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

Intel Core i9-10900 10-core CPU Pictured

Joined
Aug 19, 2017
Messages
316 (0.35/day)
Intel's desktop Comet Lake-S lineup is close to being released and we are getting more leaks about the CPU models contained inside it. Perhaps one of the most interesting points for Comet Lake-S series is that it brings a boost in frequency and boost in core count, with the highest-end Core i9 processors going up to 10 cores. Thanks to Xfastest, a Hong Kong-based media outlet, we have first pictures of what appears to be an engineering sample of the upcoming Core i9-10900 processor.

Being a non-K version, this CPU is not capable of overclocking and has a fixed TDP rating of 65 Watts. Compared to 125 W of the K models like the upcoming Core i9-10900K, this CPU will output almost half the heat, thus requiring a less capable cooling solution. The CPU is installed in LGA1200 socket, which is a new home for Comet Lake-S CPUs and provides backward compatibility for coolers supporting LGA1151. In the sample processor pictured below, we can see a marking on the CPU that implies 2.5 GHz base clock. Previously rumors were suggesting that this CPU version has 2.8 GHz base clock, however, it can be an early engineering sample given that no official imprints are found on the CPU heat spreader.


View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 

maxitaxi96

New Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2019
Messages
10 (0.10/day)
Well to be honest, everytime Intel added 2 Cores to their best Desktop CPU it somehow worked out for them...
Allthough i have my doubts about that now looking at their competitiors line-up :)
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
10,921 (5.52/day)
Location
Mars
Processor i7 8700k 4.7Ghz @ 1.26v
Motherboard AsRock Fatal1ty K6 Z370
Cooling beQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 3
Memory 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200/C16
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X @ 2100/5500
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 1TB + Samsung 830 256GB + Crucial BX100 250GB + Toshiba 1TB HDD
Display(s) Eizo Foris FG2421
Case Fractal Design Define C TG
Power Supply EVGA G2 750w
Mouse Logitech G502 Protheus Spectrum
Keyboard Sharkoon MK80 (Brown)
Software W10 x64
2.5 Ghz base for a desktop part? Wtf... I remember them coming with 3.4 base. Intel is just moving goal posts for higher boost figures, and they don't seem to know when to stop.

LOL. Soon you're better off sticking a laptop CPU in there instead.
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2018
Messages
51 (0.09/day)
2.5 Ghz base for a desktop part? Wtf... I remember them coming with 3.4 base. Intel is just moving goal posts for higher boost figures, and they don't seem to know when to stop.

LOL. Soon you're better off sticking a laptop CPU in there instead.
They have to do this in order to keep their own definition of what TDP is. Adding more cores requires the base clock to go down since it's basically still the same 14nm process Skylake.
 
Joined
Jan 11, 2005
Messages
1,263 (0.23/day)
Location
66 feet from the ground
System Name 2nd AMD puppy
Processor FX-8350 vishera
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3
Cooling Cooler Master Hyper TX2
Memory 16 Gb DDR3:8GB Kingston HyperX Beast + 8Gb G.Skill Sniper(by courtesy of tabascosauz &TPU)
Video Card(s) Sapphire RX 580 Nitro+;1450/2000 Mhz
Storage SSD :840 pro 128 Gb;Iridium pro 240Gb ; HDD 2xWD-1Tb
Display(s) Benq XL2730Z 144 Hz freesync
Case NZXT 820 PHANTOM
Audio Device(s) Audigy SE with Logitech Z-5500
Power Supply Cooleer Master RP M520
Mouse Razer copperhead / Gamdias zeus (by courtesy of sneekypeet & TPU)
Keyboard MS Sidewinder x4
Software win10 64bit ltsc
Benchmark Scores irrelevant for me
i don't think they're stupid to add 2 cores with overall lower clocks as they'll gain nothing...
 
Joined
May 31, 2016
Messages
1,538 (1.13/day)
System Name Bro2
Processor Ryzen 2700X
Motherboard MSI X470 Gaming Carbon
Cooling Corsair h115i pro rgb
Memory G.Skill Flare X 3200 CL14
Video Card(s) RX Vega 64 Red Devil
Storage M.2 Samsung Evo 970 250MB/ Samsung 860 Evo 1TB
Display(s) LG 27UD69 UHD
Case Fractal Design G
Audio Device(s) realtec 5.1
Power Supply Corsair AXi 760W
Mouse Logitech G402
Keyboard Logitech slim
Software Windows 10 64 bit
2.5 Ghz base for a desktop part? Wtf... I remember them coming with 3.4 base. Intel is just moving goal posts for higher boost figures, and they don't seem to know when to stop.

LOL. Soon you're better off sticking a laptop CPU in there instead.
I'm sure Intel will bump the clocks up a bit.
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2018
Messages
51 (0.09/day)
i don't think they're stupid to add 2 cores with overall lower clocks as they'll gain nothing...
It's just the base clock. The turbo will be higher of course and will break the TDP by a lot.

Adding more cores even if they are overall lower speed when working together will gain them MT performance which is what Zen excels at. Intel's ST "advantage" will remain basically the same since it can turbo one core very high.
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
10,921 (5.52/day)
Location
Mars
Processor i7 8700k 4.7Ghz @ 1.26v
Motherboard AsRock Fatal1ty K6 Z370
Cooling beQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 3
Memory 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200/C16
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X @ 2100/5500
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 1TB + Samsung 830 256GB + Crucial BX100 250GB + Toshiba 1TB HDD
Display(s) Eizo Foris FG2421
Case Fractal Design Define C TG
Power Supply EVGA G2 750w
Mouse Logitech G502 Protheus Spectrum
Keyboard Sharkoon MK80 (Brown)
Software W10 x64
It's just the base clock. The turbo will be higher of course and will break the TDP by a lot.

Adding more cores even if they are overall lower speed when working together will gain them MT performance which is what Zen excels at. Intel's ST "advantage" will remain basically the same since it can turbo one core very high.
That is just the thing though. Is this really the projected use case for these chips? For a laptop chip I can understand a high boost and lower base, because lots of work is bursty. For a high performance desktop MSDT part... no. This is what happens: Intel looks good in non-sustained single core load scenario's, and in any sustained load scenario it will noticeably lose performance much faster because as soon as that high turbo exceeds TDP over 'X' time, the CPU will use base clock.

So this comes down to the question: do you want your many core CPU to run its crunching workloads at 2.5~2.8 Ghz?

To me that seems abysmal, and the only reason is that >5Ghz 'sells'. I think we can count on them doing at least that.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2016
Messages
3,233 (2.43/day)
That is just the thing though. Is this really the projected use case for these chips? For a laptop chip I can understand a high boost and lower base, because lots of work is bursty. For a high performance desktop MSDT part... no. This is what happens: Intel looks good in non-sustained single core load scenario's, and in any sustained load scenario it will noticeably lose performance much faster because as soon as that high turbo exceeds TDP over 'X' time, the CPU will use base clock.
Why would it be different? These CPUs are sold to the same clients (maybe putting gamers aside).
It's the same boost-idle-boost-idle cycle.

Actually it's the other way round (Intel vs AMD in expectations). AMD looks great in Cinebench or batch encoding. People buy them, run a few benchmarks, post results on forums - great. And one day they notice that their office laptop boots quicker, opens websites faster and actually is perfectly fine for everything they need. So why did they buy this huge desktop? And how to use 12 cores?
So this comes down to the question: do you want your many core CPU to run its crunching workloads at 2.5~2.8 Ghz?
LOL on crunching workloads. How many people here actually do some heavy computing on their uber fast PCs? And I mean concious useful activity, not running benchmarks and distributed computing projects.

Also, you would have to manually limit the CPU to force it to run at those 2.8GHz (which will happen in SFF OEM machines). Leave it alone, provide decent airflow - it'll boost all day long if needed.
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2018
Messages
51 (0.09/day)
That is just the thing though. Is this really the projected use case for these chips? For a laptop chip I can understand a high boost and lower base, because lots of work is bursty. For a high performance desktop MSDT part... no. This is what happens: Intel looks good in non-sustained single core load scenario's, and in any sustained load scenario it will noticeably lose performance much faster because as soon as that high turbo exceeds TDP over 'X' time, the CPU will use base clock.

So this comes down to the question: do you want your many core CPU to run its crunching workloads at 2.5~2.8 Ghz?

To me that seems abysmal, and the only reason is that >5Ghz 'sells'. I think we can count on them doing at least that.
Is this a high performance desktop part? This will go into OEM builds like Dell OptiPlex. Most DIY builders will use a K part that is not bound by a 65W TDP.

As I wrote before, I'm pretty sure the low base clock is just the result of pressure to keep the TDP low - it's 65W after all. My guess is that it's the big OEMs requirements.

Also, you would have to manually limit the CPU to force it to run at those 2.8GHz (which will happen in SFF OEM machines). Leave it alone, provide decent airflow - it'll boost all day long if needed.
A bit of a stretch here, Intel will not boost "all day long" if their own recommendations for power limits is followed. Every OEM follows this and only select gamer boards disable it:
From 7th Generation Intel ® Processor Families for H Platforms:
Compared with previous generation products, Intel Turbo Boost Technology 2.0 will increase the ratio of application power towards TDP and also allows to increase power above TDP as high as PL2 for short periods of time.
 
Joined
Dec 16, 2012
Messages
4,080 (1.56/day)
Location
Jyväskylä, Finland
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 2600
Motherboard Asus TUF B450 Plus Gaming
Cooling Cryorig C7
Memory 16GB DDR4-2400
Video Card(s) GeForce GTX 980 Ti
Storage 2.2TB of SSDs & 2TB HDD
Display(s) 2x 1920x1080 w/ Arctic Z2 gen3 + Oculus Rift
Case Corsair Carbide Air 740
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster Z
Power Supply Seasonic Focus+ Gold 750W
Mouse Logitech G400s
Keyboard Logitech G410
Software Windows 10 Pro
65W and 10 cores with Skylake 5.0 architecture and 14nm++++++++ means probably that it uses its turbo clocks for a blink of an eye so HWInfo and similar software shows that it had peaked at those turbo clocks..
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2005
Messages
5,768 (1.10/day)
Location
USA
System Name Small ATX Desktop
Processor Intel i5 8600K @ 4.6 GHz Core & 4.3 GHz Uncore @ 1.168V
Motherboard Asrock Z370 Taichi
Cooling Phanteks PH-TC14PE, MonoPlus, Fans: 2xThermalright TY143 / 2xCorsair SP-120L / 2xYate Loon D14BH-12
Memory G-Skill TridentZ 2X8GB DDR4 3200 CL14 F4-3200C14D-16GTZ @ 3200 14-14-14-34 2T @ 1.35V
Video Card(s) Zotac 1060 6GB Mini ZT-P10600A-10L with Arctic MonoPlus and Yate Loon D14BH-12 Fan
Storage OS Samsung 970 Pro 512GB NVMe, Games Phison E12 NVMe 1TB, HDD WD Black 4TB WD4005FZBX, 2xWD10EZEX
Display(s) 2x Asus PB258Q 2560x1440 25" IPS
Case Lian Li PC A05NB (Inverted Mobo)
Audio Device(s) Audiotechnica ATH M50X, Antlion Mod Mic 4, SYBA SD-CM-UAUD, Acoustic Research 2Ch Speakers
Power Supply Seasonic SS-660XP2 660 Watt Platinum
Mouse Zowie EC2A Mouse, Razer Naga Chroma '14, Corsair MM600, Inateck 900x300 XL pad, Tiger Gaming Skates.
Keyboard Filco Majestouch II Ninja TKL, Goldtouch GTC 0033 Ten Key, PS3 Controller
Software Win 10 LTSC 1809
Well i5-8400 had a low base clock and yet had great performance in turbo. However with 10 cores 20 threads, its going to be blazing hot.

Its predecessor, the i9 9900K was bad enough. To keep the i9 9900K under an aircooler I lowered the all core turbo to something like 4.5 and the two core turbo to 4.8, which got the prime95 temps around 75*C and reported maximum TDP under 150W dropping to 100W long TDP limit, from what was 105*C+ and probably 250+W!
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 5, 2017
Messages
536 (0.62/day)
2.5 Ghz base for a desktop part? Wtf... I remember them coming with 3.4 base. Intel is just moving goal posts for higher boost figures, and they don't seem to know when to stop.

LOL. Soon you're better off sticking a laptop CPU in there instead.
7700K was 4.2GHz base and 6700K was 4GHz base.

8700K started the trend of reducing base clocks, with 3.7GHz. 9900K continued it. This continues it further.
 
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
1,808 (1.68/day)
Location
North East Ohio, USA
System Name My Super Computer
Processor Intel Core i7 8700K
Motherboard Gigabyte Z370 AORUS Ultra Gaming
Cooling Corsair H55 AIO
Memory 2x8GB Crucial/Micron Ballistix Sport DDR4-2400
Video Card(s) ASUS GeForce GTX1060 6GB
Storage Samsung 970 EVO 500 GB NVMe SSD (System Drive), Samsung 860 EVO 500 GB SATA SSD (Game Drive)
Display(s) HP 2311x and Acer G206HQL
Case CoolerMaster MasterBox Lite 5 RGB
Audio Device(s) On-Board Sound
Power Supply EVGA Supernova 650 G3 Gold
Mouse Logitech M705
Keyboard Logitech Wave K350
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores https://valid.x86.fr/liwjs3
How many people here actually do some heavy computing on their uber fast PCs?
But what about the older single-threaded games that require a high clock speed? If it can't sustain the boost clock for any decent amount of time those older games are going to suffer performance penalties.
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2018
Messages
51 (0.09/day)
But what about the older single-threaded games that require a high clock speed? If it can't sustain the boost clock for any decent amount of time those older games are going to suffer performance penalties.
I doubt this will be a problem. Single or even 2-3-4 core turbo speeds should be at least as good as the older generations. It's the all core turbo that will suffer with core count increases.
 
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
1,808 (1.68/day)
Location
North East Ohio, USA
System Name My Super Computer
Processor Intel Core i7 8700K
Motherboard Gigabyte Z370 AORUS Ultra Gaming
Cooling Corsair H55 AIO
Memory 2x8GB Crucial/Micron Ballistix Sport DDR4-2400
Video Card(s) ASUS GeForce GTX1060 6GB
Storage Samsung 970 EVO 500 GB NVMe SSD (System Drive), Samsung 860 EVO 500 GB SATA SSD (Game Drive)
Display(s) HP 2311x and Acer G206HQL
Case CoolerMaster MasterBox Lite 5 RGB
Audio Device(s) On-Board Sound
Power Supply EVGA Supernova 650 G3 Gold
Mouse Logitech M705
Keyboard Logitech Wave K350
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores https://valid.x86.fr/liwjs3
It's the all core turbo that will suffer with core count increases.
Oh most definitely. I come back to my old joke of a question... Are we all going to have to have our very own nuclear power station-style cooling tower to cool these suckers?
 
Joined
Aug 6, 2017
Messages
5,887 (6.36/day)
Location
Poland
System Name skurwiel szatan
Processor i7 5775c @4.3GHz/1.385v/EDRAM @2GHz
Motherboard Z97X Gaming 5
Cooling Noctua D15S
Memory Crucial Ballistix Tactical LP 1600 CL8 @2133 9-9-9-27 1T
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super Gaming X Trio (waiting for RX 5950XT)
Storage SU900 128 (OS)/850 PRO 256+256+ 512,860 EVO 500,XPG SX950U 480,M9Pe(Y) 512 (games)/4TB HDDs (3+1)
Display(s) Acer XB241YU+Dell S2716DG dual monitor setup
Case Full tower
Audio Device(s) W830BT headphones
Power Supply Superflower Leadex Gold 850W
Mouse G903 lightspeed+powerplay,G403 wireless + Steelseries DeX + Roccat rest
Keyboard HyperX Alloy SilverSpeed (w.HyperX wrist rest),Razer Deathstalker
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores A LOT
ring or mesh ?
if this is a 5ghz ring 10 core,however inefficient in cinemark,it's gonna kick butts and take names in gaming.
 
Joined
Oct 5, 2017
Messages
536 (0.62/day)
But what about the older single-threaded games that require a high clock speed? If it can't sustain the boost clock for any decent amount of time those older games are going to suffer performance penalties.
Skylake's 6700K was a 4GHz all core part, 4.2GHz singlecore. It was faster in games than anything that came before it with any number of cores.

Intel's IPC hasn't changed at all since that time, so we can directly compare the clockspeeds.

As long as the new chips aren't throttling below 4GHz on 4 core workloads, or 4.2GHz single core, then they'll still be as fast or faster than the hardware that was top of the line when those games came out. I really don't think anyone needs to worry about their 6700K outperforming their 10900K as a result of lost clockspeeds - there's just no way a 4 core load is going to be so impossible to cool that it'll need to run at 3.9GHz across each core.
 
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
1,808 (1.68/day)
Location
North East Ohio, USA
System Name My Super Computer
Processor Intel Core i7 8700K
Motherboard Gigabyte Z370 AORUS Ultra Gaming
Cooling Corsair H55 AIO
Memory 2x8GB Crucial/Micron Ballistix Sport DDR4-2400
Video Card(s) ASUS GeForce GTX1060 6GB
Storage Samsung 970 EVO 500 GB NVMe SSD (System Drive), Samsung 860 EVO 500 GB SATA SSD (Game Drive)
Display(s) HP 2311x and Acer G206HQL
Case CoolerMaster MasterBox Lite 5 RGB
Audio Device(s) On-Board Sound
Power Supply EVGA Supernova 650 G3 Gold
Mouse Logitech M705
Keyboard Logitech Wave K350
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores https://valid.x86.fr/liwjs3
there's just no way a 4 core load is going to be so impossible to cool that it'll need to run at 3.9GHz across each core.
How do you figure? The 9900K as it stands right now is a bitch to cool with its eight cores, add another two cores and it's going to exacerbate an already bad cooling situation.
 
Joined
Oct 5, 2017
Messages
536 (0.62/day)
How do you figure? The 9900K as it stands right now is a bitch to cool with its eight cores, add another two cores and it's going to exacerbate an already bad cooling situation.
Sure, but you said single threaded. Those extra cores don't matter. They're not under load, therefore they produce negligible heat.

At the end of the day, these are still 14nm parts. A single 10900K core can be considered "pretty much" the same as a single 6700K core. They have the same architecture and IPC. At 4GHz, both parts will perform identically.

That means that with one core, you're dealing with "pretty much" the same amount of heat, over the same amount of area, at the same clockspeeds and voltages. Add a core, you double it, add a core, you triple it, add a core, you quadruple it. You've now built a 6700K. Now add 6 more of those cores, you've built a 10900K.

Now granted, a 10900K core is going to do this at lower voltage and with less heat, because of the refinements of the manufacturing process, but that only works in the favour of the later chip.

If you load 4 of those more efficient, later production 10900K cores, you'll get a reasonable amount less than 6700K heat. If you load all 10 cores you get 10900K heat. If you load one single core then you'll get substantially less heat than either of those circumstances, which means cooling a single threaded workload is simply not an issue - if you're only pursuing the same clocks, anyway. Intel always tries to use as much of the available headroom as possible, which is why the single core boost always goes up, from 6700K to 7700K, 8700K, 9900K, and now 10900K. They're not really producing more heat when in single threaded workloads. They're just producing lots more in multi-threaded workloads.

Single core boost will always go up as long as manufacturing keeps improving. The battle is in maintaining high all-core boost clocks as you add more and more cores into the same space.
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2019
Messages
247 (2.40/day)
Location
Nuremberg
Processor Core i7 8700K@5 GHz
Motherboard MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon
Cooling 2xEKWB Rads, EKWB Reservoir 250, Aqua Computer Kryos Next CPU Cooler, Phanteks Glacier GPU Cooler
Memory 16 GB DDR4 GSkill Trident Z 3200
Video Card(s) Asus ROG STRIX RTX 2080 O8G (GPU@2115 MHz/VRAM@7800MHz)
Storage 1x Samsung Evo 840 SSD 256, 1x WD Blue 1 TB HDD
Display(s) Asus ROG Swift PG248 1080p Display/144Hz/G-Sync
Case Fractal Design R6 with Window
Audio Device(s) Realtek onboard
Power Supply be quiet 650W Straight Power
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Cherry KB
Software Win 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores FireStrike: 25953/Extreme: 13141/Ultra: 7099/TimeSpy: 11426/Superposition: 7667/CinebenchR20: 3916
How do you figure? The 9900K as it stands right now is a bitch to cool with its eight cores, add another two cores and it's going to exacerbate an already bad cooling situation.

There are users in the forum who run a 9900KS @ 5.2GHz all core Turbo and corsair 115i platinum AiO, never exceeding 75 degrees in Aida64. So sure you would need a very good cooling solution but it's not impossible.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
1,808 (1.68/day)
Location
North East Ohio, USA
System Name My Super Computer
Processor Intel Core i7 8700K
Motherboard Gigabyte Z370 AORUS Ultra Gaming
Cooling Corsair H55 AIO
Memory 2x8GB Crucial/Micron Ballistix Sport DDR4-2400
Video Card(s) ASUS GeForce GTX1060 6GB
Storage Samsung 970 EVO 500 GB NVMe SSD (System Drive), Samsung 860 EVO 500 GB SATA SSD (Game Drive)
Display(s) HP 2311x and Acer G206HQL
Case CoolerMaster MasterBox Lite 5 RGB
Audio Device(s) On-Board Sound
Power Supply EVGA Supernova 650 G3 Gold
Mouse Logitech M705
Keyboard Logitech Wave K350
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores https://valid.x86.fr/liwjs3
They're not under load, therefore they produce negligible heat.
Technically they're always under load, they're not doing nothing; there are always threads being run on it. They might be light loads but they're loads none the less.
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2007
Messages
7,749 (1.73/day)
Location
Austin Texas
System Name _
Processor 8700K @ 5.1 Ghz
Motherboard MSI Z370-A PRO
Cooling 120mm Custom Liquid
Memory 32 GB 3600 Mhz DDR4 16-16-16-36-380 trfc - 2T
Video Card(s) Gigabyte GTX 2080 Ti Windforce (Undervolted OC 1905MHz)
Storage 3x1TB SSDs
Display(s) Alienware 34" 3440x1440 120hz, G-Sync
Case Jonsbo U4
Audio Device(s) Bose Solo
Power Supply Corsair SF750
Mouse silent click gaming mouse
Keyboard tenkeyless
Software Windows 10 64 Bit
There are users in the forum who run a 9900KS @ 5.2GHz all core Turbo and corsair 115i platinum AiO, never exceeding 75 degrees in Aida64. So sure you would need a very good cooling solution but it's not impossible.
Possible for sure, but I am amazed at how just two more cores makes quite a huge difference in terms of heat.

You and I are running probably one of the best chips in terms of cooling and performance -- my 8700K @5.1 no avx offset 1.39v on a single thick 120mm rad and not break 76 according to AIDA/BIOS the chip pulls about 170W during an avx load. A 9900KS with just 2 more cores is a comparative nightmare to cool and would absolutely bake that rad at those same settings - add two more cores to a 9900KS and it would be some sort of fire code violation.

I think if they came out with a 9700K version of this series - a 10 core with no HT for a reasonable price it would be a winner.
 
Joined
Oct 5, 2017
Messages
536 (0.62/day)
Technically they're always under load, they're not doing nothing; there are always threads being run on it. They might be light loads but they're loads none the less.
Now you're just being picky in favour of preserving a practical inaccuracy. If task manager reports 0% utilization, the core is not under load. Being pinged to 1% or so every few seconds to run a background process isn't the same thing as being pegged at 100% by P95
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2018
Messages
51 (0.09/day)
Now you're just being picky in favour of preserving a practical inaccuracy. If task manager reports 0% utilization, the core is not under load. Being pinged to 1% or so every few seconds to run a background process isn't the same thing as being pegged at 100% by P95
Task Manager is far too inaccurate for this. HWiNFO will show you both package and core deep C-state residency. Only at the highest one the core is "off" (not really truly off, but power gated enough for the power usage not to matter).
 
Top