• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Intel 10th Generation Core Desktop Processors Start Selling

Tatty_Two

Gone Fishing
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
25,793 (3.88/day)
Location
Worcestershire, UK
Processor Rocket Lake Core i5 11600K @ 5 Ghz with PL tweaks
Motherboard MSI MAG Z490 TOMAHAWK
Cooling Thermalright Peerless Assassin 120SE + 4 Phanteks 140mm case fans
Memory 32GB (4 x 8GB SR) Patriot Viper Steel 4133Mhz DDR4 @ 3600Mhz CL14@1.45v Gear 1
Video Card(s) Asus Dual RTX 4070 OC
Storage WD Blue SN550 1TB M.2 NVME//Crucial MX500 500GB SSD (OS)
Display(s) AOC Q2781PQ 27 inch Ultra Slim 2560 x 1440 IPS
Case Phanteks Enthoo Pro M Windowed - Gunmetal
Audio Device(s) Onboard Realtek ALC1200/SPDIF to Sony AVR @ 5.1
Power Supply Seasonic CORE GM650w Gold Semi modular
Mouse Coolermaster Storm Octane wired
Keyboard Element Gaming Carbon Mk2 Tournament Mech
Software Win 10 Home x64
Ohhhhhh.... Triggered!

I've seen some reviewers say that the heat wasn't an issue and some say it needs a very good cooler to keep it under control.
Hope TPU has a review soon.
I have seen those comments consistently for the 10 core part, one review said that their test bench Corsair H115 Pro 280 AIO could not keep it cool, a little less so for the 8 core but the i5 runs pretty cool from everything I have seen so far.
 

SL2

Joined
Jan 27, 2006
Messages
1,767 (0.27/day)
I've seen some reviewers say that the heat wasn't an issue and some say it needs a very good cooler to keep it under control.
Wasn't it the same with the 9900K reviews? Does anyone remember?
 
Joined
Jun 19, 2018
Messages
848 (0.40/day)
System Name Batman's CaseLabs Mercury S8 Work Computer
Processor 8086K 5.3Ghz binned delidded by Siliconlottery.com 5.5Ghz 6c12t 5.6Ghz 6c6t on ambient air
Motherboard EVGA Z390 DARK
Cooling Noctua C14S for all overclocking so far Noctua Industrial PWM fan 2000rpm rated (700rpm inaudible)
Memory Gskill Trident Z Royal Silver F4-4600C18D-16GTRS running at 4500Mhz 17-17-17-37 (new mem OC) : )
Video Card(s) AMD WX 4100 Workstation Card (AMD W5400 7nm workstation card coming soon)
Storage Intel Optane 900P 280GB PCIe card as Primary OS drive / (4) Samsung 860Pro 256GB SATA internal
Display(s) Planar 27in 2560x1440 Glossy LG panel with glass bonded to panel for increased clarity
Case CaseLabs Mercury S8 open bench chassis two-tone black front cover with gunmetal frame
Audio Device(s) Creative $25 2.1 speakers lol
Power Supply Seasonic Prime Titanium 700watt fanless
Mouse Logitech MX Master 3 graphite / Glorious Model D matte black / Razer Invicta mousing mat gunmetal
Keyboard HHKB Hybrid Type-S black printed keycaps
Software Work Apps text and statistical
Benchmark Scores Single Thread scores at 5.6Ghz: Cinebench R15 ST - 249 CPU-Z ST - 676 PassMark CPU ST - 3389
Kind of impressed by the thermals. Here they are with a U14S (I'm assuming open bench): computerbase via google translate

Yep, me too. Impressed and surprised. But then 10900K die thickness 0.5mm vs 9900K die thickness 0.8mm. :)

Still, the platform doesn't offer enough to upgrade from 8th gen, at least not for me. Oh well. :ohwell:

Thinking Meteor Lake 2022 7nm and 2nd gen ddr5 might be the next platform I can run at high clocks CPU and mem - cooling with simple Noctua Air.
 

gravel

New Member
Joined
May 6, 2020
Messages
18 (0.01/day)
Hello from France

I bought my 3900x: 400 euro
MSI mortar max: 86 euro
g skill 3200 16 GB: 85 euro

My b450 max & compactible ryzen 4000

---->> The Core i9-10900K is expensive :kookoo:
 
Joined
Jun 19, 2018
Messages
848 (0.40/day)
System Name Batman's CaseLabs Mercury S8 Work Computer
Processor 8086K 5.3Ghz binned delidded by Siliconlottery.com 5.5Ghz 6c12t 5.6Ghz 6c6t on ambient air
Motherboard EVGA Z390 DARK
Cooling Noctua C14S for all overclocking so far Noctua Industrial PWM fan 2000rpm rated (700rpm inaudible)
Memory Gskill Trident Z Royal Silver F4-4600C18D-16GTRS running at 4500Mhz 17-17-17-37 (new mem OC) : )
Video Card(s) AMD WX 4100 Workstation Card (AMD W5400 7nm workstation card coming soon)
Storage Intel Optane 900P 280GB PCIe card as Primary OS drive / (4) Samsung 860Pro 256GB SATA internal
Display(s) Planar 27in 2560x1440 Glossy LG panel with glass bonded to panel for increased clarity
Case CaseLabs Mercury S8 open bench chassis two-tone black front cover with gunmetal frame
Audio Device(s) Creative $25 2.1 speakers lol
Power Supply Seasonic Prime Titanium 700watt fanless
Mouse Logitech MX Master 3 graphite / Glorious Model D matte black / Razer Invicta mousing mat gunmetal
Keyboard HHKB Hybrid Type-S black printed keycaps
Software Work Apps text and statistical
Benchmark Scores Single Thread scores at 5.6Ghz: Cinebench R15 ST - 249 CPU-Z ST - 676 PassMark CPU ST - 3389
Hello from France

I bought my 3900x: 400 euro
MSI mortar max: 86 euro
g skill 3200 16 GB: 85 euro

My b450 max & compactible ryzen 4000

---->> The Core i9-10900K is expensive :kookoo:

Sup gravel? How's things going in France man? :)
 
Joined
May 1, 2020
Messages
107 (0.07/day)
I'm truly disappointed with the 10900K pricing. I should be $80 cheaper.
 
Low quality post by Lionheart
Joined
Apr 30, 2008
Messages
4,875 (0.84/day)
Location
Multidimensional
System Name Boomer Master Race
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D 4.2Ghz - 5Ghz CPU
Motherboard MSI B650I Edge Wifi ITX Motherboard
Cooling CM 280mm AIO + 2x 120mm Slim fans
Memory G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo 32GB 6000MHz
Video Card(s) Galax RTX 4060 8GB (Temporary Until Next Gen)
Storage Kingston KC3000 M.2 1TB + 2TB HDD
Display(s) Asus TUF 24Inch 165Hz || AOC 24Inch 180Hz
Case Cooler Master NR200P Max TG ITX Case
Audio Device(s) Built In Realtek Digital Audio HD
Power Supply CoolerMaster V850 SFX Gold 850W PSU
Mouse Logitech G203 Lightsync
Keyboard Atrix RGB Slim Keyboard
VR HMD ( ◔ ʖ̯ ◔ )
Software Windows 10 Home 64bit
Benchmark Scores Don't do them anymore.
Get this moron off this site, seriously.
 
Low quality post by Bee9
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
Messages
430 (0.25/day)
System Name R2V2 *In Progress
Processor Ryzen 7 2700
Motherboard Asrock X570 Taichi
Cooling W2A... water to air
Memory G.Skill Trident Z3466 B-die
Video Card(s) Radeon VII repaired and resurrected
Storage Adata and Samsung NVME
Display(s) Samsung LCD
Case Some ThermalTake
Audio Device(s) Asus Strix RAID DLX upgraded op amps
Power Supply Seasonic Prime something or other
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
The good news out of this is that the 10700K actually launches $100 CAD lower than the 9900K normally lists at currently.
 
Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
1,525 (0.82/day)
System Name Personal Gaming Rig
Processor Ryzen 7800X3D
Motherboard MSI X670E Carbon
Cooling MO-RA 3 420
Memory 32GB 6000MHz
Video Card(s) RTX 4090 ICHILL FROSTBITE ULTRA
Storage 4x 2TB Nvme
Display(s) Samsung G8 OLED
Case Silverstone FT04
Could somebody tell me why mentioning the price of 3900x a.k.a. the biggest competitor of 10900k became "low quality" at #8 ?
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2015
Messages
2,986 (0.96/day)
Location
Argentina
System Name Ciel
Processor AMD Ryzen R5 5600X
Motherboard Asus Tuf Gaming B550 Plus
Cooling ID-Cooling 224-XT Basic
Memory 2x 16GB Kingston Fury 3600MHz@3933MHz
Video Card(s) Gainward Ghost 3060 Ti 8GB + Sapphire Pulse RX 6600 8GB
Storage NVMe Kingston KC3000 2TB + NVMe Toshiba KBG40ZNT256G + HDD WD 4TB
Display(s) Gigabyte G27Q + AOC 19'
Case Cougar MX410 Mesh-G
Audio Device(s) Kingston HyperX Cloud Stinger Core 7.1 Wireless PC
Power Supply Aerocool KCAS-500W
Mouse Logitech G203
Keyboard VSG Alnilam
Software Windows 11 x64
I'm starting to doubt if Intel shouldn't just port Ice Lake to 14nm, and force the highest possible clocks on that. At least we would see an IPC change, and mainstream programs could start to make use of AVX-512.
When even VIA offers a newer product than Intel...
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2014
Messages
266 (0.08/day)
Location
Singapore
System Name Garbage / Trash
Processor Ryzen 5600X / 5600
Motherboard MSI B450M Mortar Ti / GB B550M Aorus Pro-P
Cooling Deepcool GTE / ID Cooling SE224XT
Memory Micron 32GB DDR4-3200 E-die @ 3600C16 / Ballistix Elite 16GB 3600C16
Video Card(s) MSI 2060 Super Armor OC / Zotac 3070 Twin Edge
Storage HP EX920 1TB Micron 1100 2TB, Crucial M550 1TB, Hynix P31 1TB
Display(s) Acer XB271HU @ 150Hz x2
Audio Device(s) JBL LSR305 + Topping D50S / iLoud MM + SMSL DO100
Power Supply Seasonic Focus Plus 850W / G-series 650W
Mouse Logitech G304 x2
Yet another new hardware that goes into my "I can easily afford it but what's the point" category.
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2020
Messages
1,632 (1.12/day)
Truly a magnificent gaming processor. It gives so much headroom, you don't need to upgrade every year like you do with AMD. Where's the 14nm+++++ jokes now?

View attachment 155963

Do you game at 1080p with a top end processor? At higher resolution, the clockspeed advantage diminishes while the processor is still burning through more power and producing more heat. Moreover, you need the top of the line cooler to keep the flagship chugging along at high clockspeed.

I think nobody ever doubted Intel's performance in games given the high clockspeed. The joke is how desperate they are to keep this single core clockspeed advantage against AMD.

You're comparing stock versus overclocked. As far as I can see, 9700k, 9900k, 10900k and the entire 10th gen lineup at merely stock speed destroys the entire Zen 2 lineup at gaming.
This is, once again, grandpa Skylake with 14nm+++++++ beating the latest the greatest 7nm processor from AMD simply by adding 2 more cores to the ancient architecture ROFL.

I think there are ample reviews out there with the same conclusion. At stock, the 10900K draws around 250W period. The facts are in your face, its just a matter of you not accepting it. Of course if you ignore all other metrics other than pure FPS at 1080p or lower, sure, Intel still retains the crown with a decent margin and keeps users like yourself pleased with them. As mentioned, as resolution scales up, the benefits shrinks.

In any case, all the modern processors perform well in games regardless of Intel or AMD. With this in mind, I rather spend my money on a processor that gives me all round better performance which ironically cost less and significantly more power efficient.

I'm starting to doubt if Intel shouldn't just port Ice Lake to 14nm, and force the highest possible clocks on that. At least we would see an IPC change, and mainstream programs could start to make use of AVX-512.
When even VIA offers a newer product than Intel...

I think this is where Intel got complacent and underestimated competition and the scale of their 10nm troubles.

You have a point on a smaller die area, not sure why you bring claimed TDP in. That's a red herring. The 3950x is a 105 watt chip, but hits a peak of 145 watt total power draw with 10 cores loaded, and core frequency starts falling the more cores you load after that, with the aveerage clock rate hittting 3.875 GHz with 16 cores. Upping power limits on DIY systems to allow higher clocks raises that power draw much higher.

According to the enthusiast community, pushing these chips to 4.3-4.4 all core pushes power consumption above 280 watts total, and they manage to handle the heat generated. Notice as well the one spushing these clocks are using 360MM rads with 3-6 fans, yet there is no complkaining fro the community of the higher clocks being useless without "exotic cooling"
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/euk0th
The point is the power draw of the 10900k isnt unmanageable. As I said, you have a point of the small die becoming a limiting factor. Techspot was able to load all 10 cores at 4.9 GHz, with a 200 watt power draw, and hit 84C.

The whole "ZOMG IT SO HOT" seems to be a bit overblown. Yes the chip is hot, yes it is harder to cool then AMD chips, but its hardly unsustainable. The FX was seen as a freak more because it was identical to the 8350 just clocked higher, no additional cache or more cores, and most 8350s could be pushed about as far. And the 9000 series had compatibility issues and not all fothem worked with speccd voltages.

The 10900k seems to hold the same spot the 9700k did last year: faster in games, slower in everything else, and needing a bigger cooler to hit max speed.


I have both a 9700K and a 2700x. The 2700X is OCed, with PBO and AutoOC, with 2866 MHz RAM. The 9700k is running at stock speeds with 2400 mhz ram.

Despite all the reviews saying there is only a small differenc at higher resolutions in sucha scenario, running both on my 1440p144 gaming monitor, there is a definite difference between the two. Even limiting the framerate to 90 or 60 still shows better overall performance from the intel chip. Perhaps the ryzen chip needs faster memory, which my chip cant even get 2933 out of my 3200MHz RAM. Perhaps there is some setting to tweak. But out of the box, for high end gaming, the intel chip still holds a noticeable advantage, and the 10900k slightly improves this advantage.
AMD's strategy or chip itself was never meant for high clockspeed and about going wide. While the chips all run higher than the TDP claim, they are at least at this point, not too far away from it. The chip itself is smart enough to balance number of cores vs the type of load, so in games, you should expect less cores being utilized and run at a higher clockspeed. In a pure CPU load say running Cinebench as an example, all cores get loaded and once it hits 144W, it the clockspeed goes down. Even so, its beating Intel handily in the multicore score with the lower clockspeed. At least for 3900X and 3950X, there is little reason to overclock and just let the CPU do its work.

The perception that the CPU runs really hot is true in a sense it is running at 250W at full tilt. The heat is manageable, yes, but most reviews did mentioned you need some serious cooling solution. So that adds up on cost on top of a good Z490 motherboard for the flagship Intel chip. Even Intel recommended a 280 AIO if you refer to post #11 in the link below.


I've never run a comparison between my 2700 @ 4Ghz vs an Intel processor of the same class, so I am not able to independently validate. However most reviews out there are consistent that at higher resolution, bottleneck on CPUs are lesser and thus, reduce the performance gap between the 2. The 2700X will certainly benefit from faster ram since this is one of the limitations of AMD chips. It think will be good to know what is the FPS between the 2 from your observations at the resolution and refresh rate you are using.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 28, 2012
Messages
963 (0.23/day)
System Name Poor Man's PC
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 7500F
Motherboard MSI B650M Mortar WiFi
Cooling ID Cooling SE 206 XT
Memory 32GB GSkill Flare X5 DDR5 6000Mhz
Video Card(s) Sapphire Pulse RX 6800 XT
Storage XPG Gammix S70 Blade 2TB + 8 TB WD Ultrastar DC HC320
Display(s) Mi Gaming Curved 3440x1440 144Hz
Case Cougar MG120-G
Audio Device(s) MPow Air Wireless + Mi Soundbar
Power Supply Enermax Revolution DF 650W Gold
Mouse Logitech MX Anywhere 3
Keyboard Logitech Pro X + Kailh box heavy pale blue switch + Durock stabilizers
VR HMD Meta Quest 2
Benchmark Scores Who need bench when everything already fast?
The perception that the CPU runs really hot is true in a sense it is running at 250W at full tilt. The heat is manageable, yes, but most reviews did mentioned you need some serious cooling solution. So that adds up on cost on top of a good Z490 motherboard for the flagship Intel chip. Even Intel recommended a 280 AIO if you refer to post #11 in the link below.


I've never run a comparison between my 2700 @ 4Ghz vs an Intel processor of the same class, so I am not able to independently validate. However most reviews out there are consistent that at higher resolution, bottleneck on CPUs are lesser and thus, reduce the performance gap between the 2. The 2700X will certainly benefit from faster ram since this is one of the limitations of AMD chips. It think will be good to know what is the FPS between the 2 from your observations at the resolution and refresh rate you are using.



280mm AIO cooler. At stock :laugh:
I believe we'll see 420mm AIO cooler from some random Chinese manufacture much sooner :D
 
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
7,194 (3.86/day)
System Name Bragging Rights
Processor Atom Z3735F 1.33GHz
Motherboard It has no markings but it's green
Cooling No, it's a 2.2W processor
Memory 2GB DDR3L-1333
Video Card(s) Gen7 Intel HD (4EU @ 311MHz)
Storage 32GB eMMC and 128GB Sandisk Extreme U3
Display(s) 10" IPS 1280x800 60Hz
Case Veddha T2
Audio Device(s) Apparently, yes
Power Supply Samsung 18W 5V fast-charger
Mouse MX Anywhere 2
Keyboard Logitech MX Keys (not Cherry MX at all)
VR HMD Samsung Oddyssey, not that I'd plug it into this though....
Software W10 21H1, barely
Benchmark Scores I once clocked a Celeron-300A to 564MHz on an Abit BE6 and it scored over 9000.
Intel know they are going to sell every one of these they make at first, so no incentive to compete on price.

The Core i7-10700K is listed at $409 at Newegg and requires a cooler
They Ryzen 9 3900X is listed at $431 at Newegg and does not require a cooler.
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2019
Messages
115 (0.07/day)
Fanboys and mad gamers are going to get this no matter what. Those that use their PCs for work will just smile and look the other way
 
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
8 (0.00/day)
Location
skopje
You forgot the differences. 250 W coming from 200 mm² is not as easy to cool as 250 W coming from 315 mm².

Also, AMD said the TDP is 220 W:
View attachment 155960
Intel still says 125 W:
View attachment 155961

I still consider the 10900K to be less of a freak than the FX, because it's more competitive. Don't quote me on that tho, don't remember those FX reviews..

still using fx9590 and asus crosshair formula z (no time for gaming or much else these years :) ) and cooling it just fine with 240mm. it is freakier from that point of view, in general it costed as i5 and perf was also more or less the same
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
1,642 (0.49/day)
System Name Legion
Processor i7-12700KF
Motherboard Asus Z690-Plus TUF Gaming WiFi D5
Cooling Arctic Liquid Freezer 2 240mm AIO
Memory PNY MAKO DDR5-6000 C36-36-36-76
Video Card(s) PowerColor Hellhound 6700 XT 12GB
Storage WD SN770 512GB m.2, Samsung 980 Pro m.2 2TB
Display(s) Acer K272HUL 1440p / 34" MSI MAG341CQ 3440x1440
Case Montech Air X
Power Supply Corsair CX750M
Mouse Logitech MX Anywhere 25
Keyboard Logitech MX Keys
Software Lots
Intel know they are going to sell every one of these they make at first, so no incentive to compete on price.

The Core i7-10700K is listed at $409 at Newegg and requires a cooler
They Ryzen 9 3900X is listed at $431 at Newegg and does not require a cooler.

The prices are quite tame for day 1 and 2 of launch. Moreover Intel is already starting to compete on price, that is one of the major non-technical changes in gen 10. They aren't coming all the way down to parity but frankly if anyone expected Intel to come all the way down to AMD pricing they were deluding themselves. And if you are an AMD fan, you should be glad of that, because if Intel actually decides to lower prices and compete with AMD directly on price it will crush AMD.
 

ARF

Joined
Jan 28, 2020
Messages
3,892 (2.56/day)
Location
Ex-usa
The prices are quite tame for day 1 and 2 of launch. Moreover Intel is already starting to compete on price, that is one of the major non-technical changes in gen 10. They aren't coming all the way down to parity but frankly if anyone expected Intel to come all the way down to AMD pricing they were deluding themselves. And if you are an AMD fan, you should be glad of that, because if Intel actually decides to lower prices and compete with AMD directly on price it will crush AMD.



Only if people start ignoring that today AMD offers the top performance with the 16C/32T Ryzen 9 3950X, and Intel with its lineup does compete up to the higher parts of the midrange.
You know that Ryzen 7 3700X is a 65-watt part, supports PCIe 4.0 and currently retails for just $294 at Newegg and for just $290 at Amazon.

Core i7-10700K simply doesn't compete at $409.

Intel should have lowered its TDP and start competing with real performance in normal TDPs, while marketing heavy overclocking for those who wish to go that route.
 
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
7,194 (3.86/day)
System Name Bragging Rights
Processor Atom Z3735F 1.33GHz
Motherboard It has no markings but it's green
Cooling No, it's a 2.2W processor
Memory 2GB DDR3L-1333
Video Card(s) Gen7 Intel HD (4EU @ 311MHz)
Storage 32GB eMMC and 128GB Sandisk Extreme U3
Display(s) 10" IPS 1280x800 60Hz
Case Veddha T2
Audio Device(s) Apparently, yes
Power Supply Samsung 18W 5V fast-charger
Mouse MX Anywhere 2
Keyboard Logitech MX Keys (not Cherry MX at all)
VR HMD Samsung Oddyssey, not that I'd plug it into this though....
Software W10 21H1, barely
Benchmark Scores I once clocked a Celeron-300A to 564MHz on an Abit BE6 and it scored over 9000.
The i5-10600K is interesting whilst the i7-10700K and i9-10900K are not.

The i7 and i9 still fail to take the performance crown from AMD outside of unrealistic game benchmarks where the resolution and details are turned down on a 2080Ti to elimate the GPU as the bottleneck. Nobody buys a 2080Ti to turn down the resolution and details. So yes, Intel still holds the gaming CPU crown and no, the i7 and i9 do not change anything or improve the situation in a meaningful way. If you're not solely gaming, the 3900X beats both the i7 and i9 for less, on a cheaper, more stable, and more mature platform, at half the power draw.

The i5 on the other hand is amazing. It's not going to take the value crown away from the R5 3600 and it still (barely) loses to the much cheaper AMD in non-gaming tasks but it does bring a far more rounded product to the masses at the sub-$300 price point. The x1000 quantity price of the 10600K is $262 so at under $300 retail it will offer a lot more value in this price segment than Intel has offered for a long time. If you do have a high-end graphics card and a low-resolution monitor (maybe 240Hz) this is going to get you 9900K gaming performance at a $200 discount over the 9900K.

I'm still going to recommend the R5 3600 to people because at an estimated $135 cheaper than the 10600K you get functionally-identical performance on a cheaper, mature platform with less heat/noise, lower power consumption, and that $135 can be put into a better GPU. But the 10600K is the most exciting thing to come out of Intel since the 8700K, IMO.

I'm genuinely looking forward to the reviews of the 10400F when that gets launched, as I feel that will actually offer a true mainstream alternative to the R5 3600 with 4.0GHz all-core on a cheaper motherboard and 65W claimed power draw (so hopefully still under 100W real-world). That is what the midrange really needs.
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
19,366 (3.72/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
People only give a shit about power use when the other team uses more. These arguments are hilarious.
 

ARF

Joined
Jan 28, 2020
Messages
3,892 (2.56/day)
Location
Ex-usa
People only give a shit about power use when the other team uses more. These arguments are hilarious.

It's very difficult to keep the Intel CPUs out of the throttling zone where they like so much to fall and stay.
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
19,366 (3.72/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
It's very difficult to keep the Intel CPUs out of the throttling zone where they like so much to fall and stay.
Is it? Youve tried?

So far haven't run into it in my testing...went through 5 boards so far. Only at 5.2 ghz all c/t did my 3x120mm aio thermally limit things. At stock it wasn't close to throttling... 20C off.
 

ARF

Joined
Jan 28, 2020
Messages
3,892 (2.56/day)
Location
Ex-usa
Is it? Youve tried?

So far haven't run into it in my testing...went through 5 boards so far. Only at 5.2 ghz all c/t did my 3x120mm aio thermally limit things. At stock it wasn't close to throttling... 20C off.


Yes, I have seen it with stock Intel coolers. Maybe that's the reason why they no longer include such.
But that raises the cost to own their system even further and makes the purchasing process more complicated because the user now needs to research for proper cooler.
 
Top