Gigabyte: Intel Z490 motherboards will support 11th-gen Core Rocket Lake CPUs

[Skjorn]

I'd say no if you are comparing to the Ryzen 3000 series CPUs. AMD supports higher memory frequencies out of the box and you can often achieve higher frequencies than rated. You can also use ECC memory on consumer AMD motherboards that support it, something which is impossible with Intel. The 3000 series memory controller is pretty solid all around.

Is 3600 C16 not the 1:1 ratio for the Infinity Fabric?

 

[Evernessince]

Is 3600 C16 not the 1:1 ratio for the Infinity Fabric?

Yes, 3600 is the maximum frequency you can use 1 to 1 on the infinity fabric without overclocking. A decent amount of CPUs can push 3733 but that requires an OC on the infinity fabric.

I always thought you could use quicksynch in addition to the dgpu.

No idea since I don‘t have one of their CPU, but I keep reading that this is a plus for Intel CPU with iGPU so in the spirit of fairness I thought I‘d mention this.

That said, my kid is using the Radeon multimedia engine for video encoding and it works fine.

Quick Sync is just another encoding / decoding engine. This post explains it well:

What's the difference between Intel Quick Sync and Nvidia NVENC in video encoding?

Answer: Quick Sync takes advantage of the integrated GPU included in most recent Intel i3/i5/i7 CPUs and can dramatically accelerate encoding (or transcoding) video with the MP4/H.264 codecs. Different generations of CPU have had increasing capabilities in this regard and some of the most popular...

www.quora.com

Unfortunately you can't combine Nvidia's, Intel's, or AMD's solution. Aside from the technical hurdles of getting them to encode / decode the same content by working together, you'd have varying frames based on which engine decoded which frame. It would look awful.

There are some niche scenarios were it can be helpful but chances are you already have access to a better solution.

 

[Reehahs]

When will Intel realise that people are getting tired of platform that only last only one pair of 'tick/tock' cycles?

 

[Uncle Al]

$700 for a motherboard ..... and I can remember when we screamed about paying over $50 ........

 

[Skjorn]

$700 for a motherboard ..... and I can remember when we screamed about paying over $50 ........

The dollar has changed since that eon.

 

[Red999]

I guess comet lake still uses pcie 3 confirms that 14nm process won't be sufficient to deliver pcie 4 speed.

 

[Adi6293]

3900x at over $400 and 3950x over $700 doesn't really make AMD cheap either..

Nobody is telling you to buy either of them, they were and still are cheap next to Intels 9th gen and the general performance you can get out of them, strictly for gaming you get a 3600 and you loose almost nothing vs 3950X

 

[Shadowboxer]

I need a new CPU. If this Intel 10th gen stuff outperforms AMDs stuff in gaming and premier pro then I’m buying Intel. If it doesn’t I’m buying AMD. I’m not poor so I don’t care if the slightly worse part can save me $100 or something, I’m quite happy paying a little extra to have the best.

Not hard really is it. I love how we can measure the performance of these parts.

Oh also I think buying a brand new CPU and putting it in an older motherboard is stupid. I prefer to buy a new motherboard with each CPU that I buy. So I couldn’t care less about compatibility. As far as I’m aware both companies are only offering 1 gen of future compatibility at this point anyway.

 

[Adi6293]

I need a new CPU. If this Intel 10th gen stuff outperforms AMDs stuff in gaming and premier pro then I’m buying Intel. If it doesn’t I’m buying AMD. I’m not poor so I don’t care if the slightly worse part can save me $100 or something, I’m quite happy paying a little extra to have the best.

Not hard really is it. I love how we can measure the performance of these parts.

Oh also I think buying a brand new CPU and putting it in an older motherboard is stupid. I prefer to buy a new motherboard with each CPU that I buy. So I couldn’t care less about compatibility. As far as I’m aware both companies are only offering 1 gen of future compatibility at this point anyway.

If you are not poor then why not get the 3950X and be done with it? See how this compares in Premiere and you will know how it will stack up against 10900K. Gaming performance on this CPU will be similar to the point you wont be able to tell the difference unless you planning on playing at 1080p with 240Hz monitor?

PS. Can can upgrading your CPU but not motherboard be stupid? I deliberately bought a £240 X470 AM4 motherboard with my 2700X so when the time comes I dont have to worry about motherboard and the VRM or missiong features just a BIOS update and CPU swap, saves me hassle of swapping the motherboard and installing fresh Windows. ( Yes I know no PCI-E 4.0 on X470 but I dont need it )

 

[Shadowboxer]

If you are not poor then why not get the 3950X and be done with it? See how this compares in Premiere and you will know how it will stack up against 10900K. Gaming performance on this CPU will be similar to the point you wont be able to tell the difference unless you planning on playing at 1080p with 240Hz monitor?

PS. Can can upgrading your CPU but not motherboard be stupid? I deliberately bought a £240 X470 AM4 motherboard with my 2700X so when the time comes I dont have to worry about motherboard and the VRM or missiong features just a BIOS update and CPU swap, saves me hassle of swapping the motherboard and installing fresh Windows. ( Yes I know no PCI-E 4.0 on X470 but I dont need it )

I care a lot more about gaming performance than video render times. I tend to leave my system rendering and go off and do something else like have a shower or cook dinner etc, I’m not editing enough to need huge performance here. Gaming however I do notice small differences in performance, especially on my 144hz monitor. You are incorrect when you say you can only tell on a 1080p 244hz monitor. There are quite a lot of games that you can tell at 1440p 144hz. And I’m sick of the excuses. I care most about gaming performance, one of these parts will be measurably quicker at gaming so I’m not going to buy the worse part and constantly tell myself a lie that I can’t tell the difference.

But yeah it looks like Intel is going to be the winner, especially as they beat out AMD at premier pro anyway. Also at lightroom and photoshop with are other apps I use. Anything else I do with my system could be done with an old i3 (Netflix, outlook, browsing web etc).

Il wait and see though because as far as I’m aware AMD are also releasing new stuff. If it’s better for my uses then il get that. I await the benchmarks.

 

[Adi6293]

I care a lot more about gaming performance than video render times. I tend to leave my system rendering and go off and do something else like have a shower or cook dinner etc, I’m not editing enough to need huge performance here. Gaming however I do notice small differences in performance, especially on my 144hz monitor. You are incorrect when you say you can only tell on a 1080p 244hz monitor. There are quite a lot of games that you can tell at 1440p 144hz. And I’m sick of the excuses. I care most about gaming performance, one of these parts will be measurably quicker at gaming so I’m not going to buy the worse part and constantly tell myself a lie that I can’t tell the difference.

But yeah it looks like Intel is going to be the winner, especially as they beat out AMD at premier pro anyway. Also at lightroom and photoshop with are other apps I use. Anything else I do with my system could be done with an old i3 (Netflix, outlook, browsing web etc).

Il wait and see though because as far as I’m aware AMD are also releasing new stuff. If it’s better for my uses then il get that. I await the benchmarks.

Steve done a comparison here with 3900X vs 9900K with tuned RAM and the difference was minimal, some old games or games on older engines do run better on Intel like Far Cry but yeah I think it is best to wait till Ryzen 4000 comes out because Intel's IPC isn't going anywhere this time neither does the clock but with rumored 15% ipc gain and another bump to clock speeds Ryzen 4000 might as well beat Intel in gaming. And btw if you have adaptive sych display you definitely wont tell the difference between 134fps vs 144fps unless you are looking at your fps counter rather playing the game : - )

 

[Skjorn]

Steve done a comparison here with 3900X vs 9900K with tuned RAM and the difference was minimal, some old games or games on older engines do run better on Intel like Far Cry but yeah I think it is best to wait till Ryzen 4000 comes out because Intel's IPC isn't going anywhere this time neither does the clock but with rumored 15% ipc gain and another bump to clock speeds Ryzen 4000 might as well beat Intel in gaming. And btw if you have adaptive sych display you definitely wont tell the difference between 134fps vs 144fps unless you are looking at your fps counter rather playing the game : - )

I go with whoever has the best .1% lows as that is the most jarring and disruptive. Which happens to be Intel for almost all games.

Nobody is telling you to buy either of them, they were and still are cheap next to Intels 9th gen and the general performance you can get out of them, strictly for gaming you get a 3600 and you loose almost nothing vs 3950X

$700 is cheap? That's before taxes.. it's almost like they learned that from Intel.

 

[Adi6293]

I go with whoever has the best .1% lows as that is the most jarring and disruptive. Which happens to be Intel for almost all games.

$700 is cheap? That's before taxes.. it's almost like they learned that from Intel.

Its cheap is you take into consideration the OVERAL performance that chip has, in many tasks it outperforms the $999 Core i9 10980XE. I am not saying that $700 is not a lot of money because it is : - )

 

[m3tavision]

I need a new CPU. If this Intel 10th gen stuff outperforms AMDs stuff in gaming and premier pro then I’m buying Intel. If it doesn’t I’m buying AMD. I’m not poor so I don’t care if the slightly worse part can save me $100 or something, I’m quite happy paying a little extra to have the best.

Not hard really is it. I love how we can measure the performance of these parts.

Oh also I think buying a brand new CPU and putting it in an older motherboard is stupid. I prefer to buy a new motherboard with each CPU that I buy. So I couldn’t care less about compatibility. As far as I’m aware both companies are only offering 1 gen of future compatibility at this point anyway.

But there is ZERO point in buying a new LGA1200 mobo, when 10th Gen Intel CPUs do not support PCIe 4.0.

Might as well buy an AM4 X570 board & get Zen3. That is where I am at right now.

 

[Maxiking]

Intel always supports 2 gens per a chipset. Z490 is not compatible with their previous generations so it is pretty obvious there would be one more.

Been like that for ages.

 

[Puiu]

Sounds like it's kind of the opposite.... If they felt the pressure, they'd offer PCIe 4 now...
Looks like they feel people are stupid enough to buy this generation now - despite no real gains - and leak out "but you can keep your motherboard" for next year...

If you actually plan on getting a Rocket Lake CPU, why on Earth would you buy a Comet Lake now?!?!

The logical move is simply to wait a year - or buy AMD now since they actually offer PCIe 4.0 now - not to mention their CPUs are much better as well...

Intel seems to be betting on people being fools... and while it's scary... they're probably right.

They can't offer PCIe 4.0 with the architecture they currently have. For AMD it was simpler since all they had to do is change the I/O chiplet, not the whole architecture. Adding support for it now is clearly a good way of making some people invest in their platform (or at least make then wait for a bit longer) to steal a bit of AMD's thunder.

 

[hapkiman]

When will Intel realise that people are getting tired of platform that only last only one pair of 'tick/tock' cycles?

I see this mentioned a lot, but in reality not everyone upgrades every year to a new platform just because there is one. And conversely some people (even on AMD platforms) upgrade their mobo every time a new one comes out (like X470-X570) even though they dont have to. I still have a regularly used a i7 2600k system on an Z68 ASUS mobo, and have had it up and running for almost 9 years now. I've built several other rigs since (because that's what I do), but I never had the need or desire to upgrade the Z68 board or the Sandy Bridge proc.

 

[Boshum]

Looks like they feel people are stupid enough to buy this generation now - despite no real gains - and leak out "but you can keep your motherboard" for next year...

If you actually plan on getting a Rocket Lake CPU, why on Earth would you buy a Comet Lake now?!?!

The logical move is simply to wait a year - or buy AMD now since they actually offer PCIe 4.0 now - not to mention their CPUs are much better as well...

I don't know, I get the impression the i3-10100 will have some real gains not only over the i3-9100 but also over my Athlon X2 250 family computer #3. I also like the option of upgrading to Rocket Lake down the line. I don't think that PCIe 4.0 will help my IGP or future low-mid graphics card experience much either.

 

[theruck]

Nobody will need PCIe 4.0 for the next 2 years at least
it can be just skipped
therefore intel feels no pressure and amd pushes it as marketing. there is just no difference today

 

[Reehahs]

I see this mentioned a lot, but in reality not everyone upgrades every year to a new platform just because there is one. And conversely some people (even on AMD platforms) upgrade their mobo every time a new one comes out (like X470-X570) even though they dont have to. I still have a regularly used a i7 2600k system on an Z68 ASUS mobo, and have had it up and running for almost 9 years now. I've built several other rigs since (because that's what I do), but I never had the need or desire to upgrade the Z68 board or the Sandy Bridge proc.

It would be nice to upgrade to a more recent processor without having to through out a perfectly good motherboard and RAM.

I would upgrade to 8700K or the like if it is offered on the same platform as my 3570K. There is nothing compelling enough to upgrade from your 2600K or mine 3570K in the same platform.

 

[Squid Surprise]

I don't know, I get the impression the i3-10100 will have some real gains not only over the i3-9100 but also over my Athlon X2 250 family computer #3. I also like the option of upgrading to Rocket Lake down the line. I don't that PCIe 4.0 will help my IGP or future low-mid graphics card experience much either.

Rocket Lake is coming in a year... so if your plan is to upgrade to rocket lake... wait a year!
If you just MUST have a new PC now, unless you need the absolute best gaming PC, you’re far better off with an AMD...
Buying a PC because it will be compatible with next year’s CPU is foolish.

 

[Boshum]

Rocket Lake is coming in a year... so if your plan is to upgrade to rocket lake... wait a year!
If you just MUST have a new PC now, unless you need the absolute best gaming PC, you’re far better off with an AMD...
Buying a PC because it will be compatible with next year’s CPU is foolish.

Having an i3-10100 over an Athlon X2 250 for a whole year might be worth $125. And it might be 2 years before I upgrade. The rest of the system costs apply to Rocket Lake also, if I do upgrade again.
I'm not buying a PC "just because" it will be compatible with next year. That's a nice bonus though, and I want the option.
I am going with an i3-10100 for this system, because I know it will be a great fit for now and for quite a while into the future. I don't even think I will need to upgrade to Rocket Lake for a few years, I probably just won't wait that long.
It's more of a flavor thing. I already have an AM4 system. I might upgrade another system to AM4 in several months, but for that one I think it might be worth waiting for AM5 because of future options.
I think you are mistaken that I'm far better off with AM4 at this particular time with this particular PC. I think they are equally viable. I think I might just have to spend a tad bit more money...that's all.

 

[Squid Surprise]

Having an i3-10100 over an Athlon X2 250 for a whole year might be worth $125. And it might be 2 years before I upgrade. The rest of the system costs apply to Rocket Lake also, if I do upgrade again.
I'm not buying a PC "just because" it will be compatible with next year. That's a nice bonus though, and I want the option.
I am going with an i3-10100 for this system, because I know it will be a great fit for now and for quite a while into the future. I don't even think I will need to upgrade to Rocket Lake for a few years, I probably just won't wait that long.
It's more of a flavor thing. I already have an AM4 system. I might upgrade another system to AM4 in several months, but for that one I think it might be worth waiting for AM5 because of future options.
I think you are mistaken that I'm far better off with AM4 at this particular time with this particular PC. I think they are equally viable. I think I might just have to spend a tad bit more money...that's all.

The i3 lineup is a whole different kettle of fish... it's a budget CPU - why get an expensive motherboard?
A Ryzen 2600 will outperform it handily at the same or lower cost.

My initial arguments pertain to higher end Comet Lake - where they just make little sense unless you are only interested in gaming. I suggest checking out Techspot's "The Best CPUs 2020" - you can see plenty of better options in the $100-150 range than the 10100...

The Best CPUs: Productivity and Gaming

After reviewing CPUs throughout the year and revisiting the most interesting matchups post-launch, in this buying guide we put it all together to keep your CPU shopping...

www.techspot.com

 

[Boshum]

The i3 lineup is a whole different kettle of fish... it's a budget CPU - why get an expensive motherboard?
A Ryzen 2600 will outperform it handily at the same or lower cost.

My initial arguments pertain to higher end Comet Lake - where they just make little sense unless you are only interested in gaming. I suggest checking out Techspot's "The Best CPUs 2020" - you can see plenty of better options in the $100-150 range than the 10100...

The Best CPUs: Productivity and Gaming

After reviewing CPUs throughout the year and revisiting the most interesting matchups post-launch, in this buying guide we put it all together to keep your CPU shopping...

www.techspot.com

I won't get an expensive motherboard. If I upgrade to Rocket Lake, it will be a midrange CPU at best. I don't think a 2600 will outperform the i3 in my use case...the threshold is pretty low. A lot of the deals seem to be dying out. I probably will have to spend a little bit more than a comparable Ryzen deal, but again...I just want a little variety rather than all AM4.

 

[Squid Surprise]

I won't get an expensive motherboard. If I upgrade to Rocket Lake, it will be a midrange CPU at best. I don't think a 2600 will outperform the i3 in my use case...the threshold is pretty low. A lot of the deals seem to be dying out. I probably will have to spend a little bit more than a comparable Ryzen deal, but again...I just want a little variety rather than all AM4.

Each person to their own then... far be it from me to keep you from spending your cash...