
#122
trparky
IamEzio
would you still for example buy an 4c/8t i5 in 2020 when you have competitive 6c/12t cpu from AMD
Nope, and that's the reason why competition makes things better for the consumer in not just better products but also lower prices. If AMD didn't come back swinging Intel would have had nothing to stop them from raising prices on just about everything including the lower-end Core i3 chips. We can see that in how nVidia prices their high-end GPUs at insane prices all because AMD hasn't really had anything to speak of in the high-end GPU market.
Posted on Reply
#123
birdie
No, users should not buy PCs with as many cores as humanly possible because unused cores are nothing but wasted money. People should always buy what's best for them (in terms of the bang for the buck) for their budget. I do understand that most TPU users are tech-enthusiasts who love to have overpowered PCs because you do it for boasting rights but that's not how the world works! Many people save on food and clothes to be able to buy a PC and you're insisting they should go e.g. buy something like Ryzen 7 3700X? Or companies which buy thousands of PCs for their workers? Why?? All these people will be just fine with Core i3 10300 for the next 15 years. Yes, 15, because I had an Intel Core i5 2500 based PC until August 2019 and it still works perfectly. I replaced it not because I needed MOAR cores or speed but because I wanted a new PC for a change.

Also, please let me remind you about AMD FX-8000 / 9000 CPUs which had MORE cores but ran slower in absolute most tasks than Intel CPUs with twice as fewer cores. So, your argument about having MOAR cores goes out of the window.

And since we've just established that MOAR cores are not that essential we come back to square one.
  • Old bad Sky Lake at 5.3 GHz performs faster than any non-OC'ed AMD CPU in existence in absolute most tasks.
  • AMD does win when MOAR cores are getting used due to power throttling on the Intel side because you can go only so far with power hungry 14nm cores.
  • Intel does have CPUs with much better IPC than Sky Lake: Ice Lake (~18% IPC uplift), Tiger Lake (+15% IPC uplift vs. Ice Lake).
Lastly many people say new games will utilize MOAR cores, which means slower but MOAR cores are better than faster but fewer cores. This is too often not true. Let me explain why:
  • Most game engines have a master thread which synchronizes all other threads load and if this master thread becomes overutilized your additional cores are going to waste.
  • CCX complexes in AMD CPUs mean there's a certain amount of delay in communication between cores which means games have to be specially coded which adds complexity and some game companies will simply not do this work because there's this vendor, which is being mocked at constantly, Intel, which doesn't have inter-CPU cores communication issues. AMD has actually realized that as well and Zen 3 is rumored to have 8-core CCX complexes which solves the issue.
  • A lot of games don't actually need that many cores because they are not complicated enough and programmers have no tasks to run on additional cores. In fact less than 5% of games in 2020 fully utilize more than 6 cores which means Intel Core i9 9700 is doing its job just fine or most four-core CPUs with HT.
Over and out.
kapone32
The GPU on a 3400G is in the CPU package so no added "weight" (I can;t imagine having a PCIe slot and not using it)
Are you following me?

Let me quote myself again: "And 3400G is quite slower CPU-wise than Core i3 10100 because it's Zen+, not Zen 2."
Posted on Reply
#125
birdie
trparky
Me thinks that @birdie is an Intel shill.
I wonder how stating facts and nothing but facts can be considering "a shill" when I'm also rocking a system based on the Ryzen 7 3700X right freaking now.

I now AMD fans hate facts and love illusions or "potential" but I'm sorry I don't buy any of this.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment