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

#151
coozie78
ARF
Choice, competition, alternative. I would take a 35-watt Ryzen 9 4900HS over the 65-watt Ryzen 7 3700X.
The performance is very, very close.

www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-amd_ryzen_9_4900hs-1285
www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-amd_ryzen_7_3700x-929


wccftech.com/amd-ceo-ryzen-cpus-now-account-to-more-than-50-premium-processor-sales-globally-strong-demand-for-ryzen-3000-ryzen-2000-cpus/

No matter how many consumers prefer AMD Ryzen, it seems the market share change just comes slowly.
Even worse, after the original Ryzen first generation release in 2017, AMD actually had been losing market share until some point after beginning of 2019. :confused:
Interesting comparisons, wouldn't it be fun to put one of those mobile chips into a tiny little desktop or Mac style all-in-one?
That bump in AMD market share coincides nicely with the release of the Zen 3XXX series.
Don't forget, the bulk of the Intel market is with OEMs, most of which know and trust Intel over AMD, as do their customers. The initial Zen release was plagued with issues, something DIY/enthusiasts might tolerate, not so business users. Or their IT departments.
Posted on Reply
#152
ARF
coozie78
Interesting comparisons, wouldn't it be fun to put one of those mobile chips into a tiny little desktop or Mac style all-in-one?
That bump in AMD market share coincides nicely with the release of the Zen 3XXX series.
Don't forget, the bulk of the Intel market is with OEMs, most of which know and trust Intel over AMD, as do their customers. The initial Zen release was plagued with issues, something DIY/enthusiasts might tolerate, not so business users. Or their IT departments.
What would happen if AMD overclocks the Ryzen 9 4900H/HS to 105 or 125-watt? o_O
Posted on Reply
#153
EarthDog
Shatun_Bear
14nm in 2020 is a sad state of affairs. I would avoid any of these relic Intel CPUs until they can move to 7nm in 2022.
Funny how well these "relics" keep up in a core for core, thread for thread situation, isn't it? AMD owns price and has for quite a while. It's nice to see them back with a comparable/better cpu which helps drive intel back down to sane.
Posted on Reply
#154
$ReaPeR$
EarthDog
Funny how well these "relics" keep up in a core for core, thread for thread situation, isn't it? AMD owns price and has for quite a while. It's nice to see them back with a comparable/better cpu which helps drive intel back down to sane.
yeah.. its funny how you can "compete" when you throw power efficiency out the window..
Posted on Reply
#155
theoneandonlymrk
EarthDog
Funny how well these "relics" keep up in a core for core, thread for thread situation, isn't it? AMD owns price and has for quite a while. It's nice to see them back with a comparable/better cpu which helps drive intel back down to sane.
Would be except the sane bit of the pricing, these still aren't sane prices.

I wouldn't touch any of this, too dear ,too late, too much power used.
And as for the pciex4 situation , it's going to go exactly the same as AMD'S , the drop in next generation (actual) will be better served by a fan wearing x590 I'd wager, still it's baby steps in the right direction I suppose.

The power draw from an all intel system this fall is going to be exceptionally high to gain that single core 5.3 on i9s only and in general way too high for a marginal win in gaming for it to be worthwhile to me.
Posted on Reply
#156
Bee9
EarthDog
This is an enthusiast site and those who want to game with modern titles will find 4c/8t hold back some games at 1080p and 1440. But we arent talking peoples salaries and 1st/3ed world bullshit... that's just ranting.

That said, I dont like the core/thread war either that amd started. 16c/32t in mainstream is a joke. In fact, I didnt like the 12c/24t part either. 8c/16t is plenty for the next few years.
Looks like your definition of enthusiast means gamer. Should have changed the site name to gamer power up.
16 cores mainstream has helped me save a lot of time. I need to do color grading in Davinci Resolve, run photoshop, capture one, and indesign at the same time, while 16 python bots are crawling the internet for information. That’s enough to eat up 16 cores 32 threads and 64GB of RAM. My 8 core machine was not suitable for this workload.

When we discuss a product price/performance, we have to discuss target market’s salaries because that’s how marketing work. There’s a thing called disposable income and that’s a part of purchasing decision making.
medi01
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".
Come back and read my post again. The citation is at the bottom.
Posted on Reply
#157
ARF
EarthDog
This is an enthusiast site and those who want to game with modern titles will find 4c/8t hold back some games at 1080p and 1440. But we arent talking peoples salaries and 1st/3ed world bullshit... that's just ranting.

That said, I dont like the core/thread war either that amd started. 16c/32t in mainstream is a joke. In fact, I didnt like the 12c/24t part either. 8c/16t is plenty for the next few years.
This is just plain wrong.
We lost several years of development between 2011 and 2017 when Intel had milked the market with quad cores, while AMD discontinued the whole FX line too early.
This is - between Core i7 2600K and Core i7 7700K there was no progress.

Hence, you are confused that a quad core is everything one needs.

It is just the lowest common denominator now.
Posted on Reply
#158
Shatun_Bear
EarthDog
Funny how well these "relics" keep up in a core for core, thread for thread situation, isn't it? AMD owns price and has for quite a while. It's nice to see them back with a comparable/better cpu which helps drive intel back down to sane.
Oh please.
$ReaPeR$
yeah.. its funny how you can "compete" when you throw power efficiency out the window..
Perfect response to a desperate Intel defence from him
Posted on Reply
#159
Braggingrights
Shatun_Bear
This release is another version of 2015 Skylake. The power draw is going to be ugly.

14nm in 2020 is a sad state of affairs. I would avoid any of these relic Intel CPUs until they can move to 7nm in 2022.
Intel win gaming and nobody cares how many AMD fanboyz jump up and down screaming about power

I say moar power, moar heat... moar speed... how cool does your car engine run? go and put your ear on your big screen TV. if it aint running hot something's wrong Bear
Posted on Reply
#160
theoneandonlymrk
Braggingrights
Intel win gaming and nobody cares how many AMD fanboyz jump up and down screaming about power

I say moar power, moar heat... moar speed... how cool does your car engine run? go and put your ear on your big screen TV. if it aint running hot something's wrong Bear
Except no , if you're big telly is running hot and power hungry get a new one, clearly a five hours a week gamer you, and I don't think you have the whole world aligned behind you or AMD wouldn't be taking 50% of sales would they?.

And what happened to the original, your butchering that statement.

Moar core's, moar power, more heat, tut hmmmn what brought that saying out again AHH yes AMD FX series which this is similar to.
Posted on Reply
#161
efikkan
Braggingrights
Intel win gaming and nobody cares how many AMD fanboyz jump up and down screaming about power
In the middle of this trench warfare, I'm trying to bring some pragmatism and perspective, because the real world usually needs some nuances and common sense is usually somewhere in the middle.

I certainly expect Comet Lake to be hot, and the extra power draw will certainly be a disadvantage, which the buyer needs to consider along with the other advantages/disadvantages of the product. Still, it's important to remember how much of a difference it is. In stock configuration, the CPUs will draw ~20W more sustained (compared to AMD's counterparts, not counting motherboard etc.). The peak will be a bit more though, but it's important to remember that the peak lasts for a few seconds, and while you have to scale the PSU for peak consumption, your cooling doesn't need to. I'll let each buyer be the judge of whether ~20W extra sustained is enough to be significant for them. If we were talking about 100W extra sustained, I would certainly think it was significant for most buyers.

If you choose to run the CPU without the power limit, then this is on you, not on Intel, as this is technically an overclocked configuration. I would certainly not recommend doing so if you expect a reliable system potentially used for productive use.
Posted on Reply
#162
Braggingrights
theoneandonlymrk
Except no , if you're big telly is running hot and power hungry get a new one, clearly a five hours a week gamer you, and I don't think you have the whole world aligned behind you or AMD wouldn't be taking 50% of sales would they?.
So blah blah blah AMD lose gaming again
Posted on Reply
#163
theoneandonlymrk
Braggingrights
So blah blah blah AMD lose gaming again
Nice , burned lol bye

Oh do re read it I edited a bit.
Posted on Reply
#164
Braggingrights
theoneandonlymrk
Nice , burned lol bye

Oh do re read it I edited a bit.
I didn't read it the first time... I like my chips like my women, hot!
Posted on Reply
#165
theoneandonlymrk
Braggingrights
I didn't read it the first time... I like my chips like my women, hot!
And you will be very happy with your new one then.

Got one quick off the mark though, top end bits in your pc but mid teir CPU, odd.

Not at all like a sh### account.

I'll put you on ignore since your arguments aren't worth sh#t.
Posted on Reply
#166
IamEzio
I don't know what dreams people here are living in... the broken record about how Intel DOMINATES in gaming.
If 3900X (zen2) on average of 36 different games is 6% slower, not even a 10%.... than a 9900K..
Consumes less power, and faster on all other tasks, how can you people continue with the broken record of "OMG ONLY INTEL CAN RUN GAMES"
"RYZEN SUCKS AT GAMING", "INTEL SAID RYZEN SUCKz AT REAL WORLD HERE IS A SLIDE THEY DID IN POWERPOINT THAT PROVES IT" "CPUZ THAT CAN'T DO 5GHzzzz ARE BAD" and other crap we saw only it this thread.

www.techspot.com/review/1877-core-i9-9900k-vs-ryzen-9-3900x/

Now, I don't like to cherry pick, and everyone will find sligthly different benchamrk were the difference might be smaller or bigger.
But it will not change the fact that the differences are minor at best considering the overall picture, even if you people continue to taunt that "Multi-threaded performance are meaningless" while it clear that even your beloved games benefit from it to some degree, an when games become more and more multi-thread aware, and able to utilize it better and better, you should stop pretending that your magical 14nm is anything but what it is. Comet Lake will be great for gaming, that is without a doubt. but Comet-Lake-S is nothing more than an i9-9900KS with 2 more cores, and the gaming performance will be pretty similar. meanwhile Zen 3 is coming sooner than later and should bring another performance improvement. even the gaming gap is closing, even if you don't like it.
Meanwhile Rocket-Lake-S will be lower core count and lower clocks thanks to 10nm. and Tiger-Lake-S ? It's not coming any-time soon..............
RandallFlagg
Here are some facts.

Top benchmarks recorded for PCMark 10, Firestrike Extreme, and Time Spy Extreme.



And now lets play the ignorant game of intel and amd fanboys of cherry picking benchmarks, like this post back that posted PCMark 10 scores showing Intel CPU's filling the top of the chart without Taking into account that its a benchmark that takes into account all aspects of the system, CPU, Storage and GPU. or worse.. 3DMark scores that combines Both the CPU and GPU. Most of the top scores are extreme overclock, You can't prove your point with 3Dmark scores of a W-3175X running at insane Overclock using a chiller or LN2 or whatever. this proves nothing but cherry picking unreasonable scores to prove your bias.

for comparison, Highest 3970X on 3DMark TimeSpy Extreme is probably running on stock clocks and with 2X 2080 Ti on moderate clocks, how can we even compare that to a w-3175X running at 5.8GHz under Extreme cooling and 4X 1080Ti's running 2400MHz (!) ? how is a system running at Extreme OC, under Extreme cooling, Barely stable enough to complete a Benchmark while pulling 2.5kW at the wall (best case probably) is a testament at how Intel is great at gaming? anyway, This totally proves that Intel is the greatest CPU ever. only problem is it needs to pull 1kW from wall alone.. silly me, such a minor problem (proceeds to order 1800$ motherboard, 4000$ cpu and an an industrial a/c unit to play overwatch between overclock crashes)

Anyway. I should probably be ashamed that I bought a R9 3900X that can barely even run Tetris at 24 Cinematic FPS. I Definitely feel ripped of by AMD. Should return it for a REAL MANS GAMING CPU for that 6GHZzzzzzz CPU /s
Posted on Reply
#167
Shatun_Bear
Braggingrights
I say moar power, moar heat... moar speed... how cool does your car engine run? go and put your ear on your big screen TV. if it aint running hot something's wrong Bear
I'm sorry to hear you've got one of those janky old plasma TVs in your living room that heat the room as well as offer a blurry picture, but everyone else has moved on from 2010 tech to cooler, more efficient LCDs. So no, my TV is not running hot.
IamEzio
I don't know what dreams people here are living in... the broken record about how Intel DOMINATES in gaming.
If 3900X (zen2) on average of 36 different games is 6% slower, not even a 10%.... than a 9900K..
Consumes less power, and faster on all other tasks, how can you people continue with the broken record of "OMG ONLY INTEL CAN RUN GAMES"
"RYZEN SUCKS AT GAMING", "INTEL SAID RYZEN SUCKz AT REAL WORLD HERE IS A SLIDE THEY DID IN POWERPOINT THAT PROVES IT" "CPUZ THAT CAN'T DO 5GHzzzz ARE BAD" and other crap we saw only it this thread.

www.techspot.com/review/1877-core-i9-9900k-vs-ryzen-9-3900x/

Now, I don't like to cherry pick, and everyone will find sligthly different benchamrk were the difference might be smaller or bigger.
But it will not change the fact that the differences are minor at best considering the overall picture, even if you people continue to taunt that "Multi-threaded performance are meaningless" while it clear that even your beloved games benefit from it to some degree, an when games become more and more multi-thread aware, and able to utilize it better and better, you should stop pretending that your magical 14nm is anything but what it is. Comet Lake will be great for gaming, that is without a doubt. but Comet-Lake-S is nothing more than an i9-9900KS with 2 more cores, and the gaming performance will be pretty similar. meanwhile Zen 3 is coming sooner than later and should bring another performance improvement. even the gaming gap is closing, even if you don't like it.
Meanwhile Rocket-Lake-S will be lower core count and lower clocks thanks to 10nm. and Tiger-Lake-S ? It's not coming any-time soon..............




And now lets play the ignorant game of intel and amd fanboys of cherry picking benchmarks, like this post back that posted PCMark 10 scores showing Intel CPU's filling the top of the chart without Taking into account that its a benchmark that takes into account all aspects of the system, CPU, Storage and GPU. or worse.. 3DMark scores that combines Both the CPU and GPU. Most of the top scores are extreme overclock, You can't prove your point with 3Dmark scores of a W-3175X running at insane Overclock using a chiller or LN2 or whatever. this proves nothing but cherry picking unreasonable scores to prove your bias.

for comparison, Highest 3970X on 3DMark TimeSpy Extreme is probably running on stock clocks and with 2X 2080 Ti on moderate clocks, how can we even compare that to a w-3175X running at 5.8GHz under Extreme cooling and 4X 1080Ti's running 2400MHz (!) ? how is a system running at Extreme OC, under Extreme cooling, Barely stable enough to complete a Benchmark while pulling 2.5kW at the wall (best case probably) is a testament at how Intel is great at gaming? anyway, This totally proves that Intel is the greeting CPU ever. only problem is it needs to pull 1kW from wall alone.. silly me, such a minor problem.

Any way. I should probably be ashamed that I bought a R9 3900X that can barely even run Tetris at 24 Cinematic FPS. I Deferentially feel ripped of by AMD. Should return it for a REAL MANS GAMING CPU for that 6GHZzzzzzz CPU /s
You're right. Last time I checked the gap was 3.8% according to TPU. Three percent! This was after a chipset driver update last year (3900X vs 9900K).
Posted on Reply
#168
IamEzio
Shatun_Bear
I'm sorry to hear you've got one of those janky old plasma TVs in your living room that heat the room as well as offer a blurry picture, but everyone else has moved on from 2010 tech to cooler, more efficient LCDs. So no, my TV is not running hot.



You're right. Last time I checked the gap was 3.8% according to TPU. Three percent! This was after a chipset driver update last year (3900X vs 9900K).
The thing is even if its 10%, whatever.
People exaggerate it so much. so many are stuck at 1080p because of "high refresh rate" and "competitive gaming", maybe every GAMER on TPU is a twitch celebrity, streaming sensation. they must use the 1080p GHz.

The reality is that these potato games run just fine on lower end hardware. Even my GTX970 could play the "esports" titles like Overwatch at 120FPS+ on 1440p (with my older E3-1270v2).
This are the same PCMR people that make fun of the Xbox one X and PS4 Pro running games at sub 4K resolution, while they base their whole world view on 1080p gaming.
I don't even get how people can stand 1080p monitors today. I daily a 1440p 27" for last several years. even that is not sharp enough in my opinion. I would like to upgrade to a 32" 4K monitor but prices on monitors are absurd (like more than 1000$ for the U3219Q, the logical upgrade from my U2715h, its a joke when an LG 55" OLED is 1499$). besides that, I also have cheap 27" 1080p monitor that I got for my PS4 Pro as it can't output (thanks Sony very much) 1440p and any half decent 4k display was twice the price. the resolution on this size is a joke.
So my question is - do this people have the most blurry vision or do they stuck on 24" monitors like its 2010??
Posted on Reply
#169
Caring1
Braggingrights
I like my chips like my women, hot!
You left off, Huge, you've already made it clear you love the big ones. ;)
Posted on Reply
#170
RandallFlagg
Shatun_Bear
...
And everyone will still buy Ryzen, because of the lower power draw, much cheaper prices and superior multi-threaded performance.

Just look at Amazon.com best selling processors. 9 of the top 10 is Ryzen I'm afraid.
Not that what you are pointing at means anything at all, as it changes from one hour to the next.

Nor does it have anything to do with the question of performance.

But since you brought it up, lets use those kind of metrics.

All but one of the 12 top selling PCs on Amazon use Intel - and the one AMD is selling down there with recycled business desktops :






All but two of the top 12 selling laptops on Amazon use Intel, and only one of those two uses AMD:





-Three of the four best selling CPUs at Newegg are Intel :


Posted on Reply
#171
Braggingrights
theoneandonlymrk
And you will be very happy with your new one then.

Got one quick off the mark though, top end bits in your pc but mid teir CPU, odd.

Not at all like a sh### account.

I'll put you on ignore since your arguments aren't worth sh#t.
I have very specific needs, and that's not how you spell tier

As for your other tears, I would suggest a tissue ;)
Posted on Reply
#172
Caring1
RandallFlagg
Not that what you are pointing at means anything at all, as it changes from one hour to the next.

Nor does it have anything to do with the question of performance.

But since you brought it up, lets use those kind of metrics.

All but one of the 12 top selling PCs on Amazon use Intel - and the one AMD is selling down there with recycled business desktops :
Different metric altogether as Prebuilt systems tend to use what they are told they can.
Consumer built systems use parts they want.
Posted on Reply
#173
EarthDog
Caring1
Different metric altogether as Prebuilt systems tend to use what they are told they can.
Consumer built systems use parts they want.
They can do whatever they want. However...intel likes to pay off OEM's, so that likely skews things.
Super XP
Currently, anything Intel has out to date is pretty much DOA, they will receive the same scrutiny as AMD once did with its Bulldozer release.
DOA? Lol...

The same scrutiny as bulldozer? Wow, no. The difference is bulldozer was a slug compared to cpus 2/3 generations older, nonetheless the same gen. New intel chips are just as fast or faster in single/lightly threaded apps and some games. Its only in heavily multi threaded loads where SMT shows its mettle. These cpus will be competative, for sure...maybe cheaper for more cores. Bulldozer never was competative and only had price going for it. It was ridiculed for good reason.
Posted on Reply
#175
theoneandonlymrk
ARF
Leaked benchmarks of Core i5-10400 6C/12T:


wccftech.com/intel-core-i5-10400-6-core-desktop-cpu-benchmarks-leak/
But it's competition allows for board And CPU bought within that price.
It's a good chip at too high a price IMHO.

In general any CPU by Intel in the last two years was too expensive for what you're getting, they do not even cost as much to make as it's competition so I wouldn't pay more or at least not this much since tbf to some that single core performance is desirable but hell no it's not worth the cost.

Rocket lake just got driver support in Linux, meaning it's not far out to me and the pciex4 support some boards (490) claim will soon be tested.

They do have redriver chip's don't they?

Or is that going to go into x590?
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment