Friday, June 5th 2020

Intel Posts 10th Gen Core Power Limit and Tau Values

Intel today updated the public data-sheet of its 10th Gen Core "Comet Lake-S" desktop processor to reveal precise power limit and tau values of each specific SKU. PL 1 or power level 1 is interchangeable with the processor's TDP as a power value. PL 1 is sufficient for a processor to sustain its base frequency (nominal clocks). For example, a processor with 65 W TDP has PL 1 at 65 W. PL 2 is what affords the processor the power to seek out boost frequencies. This value varies with between model to model, with the unlocked K/KF SKUs getting higher PL 2 values than the locked ones. The company also disclosed Tau. This is a timing variable that tells the processor how long (in seconds) can it stay within PL 2, before having to retreat to PL 1.
Source: Intel 10th Gen Core Datasheet
Add your own comment

49 Comments on Intel Posts 10th Gen Core Power Limit and Tau Values

#2
Unregistered
I can't buy an Intel processor anymore. The power bill alone puts me off since my pc is used by multiple people during most of the day.

Add to that a new motherboard, even if I had an Intel motherboard to start with, and the cost of the processor itself and for me it is an AMD clean sweep from budget to high end.
#3
Vayra86
Intel technology 2020: add more useless stats to push cpus even further out of their comfort zone. This is their disclaimer, nothing else. And even then, those power figures are retarded.

65W > 224W. Lol, imagine if you bought that 70W TDP cooler for it. After all, that is not a K- CPU... 28 seconds...
cucker tarlson
not great,not terrible.
Pretty terrible when only your i3s have some semblance of logic to their turbo left, pushing 90W on it vs 65W base. Those are quads. Intel still rocking that 2016 mojo at heart. We gained a few hundred mhz since Sandy Bridge, yay. 8 gens :)
Posted on Reply
#4
cucker tarlson
Vayra86
Intel technology 2020: add more useless stats to push cpus even further out of their comfort zone. This is their disclaimer, nothing else. And even then, those power figures are retarded.

65W > 224W. Lol, imagine if you bought that 70W TDP cooler for it. After all, that is not a K- CPU... 28 seconds...



Pretty terrible when only your i3s have some semblance of logic to their turbo left, pushing 90W on it vs 65W base. Those are quads. Intel still rocking that 2016 mojo at heart. We gained a few hundred mhz since Sandy Bridge, yay. 8 gens :)
10 core on 14nm at +5GHz ? seems standard to me.
Posted on Reply
#5
Vayra86
cucker tarlson
10 core on 14nm at +5GHz ? seems standard to me.
PL2 is effectively saying 'you can't keep me in turbo like you used to'. Its a boundary that is just there because Intel needs to push that turbo into the red - because it NEEDS to top that bench chart. Any sensibility is out the window.
Posted on Reply
#7
Vayra86
cucker tarlson
doesn't manual oc override those anyway ?
If you buy a K CPU. If you don't, joke's on you. Now, take a long look at that 10900 again. 65W. 224W.
Posted on Reply
#8
cucker tarlson
I think xtu can still do that on any cpu.and bios limits too.it is very confusing tho.the hell is going on with that 10700
Posted on Reply
#9
Vya Domus
250W for 10 cores is staggering, AMD can fit 64 cores in that power budget. With lower clocks yes, but still, that's 6.4x more cores.
Posted on Reply
#10
cucker tarlson
Vya Domus
250W for 10 cores is staggering, AMD can fit 64 cores in that power budget. With lower clocks yes, but still, that's 6.4x more cores.
apples to oranges.
yes,zen is mighty more efficient,but still stupid comparison.
compare intel's 56 vs amd's 64,that's more consistent as far as comparisons go.
still beats the crap out of intel,but not 6.5x,nowhere near.225 at 3.4 vs 400 at 3.8. 2x maybe ?

epyc 32c 7542 225w at 3.4G,xeon plat 9222 32c 250w at 3.7G

no one is saying intel is as efficient,but be objective in comparisons.
Posted on Reply
#11
W1zzard
cucker tarlson
doesn't manual oc override those anyway ?
You can even override those on non-K CPUs, on any motherboard/chipset
Posted on Reply
#12
Caring1
Vayra86
PL2 is effectively saying 'you can't keep me in turbo like you used to'. Its a boundary that is just there because Intel needs to push that turbo into the red - because it NEEDS to top that bench chart. Any sensibility is out the window.
Isn't that 225W TVB not Turbo which can be sustained?
Posted on Reply
#13
Vayra86
W1zzard
You can even override those on non-K CPUs, on any motherboard/chipset
That is good, then.
Posted on Reply
#15
Darmok N Jalad
Hugh Mungus
I can't buy an Intel processor anymore. The power bill alone puts me off since my pc is used by multiple people during most of the day.

Add to that a new motherboard, even if I had an Intel motherboard to start with, and the cost of the processor itself and for me it is an AMD clean sweep from budget to high end.
The only way you’d know for sure is to measure your consumption while in use. Desktop tasks are not going to be crazy like this, so you’re only paying the premium under high-demand tasks. To me, the bigger issue is the higher max-TDP just makes everything more expensive—motherboards and coolers have to be beefier to get the advertised performance.
Posted on Reply
#16
1d10t
Now that something to brag about, 10s - 15s longer than AMD :D
Darmok N Jalad
The only way you’d know for sure is to measure your consumption while in use. Desktop tasks are not going to be crazy like this, so you’re only paying the premium under high-demand tasks. To me, the bigger issue is the higher max-TDP just makes everything more expensive—motherboards and coolers have to be beefier to get the advertised performance.
In previous chipset, MCE is enable by default on Z motherboard. Now even with B motherboard, "MCE" thingy like assorted bclk boost also enable by default, kinda bummed unsuspecting user isn't ?
Posted on Reply
#17
HenrySomeone
Hugh Mungus
I can't buy an Intel processor anymore. The power bill alone puts me off since my pc is used by multiple people during most of the day.

Add to that a new motherboard, even if I had an Intel motherboard to start with, and the cost of the processor itself and for me it is an AMD clean sweep from budget to high end.
You do realize that average power consumption (at stock at least) is still lower on Intels when comparing chips with same core/thread counts, right? That's especially true if you use X570 with AMD.
Posted on Reply
#18
cucker tarlson
HenrySomeone
You do realize that average power consumption (at stock at least) is still lower on Intels when comparing chips with same core/thread counts, right? That's especially true if you use X570 with AMD.
what does the chipset have to do with it ?

this is a scenario which most of us will find most useful,a mid range chip in gaming
start at 2:00
about 10-15 degrees cooler and 10w less power

with k-skus you're throwing power efficiency out of the window tho and you'd better be ready to get a good cooler.
Posted on Reply
#19
HenrySomeone
A bit more overall power because the 2080Ti can better stretch its legs with Intel, the cpu alone is actually slightly lower. In games where both cpus will fully utilize the gpu, the overall will be slightly lower as well, hence we get this average:
Posted on Reply
#22
qcmadness
HenrySomeone
You do realize that average power consumption (at stock at least) is still lower on Intels when comparing chips with same core/thread counts, right? That's especially true if you use X570 with AMD.
www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-ryzen-7-3800x#product-specs
Ryzen 7 3800x: 95W TDP, 3.9GHz Base Clock
ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/199325/intel-core-i7-10700kf-processor-16m-cache-up-to-5-10-ghz.html
Core i7 10700KF: 125W TDP, 3.8GHz Base Clock

3800x has a higher IPC, higher base clock, and possibly lower power consumption too.
Posted on Reply
#23
Caring1
cucker tarlson
?
Thought I would show the most recent from both camps, not just from Intel, V's an old chip from AMD. :D
Posted on Reply
#24
cucker tarlson
is xt line out yet ?
qcmadness
www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-ryzen-7-3800x#product-specs
Ryzen 7 3800x: 95W TDP, 3.9GHz Base Clock
ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/199325/intel-core-i7-10700kf-processor-16m-cache-up-to-5-10-ghz.html
Core i7 10700KF: 125W TDP, 3.8GHz Base Clock

3800x has a higher IPC, higher base clock, and possibly lower power consumption too.
ipc is an elusive terms,if you take cinebench only as you method then yes
base clocks don't really matter,neither for intel or amd so dunno why you're bringing them up
peak power consumption is lower on ryzen's 7nm,but per-use power consumption can vary.
I linked this video earilier,start at 2:00
sorry I don't have one with 10700f vs 3800x,not that many out yet.this is as close to getting same core/thread config at similar frequencies as I can find.
Posted on Reply
#25
qcmadness
cucker tarlson
is xt line out yet ?


ipc is an elusive terms,if you take cinebench only as you method then yes
base clocks don't really matter,neither for intel or amd so dunno why you're bringing them up
peak power consumption is lower on ryzen's 7nm,but per-use power consumption can vary.
I linked this video earilier,start at 2:00
sorry I don't have one with 10700f vs 3800x,not that many out yet.this is as close to getting same core/thread config at similar frequencies as I can find.
Your "IPC" means gaming only?

I bring up the base clock because TDP is measured at base clock (according to Intel).
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment