Monday, May 18th 2020

Comprehensive Core i9-10900K Review Leaked: Suggests Intel Option Formidable

A comprehensive review of the Intel Core i9-10900K 10-core/20-thread processor by Chinese tech publication TecLab leaked to the web on video sharing site bilibili. Its testing data reveals that Intel has a fighting chance against the Ryzen 9 3900X both in gaming- and non-gaming tasks despite a deficit of 2 cores; whereas the much pricier Ryzen 9 3950X only enjoys leads in multi-threaded synthetic- or productivity benchmarks.

Much of Intel's performance leads are attributed to a fairly high core-count, significantly higher clock speeds than the AMD chips, and improved boosting algorithms, such as Thermal Velocity Boost helping the chip out in gaming tests. Where Intel loses hard to AMD is power-draw and energy-efficiency. TecLab tested the three chips with comparable memory- and identical graphics setups.

More charts follow.

The games above are Assassin's Creed Odyssey, Metro: Exodus, and Tomb Raider.

Find the video presentation (in Chinese language) here.
Source: TecLab (bilibili)
Add your own comment

159 Comments on Comprehensive Core i9-10900K Review Leaked: Suggests Intel Option Formidable

#26
watzupken
john_
The average consumer will buy this CPU, put a mid range water/air cooler on it and never see these numbers.
On the other hand, the average consumer who will buy an AMD CPU, will put a mid range water/air cooler on it and probably see results close to these numbers.
I don't disagree here. Most reviewers uses high end cooler and open air test bed for testing, with the purpose of letting the product run at its full potential. What they generally don't show is that most CPU coolers will not be able to handle the heat from the flagship Intel chips and won't trigger this "thermal velocity" clockspeed. If you want to overclock it further, better have an industrial chiller under the table to cool it.
Aldain
Formidable?? Really??
Formidable power consumption and heat output. No previous consumer processor even comes close to these.
Posted on Reply
#27
Mark Little
If the 10th generation isn't available soon or there isn't enough volume to stay in stock for several months, then these Intel chips will be going up against AMD Zen 3 chips.
Posted on Reply
#28
sutyi
Depending on pricing everything can be a good deal to be honest.

Wonder what sort of cooling they'll provide for non-K SKUs tho.
Posted on Reply
#29
RealNeil
watzupken
Formidable power consumption and heat output. No previous consumer processor even comes close to these.
Mitigating high heat output can get expensive. It also causes problems with a system in the long haul.
It's probably not worth it for many of us.
Posted on Reply
#30
Mats
SIGSEGV
I don't know why I am so happy to see Intel having a hard time against AMD Ryzen to take the performance crown.
Oh yeah, and we all benefit from the competition. Intel will return with something interesting worth a new naming scheme, but this is the best they've got for now.

I have a wish list for a few more 14 nm names before Intel moves on, hopefully an eleven core Plasma Lake,
or preferrably the twelve core, with a single channel RAM controller (had to leave room for that extra core), Big Bang Lake 1010x9990STFU^+++ .

The Yucatan Impact Crater Lake would also be a nice nod to another disaster. /s
Posted on Reply
#31
Chrispy_
In all the benches where the 3950X comes last, it's a "lower is better" benchmark.
Posted on Reply
#32
ARF
WPrime runs in seconds, so yeah, less is more.
Posted on Reply
#33
thesmokingman
Damn... why even bother? It's 75w more for the same number of cores versus 3900x. AMD gives you 4 more cores for 44 more watts. Godamn!

Posted on Reply
#34
ERazer
if your serious about sustaining those OC you gonna need custom water loop

been there done that, custom loop is pain in the ass to maintain at least you only had to do it twice a year or so
Posted on Reply
#35
phanbuey
if I was going to build the ultimate gaming machine, I would get this, disable HT and see how far it could go on stock 10C/10T for games.

The dream would be a 5.3 or 5.4Ghz all 10 core clock no HT. Curious to see if anyone does this.
Posted on Reply
#36
Vya Domus
XL-R8R
Summery: Intel finally gives users a viable alternative to AMD's 6 month old 3900x while using 10-20% more power.
That's optimistic.
Mats
The average consumer doesn't buy a $500 CPU.
You ask people around here and they'll tell you X/Y/Z company is dead because their top of the line product is 1% slower.
phanbuey
The dream would be a 5.3 or 5.4Ghz all 10 core clock no HT. Curious to see if anyone does this.
The main reason these CPUs get faster and faster is not because of the core count, it's because they keep pushing single core Turbos. So whether you have 6 8 10 cores at 5.4 Ghz, it's going to be more or less the same.
Posted on Reply
#37
KarymidoN
ERazer
if your serious about sustaining those OC you gonna need custom water loop

been there done that, custom loop is pain in the ass to maintain at least you only had to do it twice a year or so
I recently assembled my first custom Liquid Loop and boy is it pretty, yeah. Is it cool, yeah. But is it a pain in the ass o maintain? Hell yeah.
Even tho i added drain ports and designed it to be easy to clean, its so much pain to keep it running that, i'm not even 6 months in it and i'm already looking for reasons to go back to a more lazy solution.
Posted on Reply
#38
thesmokingman
KarymidoN
I recently assembled my first custom Liquid Loop and boy is it pretty, yeah. Is it cool, yeah. But is it a pain in the ass o maintain? Hell yeah.
Even tho i added drain ports and designed it to be easy to clean, its so much pain to keep it running that, i'm not even 6 months in it and i'm already looking for reasons to go back to a more lazy solution.
Dude, drain ports are a waste of time. Get QDC's, then you can drain from the QDC. Dedicated drain ports are circa 2010.
Posted on Reply
#39
Mats
Vya Domus
You ask people around here and they'll tell you X/Y/Z company is dead because their top of the line product is 1% slower.
Indeed. So much drama and whining going on. I'd like to see a TPU telenovela based on some forum posts. (..and yeah, some of my own posts would probably be included lol)
Posted on Reply
#40
phanbuey
I just want to see the 9900ks drop in price so that i can lazy swap.
Posted on Reply
#42
phanbuey
Mats
Not very likely, since Comet is on a different socket. Remember what heppened to 8700K when 9900K came?

Nothing.
geizhals.eu/intel-core-i7-8700k-bx80684i78700k-a1685281.html?hloc=at&hloc=de&hloc=eu&hloc=pl&hloc=uk


not on the retail sites, but I got my 8700 on ebay for like $280 when that happened, and the z370 mobo for basically free from a friend upgrading to z390... so Im hoping the second hand market is flooded by 9900k peeps ditching to AMD/new platform. A $320 9900K would hold me over until DDR5 nicely i think.
Posted on Reply
#43
Mats
Could be wrong tho, I forgot about the Intel CPU shortage.

Yaeh the 9900K got a lot of flak but it's fast and not 10900K hot. :)
Posted on Reply
#44
thesmokingman
phanbuey
I just want to see the 9900ks drop in price so that i can lazy swap.
It's probably a good time to try Zen 3. :roll:
Posted on Reply
#46
dj-electric
ITT: people who assume how hot the 10900K actually is to handle.
Posted on Reply
#47
AnarchoPrimitiv
The 3900x is going for about $420 right now while the MSRP retail price for the 10900k is about $520 (only the tray price is $488 when 1000 units are purchased)... so is it really that impressive for the 10900k to come close to (but still not soundly defeating) thr 3900x while costing approximately 25% more and using 20+% more power?
Posted on Reply
#48
ppn
try 10700K, at 409,99 price is a steal.
Zen3 will be losing in the future, compared to 5 and 3nm with triple transistor densities, it is always useless to argue power consumption and performance,. it is going to lose sooner than you think.
Posted on Reply
#49
phanbuey
ppn
try 10700K, at 409,99 price is a steal.
Dont forget the $100 motherboard.
AnarchoPrimitiv
The 3900x is going for about $420 right now while the MSRP retail price for the 10900k is about $520 (only the tray price is $488 when 1000 units are purchased)... so is it really that impressive for the 10900k to come close to (but still not soundly defeating) thr 3900x while costing approximately 25% more and using 20+% more power?
And... the crazy thing is that it's the 3900x - the 4900x is around the corner so if the 10900k is already just barely competing with the 3900x it will get destroyed lol.
Posted on Reply
#50
Vario
Mats
Could be wrong tho, I forgot about the Intel CPU shortage.

Yaeh the 9900K got a lot of flak but it's fast and not 10900K hot. :)
Its still pretty hot. To run it on an aircooler, you have to underclock and undervolt it.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment