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

#51
Mats
phanbuey
A $320 9900K would hold me over until DDR5 nicely i think.
Just because it's a decent second hand CPU it doesn't mean it's worth it.
I mean, you already have an 8700K. Dunno what you're expecting from such an upgrade. Maybe wait for the post-Skylake-CPU's to get some real improvements with less power draw.
If you had a 4 core I wouldn't say anything.
Vario
To run it on an aircooler, you have to underclock and undervolt it.
Even besides stress testing? I've never used one lol.
Posted on Reply
#52
Vario
Mats
Just because it's a decent second hand CPU it doesn't mean it's worth it.
I mean, you already have an 8700K. Dunno what you're expecting from such an upgrade. Maybe wait for the post-Skylake-CPU's to get some real improvements with less power draw.
If you had a 4 core I wouldn't say anything.


Even besides stress testing? I've never used one lol.
Yes, in my experience the 9900K gets really hot at stock parameters on a large aircooler (PHTC14PE). Depends on your workload. If all you do is look at firefox, its probably going to run fine. If you do anything intensive with it and are using aircooler and a normal PC case with normal fans, you will want to underclock and undervolt it, at the very least make sure that your motherboard's long and short power limit are set properly, since the ASRock Z390 Taichi didn't seem to set these limits by default.

@phanbuey I'd keep the 8700K, 9900K isn't much of an upgrade unless you are into video compiling.
Posted on Reply
#53
noel_fs
This is mediocre and embarrassing. If they atleast had the decency to support a single platform for 4 years maybe this would be worth it with previous socket. But of course new socket so add easily 150$ for a 10900k build. At that point i would objectively wait for next zen generation.
Posted on Reply
#54
AnarchoPrimitiv
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.
Why is Zen3 losing in the future when we already know that OEMs are reporting 20%+ IPC improvements, that moving to 7nm EUV will gain 200-300Mhz in the clocks (possibly allowing Zen3's boost frequency to hit 5.0Ghz and basically taking away Intel's last, albeit pointless, source of pride), and that the amount of cores per CCX is going to be doubled. We know from the reviews of the 3100 vs 3300x that the two vs one CCX topology respectively equated to an approximate 12% overall performance increase. With Zen 3 doubling the cores per CCX, there's every reason to believe that this performance boost will help Zen3 in ADDITION to the 20+% IPC increase.

So with the 20% IPC increase, the 200-300Mhz boost in clocks, and the doubling of cores per CCX, Zen3 could very well result in core for core performance gains vs Zen2 in the area of 30+%! When it comes to rocket lake, we know there will be new core architecture, but the same old 14nm process. I seriously doubt this will result in better performance gains than Zen3. It was just leaked that OEMs testing early samples of Zen3 believe that not only will Zen3 maintain multicore application dominance, but that Zen3 might take the gaming performance crown as well..... Knowing all of that, I don't see how it's possible for you to believe Zen3 will be defeated by whatever intel squirts out
Posted on Reply
#55
IceShroom
Extra electric bill from those power consumption???
Or it is only matter when AMD's GPU/CPU cause it.
Posted on Reply
#56
Mats
Vario
Yes, in my experience the 9900K gets really hot at stock parameters on a large aircooler (PHTC14PE).
The TPU review didn't give me that impression but I'll take your word for it.
Posted on Reply
#57
ERazer
dj-electric
ITT: people who assume how hot the 10900K actually is to handle.
14nm is 14nm, then add 2 more core with higher boost, i pretty sure everyone can agree the lower your temp the better boost/sustain boost.

it doesn't take a rocket scientist to at least recognize this cpu gonna run hotter that 9900ks
Posted on Reply
#58
phanbuey
This is the true successor the original Pentium 4 D :D
Posted on Reply
#59
Lokran88
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.
Sorry if that's offtopic but besides having to drain it once a year or even less often I am not having any work with it at all. Just runs and runs. But I am using soft tubing and clear cooling liquid.

Anyway, I did order a 10900k but still not sure if I might cancel it and wait rather for Zen 3.
Posted on Reply
#60
thesmokingman
phanbuey
This is the true successor the original Pentium 4 D :D
It is starting to look like those Netburst days, do less with a lot more!
Posted on Reply
#61
Mats
Lokran88
Anyway, I did order a 10900k but still not sure if I might cancel it and wait rather for Zen 3.
What do you have right now? Don't you want to wait for some reviews?
Posted on Reply
#62
Bee9
phanbuey
.
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.
beating a dead horse is still Beating...
Damn Intel needs a die shrink right now. I can’t wait for new Zen to come out and see intel drop their price to compete.
Posted on Reply
#63
Vario
Mats
The TPU review didn't give me that impression but I'll take your word for it.
To simulate a worst case scenario, when I built that machine, I turned on Prime 95 with entirely stock out of the box settings, I hit 110C.
Posted on Reply
#64
theoneandonlymrk
john_
I think you are wrong here. There are plenty who will buy the best CPU and then try to cut costs from other parts (mobo, PSU, etc....).

