Intel Core i7-10700K Features 5.30 GHz Turbo Boost

[ToxicTaZ]

Hmm, I have always though 3800x is that pointless cpu anyway. Buy 3700x for cheaper and OC that. Stock TDPs are meant to be broken.

Haven't really followed cpu market lately(Cpus are quite dull). Will that 10th series be pin compatible with upcoming 10nm processors too(LGA1200 or what was it again), or is there even 10nm cpu on the radar for desktop.

10nm+ is for mobile devices only!

Intel TigerLake 10nm++ mobile CPU should be in devices like the Microsoft Surface Pro 8 around Hollween

Desktop will remain on 14nm++ till Intel new factory Fab42 up and running with full 7nm/5nm ready from the start.

10th generation is on new LGA 1200 socket PCIe 4.0 board but PCIe 4.0 won't be working until 11th gen (Rocket Lake) around this Christmas. So you can say 10th Gen is short lived. And no 10th generation is not backwards compatibility with Intel 300 series boards.....the last best CPU for the Intel 300 series is the I9-9900KS

Intel will remain 14nm++ on LGA 1200 socket PCIe 4.0 Motherboard will have Comet Lake, Rocket Lake, Alder Lake CPUs on it!

Intel Meteor Lake is Intel first 7nm CPUs product line from the new Fab42 factory.

Intel 7nm/5nm will be on LGA 1700 socket PCIe 5.0 Motherboard with DDR5 and USB-4, WiFi-6E etc... At the same time AMD Zen 5 with new AM5 socket to stop backwards compatibility.

For now if you want a 8 cores CPU with higher performance than 3800X at a lower 9700K price point then get the 10700K.... Comes with 5.3GHz Turbo lol

 

[Super XP]

The 10700K using less power and runs cooler than the 9900KS and "both" 9900KS and 10700K don't have vulnerabilities! That was all fixed with stepping 13 if you did your research. And the 10700K is above the 3800X in performance everything and with a lower price point! (Best 8 cores vs best 8 cores) "we are not talking expensive multicore 3900X/3950X here...

Why would you pay more for less performance buying a 3800X... No point.... If you want the best 8 cores CPU that's cheaper than your 3800X then your 10700K is best smart value!

The Core i9 10900K hits up to 300W under load. And is still based on the 14nm+++ process, which explains the wattage increase. Just going by that
The 10700K is an unreleased product at the moment, and it should be faster than the R7 3800X Ryzen (July 7, 2019) as its a much newer processor.
And thanks for letting me know about the 10th Gen with the stepping 13 that they fixed the security vulnerabilities, I didn't know that.

 

[HenrySomeone]

The 10700K using less power and runs cooler than the 9900KS and "both" 9900KS and 10700K don't have vulnerabilities! That was all fixed with stepping 13 if you did your research. And the 10700K is above the 3800X in performance everything and with a lower price point! (Best 8 cores vs best 8 cores) "we are not talking expensive multicore 3900X/3950X here...

Why would you pay more for less performance buying a 3800X... No point.... If you want the best 8 cores CPU that's cheaper than your 3800X then your 10700K is best smart value!

Precisely - AMD got a bit of a headstart as far as price/performance 8/16 cpus go, but that time is ending and as far as pure performance goes, there was never any doubt, who's the (desktop) king (they do have a relatively good product with their 3960 & 3970x though for those who really need that many cores (3990x on the other hand is once again just a gimmick, just like the 2990x))

 

[ToxicTaZ]

Precisely - AMD got a bit of a headstart as far as price/performance 8/16 cpus go, but that time is ending and as far as pure performance goes, there was never any doubt, who's the (desktop) king (they do have a relatively good product with their 3960 & 3970x though for those who really need that many cores (3990x on the other hand is once again just a gimmick, just like the 2990x))

This is a dual channel CPU debates why would you start talking about expensive Quad channels TreadRippers? I think you're very confused of product lines??? Or did you mean the expensive dual channel 3900X/3950X?

When we are talking about dual channel 8 cores vs 8 cores CPUs....basically AMD only has the 3800X, 3700X, 2700K-(50th Anniversary Edition), 2700K vs Intel 10700K, 9900KS, 9900K, 9700K CPUs

The 10700K and 3800X as you would say have similar performance while the 10700K being slightly above AMD best Dual channel 8 cores CPU the 3800X and the 10700K will be cheaper than the 3800X as well.

If you want more performance with less price get the 10700K and if you don't mind paying more and less performance and saving a little bit on your power bill get the 3800X.

10700K looks to be the true value 8 cores here.

Until the AMD 4000 series of course!

 

[HenrySomeone]

Agreed, that's why I said Intel is still the undisputed desktop king; AMD has some useful options in the HEDT, but they still lack the single core punch and low latency to rival team blue where it matters most. And 4000 series will only narrow the gap, it's not gonna fully close it.

 

[Super XP]

Precisely - AMD got a bit of a headstart as far as price/performance 8/16 cpus go, but that time is ending and as far as pure performance goes, there was never any doubt, who's the (desktop) king (they do have a relatively good product with their 3960 & 3970x though for those who really need that many cores (3990x on the other hand is once again just a gimmick, just like the 2990x))

That 3990X Threadripper 64-Core / 128-Thread monster is a choice for those that require that horse power of a processor.

It has nothing to do with AMDs Mainstream/High end lineups. Threadripper is for Enthusiast and heavy power users. And it's a great lineup as many people are buying it for massive multi threading starved programs. You don't buy Threadripper for PC Gaming but it can still do that too. Just not for the price tag as a lone gaming PC.

Agreed, that's why I said Intel is still the undisputed desktop king; AMD has some useful options in the HEDT, but they still lack the single core punch and low latency to rival team blue where it matters most. And 4000 series will only narrow the gap, it's not gonna fully close it.

Based on reliable sources, for PC Gaming, ZEN3 is said to be "On Average" 17% IPC increase over ZEN2 clock 4 clock. That's an average, as some games will see up to 30-50% and others won't see more than 1%. It's game specific according to what I've read. And it's Floating Point increase is 50%+ over ZEN2.

We need fair competition from both comapanies. Nobody wants to see either go bust or we would have Industry Technology Stagnation. Just look what happened when AMDs Bulldozer did not live up to its hype. We have at least 5 full years of CPU stagnation. Now look at the industry with ZEN, ZEN+ (ZEN+ was suppose to have been original ZEN) and ZEN2, it's very competitive and wins hands down in multi threading. This ZEN push woke up the beast inside Intel so bring on the competition so consumers can Benefit with fair pricing and solid performance gains.

 

[Nkd]

You can bolstering all you want but if your 105w CPU can't outperforming 125w CPUs at every day tasks and of course PC Gaming.... The jokes on AMD

Already stock 9900KS 127w is already faster than stock 3800X 105w

I suspect stk 10700K 125w is around stk 9900KS 127w performance for less money.

Let's see if the 10700K is cheaper than the 3800X is the question?

I'm not sure if the 10700K will take away the top 8 cores performance crown away from the 9900KS

you missed my point. 9900KS is not 127w running at its all core boost. Its never running at base clock in gaming. I can promise you, I have had 9900k and when its running at all core boost which is almost always under gaming its burning close to 200w. So that is my point, so no 9900k is not beating the 3800x at 105w. Intel CPUs use a lot more power at their all core boost speed which they basically run all the time under load.

 

[TranceHead]

I agree to a certain extent. It took AMD years to finally come out with something very competitive. But all I keep reading is massive negativity from those that refuse to accept ZEN as a viable CPU option. Technologically ZEN2 is well ahead of Intel in architecture, manufacturing process, price and performance. Anyhow I've debated this point to kingdom come. Lol just give AMD credit for coming out with ZEN and disrupting the entire CPU market, the same market that stagnated since 2011.

Here. Basing that on a major German retailer.

AMD dominates Intel with 82% market share with major German retailer

Germany's largest retailer sees AMD domination with 82% market share, Intel losing big time.

www.tweaktown.com

Intel has 82% of the desktop market share currently, AMD has 18%

Intel 82% market share

 

[Super XP]

Intel has 82% of the desktop market share currently, AMD has 18%

Intel 82% market share

As of December 2019 AMDs CPU market share stood at 33%. By the end of 2020 and the introduction of ZEN3 I can see that market share hit 40% or more.

Q3 2019 numbers, AMD’s share stands at 32%

Intel controls most of the CPU market with its share growing from 77% in 2014 to 82% in 2016, and back at 77% in 2018.

• AMD’s share fell from 23% in 2014 to 18% in 2016, but it has been on a rise since then to 23% in 2018.
  [*]In fact, if we look at Q3 2019 numbers, AMD’s share stands at 32%.
  [*]This can be attributed to the success of its Ryzen processors, which offer comparable performance for a cheaper price when compared to Intel.

 

[TranceHead]

As of December 2019 AMDs CPU market share stood at 33%. By the end of 2020 and the introduction of ZEN3 I can see that market share hit 40% or more.

Q3 2019 numbers, AMD’s share stands at 32%

"Desktop market share"
That was what we were talking about, wasn't it?

 

[Super XP]

"Desktop market share"
That was what we were talking about, wasn't it?

Was talking about major retailers selling over 85% more Ryzen CPUs. In Germany and most of Asian.

 

[TranceHead]

Was talking about major retailers selling over 85% more Ryzen CPUs. In Germany and most of Asian.

Then you need to choose your words more carefully.
Because worldwide, Intel holds the desktop market share 82% to AMDs 18%

 

[WeeRab]

What kinda drug fantasy are you on? If you like it or not stock 9900KS still holding the top record of fastest Gaming CPU! No competition from AMD best 8 cores CPU 3800X or from any R9 series for that matter.....

LOL you talk about 3950X as it is extremely expensive especially to AMD people that talk all day long about price price price I can't afford anything price price and can't afford anything. You talking about 3990X is even more ridiculous expensive trying to quote price price price all day!

Nothing is touching my 9900KS @5.2GHZ (30%OC) Cooled by EK in gaming thus is what I do 90% of the time on my custom Gaming RIG.

You say get a better GPU and RAM?? Are you on drugs? I'm running RTX 2080 NVlink setup with XMP 4133MHz CL17-17-17-37 Ultra low latency RAM! Well above Any AMD GPUs and dual channel platform in gaming!

Sorry AMD doesn't have a better 8 cores than the 3800X for now. Maybe AMD 4000 series will have a better 8 cores CPU then the 10700K?

10700K will out perform the 3800X for the 9700K price.

I would love to see the 3800X run 5GHz clock speeds just Emagine 3800X with the power and throttling heat nightmare if AMD had 5GHz tech lol....but unfortunately bound to the max 4.3GHz OC if your very lucky.



Intel has Rocket Lake to deal with Zen 3 and yes Rocket Lake is 125w TDP what's your point? TDP means nothing....just like your Tread Rippers now pushing almost 300w TDP going off your statement.

Yeah your right I wouldn't be surprised if Intel came out with the 10900KS lol.... Would be amazing

Intel had no competition from AMD from the 2700K to 10700K in the PC Gaming department going on a decade now.

All that expense. All that heat. All that noise. Just to play games at 1080p. LOL.

 

[Braggingrights]

All that expense. All that heat. All that noise. Just to play games at 1080p. LOL.

Expense is for office productivity, this is enthusiast and damn the cost
Heat? Are we talking about Ryzen's now, because in every test they burn like the sun compared to the Intel counterpart
1080p: E-Sports dude, the whole world is chasing frames and latency and your boys just don't deliver

 

[ToxicTaZ]

All that expense. All that heat. All that noise. Just to play games at 1080p. LOL.

Unfortunately I have no idea what issues you're talking about? I'm a proud owner 9900KS @5.2GHz and it's all around fantastic OCing CPU!

Heat?.....my RIG build is custom Cooled By EK!....my RIG cooling system can handle 420w. (idle 25c)(load 55c)

Noise?.....my RIG build is 30db only!

Playing games 1080p?.... How do you know what resolutions I play games at?....I'm using "1600p" by the way LG UltraGear 38GL950G-B monitor (3840x1600) and Nvidia RTX 2080 NVlink setup to drive it!

Why do you make stupid accusations about me? When you know absolutely nothing about PC Gaming set-ups!

9900KS is a amazing CPU and will keep me going till my next RIG build (Intel 13th generation i9) "Meteor Lake" on Intel 700 series H6 LGA 1700 socket PCIe 5.0 with DDR5 and USB-4 and all the other goodies!

And yes! Intel Meteor Lake is 7nm+

Looking forward for ASUS ROG Maximus XV Formula Motherboard in my future.

I'm skipping 10nm and H5 LGA 1200 socket PCIe 4.0 board Fiasco altogether.

 

[Vayra86]

Expense is for office productivity, this is enthusiast and damn the cost
Heat? Are we talking about Ryzen's now, because in every test they burn like the sun compared to the Intel counterpart
1080p: E-Sports dude, the whole world is chasing frames and latency and your boys just don't deliver

8th gen Coffee Lake wants its statements back. You're a little bit behind it seems, right now Ryzen delivers perfectly fine FPS across the whole spectrum. Well, maybe except for that tiny, and completely unimportant niche that chases 240fps/240hz and will probably brag about 480fps CS GO next year while they're sniped by cheaters. If Intel caters to that, they can have it

Ryzen now has lower temps, lower power, higher IPC, and Intel actually just needs its high turbo to catch up and keep pace. Another big plus is that Ryzen has higher base clocks across the board, which make it perform noticeably better in heat- and form factor restricted situations. ie Laptops. Intel already lost that crown too.

Oh, did I mention its cheaper and usually has better SMT as well?

 

[Braggingrights]

8th gen Coffee Lake wants its statements back. You're a little bit behind it seems, right now Ryzen delivers perfectly fine FPS across the whole spectrum. Well, maybe except for that tiny, and completely unimportant niche that chases 240fps/240hz and will probably brag about 480fps CS GO next year while they're sniped by cheaters. If Intel caters to that, they can have it

Ryzen now has lower temps, lower power, higher IPC, and Intel actually just needs its high turbo to catch up and keep pace. Another big plus is that Ryzen has higher base clocks across the board, which make it perform noticeably better in heat- and form factor restricted situations. ie Laptops. Intel already lost that crown too.

Oh, did I mention its cheaper and usually has better SMT as well?

Ahh yes the unimportant niche that keeps you fanboyz up so late at night, too bad slowpoke... you better get back to that hot unstable mess that hates nvidia cards so you can lose COD again

Uh oh, you didn't even get on the podium son

CPU UserBenchmarks - 1442 Processors Compared

 

[Vayra86]

Ahh yes the unimportant niche that keeps you fanboyz up so late at night, too bad slowpoke... you better get back to that hot unstable mess that hates nvidia cards so you can lose COD again

Uh oh, you didn't even get on the podium son

CPU UserBenchmarks - 1442 Processors Compared

Maybe you oughta click my system specs before you troll on.

With your attitude you are clearly on the wrong forum, WCCFTech & Reddit is that way.

 

[Braggingrights]

Maybe you oughta click my system specs before you troll on.

With your attitude you are clearly on the wrong forum, WCCFTech & Reddit is that way.

Hit a nerve did I speccy

 

[Super XP]

This chip won't be DOA and not needed on the market only if it costs around $250-$300.

That was because the Athlons had tremendously higher IPC, while the pentium was designed for high clocks with very long execution pipeline.

Athlon 64's IMC helped with those much higher IPCs along with its unique Hyper Transport Technology, AMD helped Co-Design/Make.
Back in the day, Intel kept boosting the clock speeds, because it thought that is what made the processors sell so well. From my memory of course lol

 

[Braggingrights]

Cheap as chips, pardon the pun

Intel 10th Gen Comet Lake-S Desktop CPU Final Specifications And Prices Leak Out - Core i9-10900K 10 Core For $488 US, Core i7-10700K 8 Core For $374 US, Core i5 6 Core Starting at $150 US

The final specifications & prices of Intel's upcoming 10th Generation Comet Lake-S Desktop Core i9, i7, i5 & i3 CPU have leaked out

wccftech.com

 

[EarthDog]

Cheap as chips, pardon the pun

Intel 10th Gen Comet Lake-S Desktop CPU Final Specifications And Prices Leak Out - Core i9-10900K 10 Core For $488 US, Core i7-10700K 8 Core For $374 US, Core i5 6 Core Starting at $150 US

The final specifications & prices of Intel's upcoming 10th Generation Comet Lake-S Desktop Core i9, i7, i5 & i3 CPU have leaked out

wccftech.com

I wouldn't call that cheap unless you are in a vacuum. If we look around, your choices are a 3800x for $399 (on sale now for $350 - Intel should should handily beat this in single and multi thread), and the 3900x at $489.99. Here, single thread will go to Intel (thanks clock speed), but multi-threaded AMD would get the nod.

It depends.

 

[Braggingrights]

I wouldn't call that cheap unless you are in a vacuum. If we look around, your choices are a 3800x for $399 (on sale now for $350 - Intel should should handily beat this in single and multi thread), and the 3900x at $489.99. Here, single thread will go to Intel (thanks clock speed), but multi-threaded AMD would get the nod.

It depends.

It's cheap as in my situation, stability and silence is all I care about so I wouldn't even look at red... and I don't do windows or vacuuming, that's just me man

 

[EarthDog]

It's cheap as in my situation, stability and silence is all I care about so I wouldn't even look at red... and I don't do windows or vacuuming, that's just me man

Ok...

Don't mind the fact that you can run the same cooler on a 3900x that you would on this CPU and it would output less heat (and therefore be able to run the same speed or less = quiet)...

You're...uhh, pretty bawls deep in Intel aren't you, bud...

 

[Braggingrights]

Ok...

Don't mind the fact that you can run the same cooler on a 3900x that you would on this CPU and it would output less heat (and therefore be able to run the same speed or less = quiet)...

You're...uhh, pretty bawls deep in Intel aren't you, bud...

Nup, fave chip all time was an AMD... but you're the one that responded to my post to push your agenda.

Infantile fandom for either company really wouldn't make sense unless you are a very heavy investor in one of them... bud