Intel Core i9-10980XE "Cascade Lake-X" Benchmarked

[GlacierNine]

1) The 10980XE does not support any HEVC it doesn't have an IGP and AMD has a few TB3 motherboards. So optane i guess?
2) LOL what? X299 idle is not low by any means. Overclocking I could give you if you want a household heater.
3) Early adoption of AMD 1st gen Ryzen maybe what issues are you talking about now. 3rd Gen Ryzen is has very good motherboards and memory support.
4) Uhm Intel's HEDT uses a different internal memory architecture than desktop Intel chips. This leads to higher latencies and with that a loss is ST performance giving the lead to AMD whoops so much for ST performace. Check the game benchmarks above. And also pay attention to the point that the 10980xe and Ryzen 3900x have similar clock frequencies and AMD won when it came to games every time in the charts picked. Even going to the source site it is hard to find any real win for Intel even when cherry picking your data.
5) See 4.
6) X399 yeah. Although there are quite a few X570 boards if the 3950X is an option in that size category depending on your needs.
7) It's new? And optimizations are coming with every new version of Windows 10. Although this really isn't a thing that should be an issue given that Ryzen is fast enough already.

Not to be too pointed, but I already did a point-by-point breakdown of why this is wrong, including sources linked like this.

 

[ZoneDymo]

I'd honestly take this over AMD's offerings, mainly because:
- HEVC advantage, optane and TB3
- lower idle consumption and better overclocking experience
(unlike the sterile, meaningless and incremental one on AMD's zen cpus)
- none of the countless problems faced by AMD mobos and memory
- super ST performance, being more reflective and reliable in today's usages
- superior gaming experience
- availability of ITX option - Asrock X299-ITX/Server counterpart
- AMD's lack of optimization in windows

So many unmentioned advantages. I say its a good placeholder until the actual zen response (Tiger-Lake/Ice Lake) arrives. Kudos to AMD for catching up to Coffeelake though.

Welcome to TPU my man, hope you did not just make a new account to do some blind fanboying

 

[Octavean]

Not to mention that Thunderbolt 3 is available to everyone anyway, as an optional part of the USB 4 specification, meaning it can be used by anyone who wants to implement it alongside their USB 4 implementation.

Good to know. I wasn’t aware of that until you mentioned it. That is the sort of thing that could boost Thunderbolt to actually being mainstream beyond niche Apple users.

However, I was talking in terms of currently available hardware. USB 4 isn’t something we can take advantage of quite yet.

Thunderbolt support would be an interesting option (better to have it and not need it then to need it and not have it) but 99.9% of users don’t need it. I’ve had Thunderbolt 3 support for quite some time and never had need of it.

 

[ShurikN]

- superior gaming experience

> Loses to 3900X in all 3 gaming tests.

 

[GlacierNine]

Good to know. I wasn’t aware of that until you mentioned it. That is the sort of thing that could boost Thunderbolt to actually being mainstream beyond niche Apple users.

However, I was talking in terms of currently available hardware. USB 4 isn’t something we can take advantage of quite yet.

Thunderbolt support would be an interesting option (better to have it and not need it then to need it and not have it) but 99.9% of users don’t need it. I’ve had Thunderbolt 3 support for quite some time and never had need of it.

Ditto. I did also link the boards you mentioned in my post, just felt it was worth pointing out Intel has officially given up any advantage TB3 might have allowed them, by giving it to everyone.

 

[ShurikN]

Ditto. I did also link the boards you mentioned in my post, just felt it was worth pointing out Intel has officially given up any advantage TB3 might have allowed them, by giving it to everyone.

The standard originally required a license thus adding cost. When Intel realized it's going nowhere fast, they gave up, and made it free.

 

[Kapone33]

Good to know. I wasn’t aware of that until you mentioned it. That is the sort of thing that could boost Thunderbolt to actually being mainstream beyond niche Apple users.

However, I was talking in terms of currently available hardware. USB 4 isn’t something we can take advantage of quite yet.

Thunderbolt support would be an interesting option (better to have it and not need it then to need it and not have it) but 99.9% of users don’t need it. I’ve had Thunderbolt 3 support for quite some time and never had need of it.

I would rather have Optane support those drives have some serious i/O

 

[GlacierNine]

I would rather have Optane support those drives have some serious i/O

https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/store-mi

Behold, the same damn thing, but for AMD.

 

[Kapone33]

https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/store-mi

Behold, the same damn thing, but for AMD.

I have used Store MI. It is honestly meh for me. The maximum size you can add without paying a premium is 256GB and one of the drives has to listed as fast and slow. It really only makes sense if you have an HDD and you would like to turn it into a SSHD with 256GB of flash. Optane is more like a different version of NVME than a software based program. Windows already has Storage spaces that does way more than Store MI anyway.

 

[Caqde]

I would rather have Optane support those drives have some serious i/O

The Optane support reallly isn't about supporting the drives but the "Optane" software. There are multiple products that Intel places their Optane tag on. One of them being the software they use with their Optane drives. If your only concern is using an Optane SSD as a boot drive any AMD system with the proper connection will suffice. The only other Optane tech Intel has exclusive use of is the Optane Memory supported by certain Xeon platforms. Idk if AMD will eventually add support for those in their EPYC line eventually or something similar.

 

[dont whant to set it"']

The elefant in the room just turned the lights on.

 

[HwGeek]

10980xe and 9980xe have same all core boost so they would perform the same in most benchmarks that not using the new features.
so it's going to be even boring benchmarks then 2080Super ;-).

 

[SamuelL]

I'd honestly take this over AMD's offerings, mainly because:
- HEVC advantage, optane and TB3
- lower idle consumption and better overclocking experience
(unlike the sterile, meaningless and incremental one on AMD's zen cpus)
- none of the countless problems faced by AMD mobos and memory
- super ST performance, being more reflective and reliable in today's usages
- superior gaming experience
- availability of ITX option - Asrock X299-ITX/Server counterpart
- AMD's lack of optimization in windows

So many unmentioned advantages. I say its a good placeholder until the actual zen response (Tiger-Lake/Ice Lake) arrives. Kudos to AMD for catching up to Coffeelake though.

I own/have owned both intel and AMD mainstream and HEDT platforms in the last two years. I have to disagree with all but your first point. TB3 was the biggest pain for me, Would’ve been useful several times now on my X399 workstation.

As to everything else, if you’re gaming at 1440p or 4K - you do not notice the difference. If anything, my current X399 build seems to have more consistent FPS (“smoother”) at 4K vs my previous AM4 or Z270 builds. SIngle threaded performance is a terrible metric to build a system around FYI - the tasks and applications that are truly single-threaded are mostly the stuff of benchmarks now. ITX isn’t realistic with X399 due to the size of the socket. Windows optimizations / lack thereof had much to do with NUMA vs UMA and this has been resolved for Zen 2.

Overclocking is where I have to disagree most. Zen overclocking has more to do with building a custom cooling solution, tweaking PBO options / wattage / scalar, and many hours of memory adjustment and testing. To do it well is harder than bumping vcore and cranking the multiplier on a mainstream intel board - this is especially true regarding the memory.

 

[PanicLake]

The only thing I take from those benchmarks is the outstanding value of the 3700x that despite costing (where I live) around ~€350 against the ~€500 for the i7 9900k is neck to neck and in more than one case even better.

 

[thesmokingman]

This is product stack is already dead at release. I don't see much reason to leave your 9900K, let alone a 3900x. You'd be crazy to pay twice the price of a 3900x for this, imo.

 

[jeffj7]

I'd honestly take this over AMD's offerings, mainly because:
- HEVC advantage, optane and TB3
- lower idle consumption and better overclocking experience
(unlike the sterile, meaningless and incremental one on AMD's zen cpus)
- none of the countless problems faced by AMD mobos and memory
- super ST performance, being more reflective and reliable in today's usages
- superior gaming experience
- availability of ITX option - Asrock X299-ITX/Server counterpart
- AMD's lack of optimization in windows

So many unmentioned advantages. I say its a good placeholder until the actual zen response (Tiger-Lake/Ice Lake) arrives. Kudos to AMD for catching up to Coffeelake though.

LOL riding a boat on D-Nile

 

[dirtyferret]

Finally a CPU for reading email, posting on Instagram and can play Crysis!

 

[Nkd]

I am not sure how to think about this. This processor seems DOA. I mean its not great in gaming and doesn't blow past in multicore tests against 12core AMD. Its probably generating too much heat to sustain any higher boost clocks. 3950x is just going to destroy it. Intel couldn't have a node shrink fast enough.

 

[dirtyferret]

What is up with the 8700k beating everything in DoW3 and Metro?

Seriously this is either fake or they gave the chip some secret sauce...it's a good 10% better then anything else in their tests yet no ones else has seen those numbers

 

[MikeZTM]

Higher sustained boost clocks is my guess. Could be either a chip with good boost behaviour, or even that the limitation of threads causes an anomaly where 6/12 forces a workload into an HT thread that would ordinarily be handled on a 7th physical core, limiting the performance of that thread in theory, but in practice keeping that one physical core operating more quickly and therefore at higher boost.

Actually it is much simpler than that: 8700k have less cores resulting in lower ring bus latency than 9900k. In 1080P CPU frame rate test RAM/Cache system latency is critical and this architecture shows it weakness.

BTW I'm using my Optane SSD 900P AIC with a X570. All client Optane devices are standard NVMe SSDs including those H10 hybrids. It's hilarious to think a standard NVMe SSD will not work on AMD platform.

Only server part like Optane DC Persistence Memory are limit to Xeon platform and anyway they are not compatible with desktop or HEDT platform and not even Xeon E or Xeon W.

 

[Rahmat Sofyan]

I'd honestly take this over AMD's offerings, mainly because:
- HEVC advantage, optane and TB3
- lower idle consumption and better overclocking experience
(unlike the sterile, meaningless and incremental one on AMD's zen cpus)
- none of the countless problems faced by AMD mobos and memory
- super ST performance, being more reflective and reliable in today's usages
- superior gaming experience
- availability of ITX option - Asrock X299-ITX/Server counterpart
- AMD's lack of optimization in windows

So many unmentioned advantages. I say its a good placeholder until the actual zen response (Tiger-Lake/Ice Lake) arrives. Kudos to AMD for catching up to Coffeelake though.

wake up mate, we already at the end of 2019 ...

 

[MikeZTM]

I would rather have Optane support those drives have some serious i/O

Sitting with 900P on a X570.
It works day one as those drives are just NVMe SSDs.

 

[Kapone33]

The Optane support reallly isn't about supporting the drives but the "Optane" software. There are multiple products that Intel places their Optane tag on. One of them being the software they use with their Optane drives. If your only concern is using an Optane SSD as a boot drive any AMD system with the proper connection will suffice. The only other Optane tech Intel has exclusive use of is the Optane Memory supported by certain Xeon platforms. Idk if AMD will eventually add support for those in their EPYC line eventually or something similar.

Yeah I know what you mean

Sitting with 900P on a X570.
It works day one as those drives are just NVMe SSDs.

Nice those are a little rich for my blood but are very tempting.

 

[Tomgang]

At first i was like

But then i was like

If these results are true, intel… sorry i mean Shintel is gonna have a hard year a head of them on the desktop marked. Intel HEDT is a dying breed as it is right now.
Well this just confirms for my needs Ryzen 9 3950X is a better choise for me. I want the best possible gaming performance mixed with high core count for multi tasking perpose and other core needy stuff and there it seems so far Ryzen 9 3950X doing a better job based on the 3900X gaming results. AMD wins my money this round.

 

[skizzo]

What is up with the 8700k beating everything in DoW3 and Metro?

8700K is 6 cores / 12 threads

9700K is 8 cores / 8 threads

apparently more threads was more beneficial for such benchmarks

PS....now I see a 9900K is in there too which is 8 cores / 16 threads....OK so 8700K beating 9900K is a bit perplexing. However, not perplexing in my initial response between 8700K and 9700K