Also let's be a little logical here and don't expect the other person to explain the obvious. When I am saying about average consumer, I am not talking about the whole market, from Celerons to Threadrippers, I am talking about those who will buy that CPU. Maybe I should say "the average buyer of that CPU", but even then you could argue that the average buyer of that CPU has a masters degree in CPU cooling, overclocking, memory optimizations....
Your contradictory.

He means the actual average user , so he is right.

Your , average buyer of this chip knows what's what point, might be right.

But the Average user isn't him or her.

The average user buys a little below what they actually need typically and the mainstream doesn't start at i5 for no reason, this is a i9! It's too expensive for 90%+ out there.
Posted on Reply
#66
Chrispy_
Mats
Not very likely, since Comet is on a different socket. Remember what happened to 8700K prices when 9900K came?

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


Exactly. The most powerful CPU you can fit in an older socket always goes up in price.

I sold my 4790 (Wasn't even a K-model) for more than I bought it for new, because to someone with an S1150 i3 machine they get a huge upgrade without having to spend even more on a new motherboard and different RAM as well. That convenience massively increases the resale value of any high-end processor on a retired socket type.
Posted on Reply
#67
Tomgang
How cute, I9 10900K can almost beat zen 2 while warming up your house and set your power meter on overwork. No thanks, while It reaches impressive coreclock, it is still based on way to old tech (14nm), power hungry and running hot as he'll.

I think I will wait for zen 3 and see what it can do. I've been on X58 for 11 years now, so I can properly manage to wait a few more months before an upgrade and see what will come.
Posted on Reply
#68
Chrispy_
How many of Intel's huge list of security vulnerabilities have been hardware-patched in Comet Lake?

I get the impression that vulnerabilities in the recycled Skylake architecture are being discovered at twice or even three times the rate that Intel can patch them in software, let alone hardware mitigations that are always at least 18 months behind the curve just because of the lenghty process between tapeout and a shipped product.
Posted on Reply
#69
B-Real
3900X: $410 with less power consumption
10900K: $488

That's a massive no. And Zen 3 is some months away, which will likely see another 15% IPC boost.
Posted on Reply
#70
Mats
Tomgang
I've been on X58 for 11 years now, so I can properly manage to wait a few more months before an upgrade and see what will come.
Yeah, no matter if you go Intel or AMD, Comet Lake is not a worthy upgrade.
Posted on Reply
#71
Tomgang
Mats
Yeah, no matter if you go Intel or AMD, Comet Lake is not a worthy upgrade.
Intel has not been a worthy upgrade for a long time now. They been on 14 NM for 5-6 years and that is way to long. You can clearly see what that means. AMD now has the over all better choises and the fastest as well (Intel can't do much to threadripper). While Intel win on games and coreclock respectively, they lose in technology, power consumption, heat and multicore performance.

I will not pay for old reused tech from Intel. I will either upgrade to zen 3 or wait for Intel 10 nm... Maybe.
Posted on Reply
#72
ARF
B-Real
3900X: $410 with less power consumption
10900K: $488

That's a massive no. And Zen 3 is some months away, which will likely see another 15% IPC boost.
Maybe even more :eek:


[MEDIA=twitter]1260944035444920325[/MEDIA]
Posted on Reply
#73
Vario
Chrispy_
Exactly. The most powerful CPU you can fit in an older socket always goes up in price.

I sold my 4790 (Wasn't even a K-model) for more than I bought it for new, because to someone with an S1150 i3 machine they get a huge upgrade without having to spend even more on a new motherboard and different RAM as well. That convenience massively increases the resale value of any high-end processor on a retired socket type.
If you have a long term plan in place, its a decent plan to buy a high end motherboard and high end CPU, and then parting them out several years later when the platform has hit obsolescence. People do pay a lot for the best possible processor on a obsolete socket. There is a bit of a sunken cost fallacy to it: they have a motherboard and ram and do not want to upgrade either of them so they pay a lot for a CPU. Same with the motherboard, they have a decent but older system and the motherboard fails: they already have the CPU and ram and so will pay a lot for a good condition motherboard of the same socket as their dead one just to keep their system alive. Premium obsolete ITX motherboards really go up in value because they are even scarcer.
Posted on Reply
#74
Lokran88
Mats
What do you have right now? Don't you want to wait for some reviews?
Yeah, I am well aware that I got nothing. And I don't think that it is a bad chip. It is just less competitive on this node with an old arch drawing more power than necessary. So I might consider to wait a little more and then decide.
Posted on Reply
#75
Mats
Lokran88
Yeah, I am well aware that I got nothing.
No, I meant, what CPU have you got right now? What are you upgrading from?
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment