Intel Core i9-10900K, Core i7-10700K and Core i5-10600K marketing slides surface online

nanoguy

Posts: 445   +4
Staff member

This past week Intel unveiled the 10th generation, Comet Lake H-series CPUs for high-end laptops, sparking gamers and creators' enthusiasm with potent silicon that breaks the 5 GHz speed barrier inside a 45 W thermal envelope.

Of course, people have also been waiting for a while now to see the desktop variants in all their glory. After all, these will require new motherboards with LGA 1200 sockets, so everyone wants to know if they're worth upgrading to.

The new processors are reportedly slated for an April 30 announcement, and the marketing materials have already leaked online.

As expected, the i9-10900K seems to be a 10-core processor with a base clock of 3.7 Ghz and the ability to boost up to 5.3 Ghz using Intel's Thermal Velocity Boost (TVB) technology. This appears to be an exclusive feature of all 10th generation i9 variants. The i9-10900K is expected to have a TDP of 125W, and TVB will only kick in for short, burst workloads, and only when temperature and power budget allow for it.

Based on various benchmarks that have surfaced over the last few months, the i9-10900K is expected to be quite a bit faster than an i9-9900K (up to 30% in some scenarios). Leaks hint that it could be faster than AMD's Ryzen 3700X but also a tad slower than an R9 3900X.

Power efficiency won't be a strong point for the i9-10900K (which remains a 14nm part), which means Intel will have to play with pricing to get a winning formula against losing more market share to AMD. The latter is expected to unveil its Zen 3 CPU lineup in the second half of this year, and those will be improvements on 7nm, Zen 2 CPUs, which are already proving to be a better deal.

The i7-10700K will be an 8-core CPU with a base frequency of 3.8 GHz that will only go up to 5.1 GHz, but it won't support Thermal Velocity Boost. Contrast that with mobile Comet Lake i7 parts which do get support for TVB, and you'd think that Intel forgot to add that in for the desktop part. However, even on high-end laptops that will feature the best possible cooling solution, the desktop i7-10700K with the standard, Turbo Boost 3.0 will likely be able to sustain all-core boost clocks for much longer than say, the i7-10875H with TVB.

The i5-10600K will be a 6-core CPU with a moderately higher base clock of 4.1 GHz and a maximum boost clock of 4.8 Ghz. All three Comet Lake-S unlocked CPUs will come in two versions, one with a recycled Intel UHD 620 iGPU (rebranded to UHD 630 and running at slightly higher clocks), and a KF series without an iGPU.

At this point, pricing is everyone's guess, and so is Intel's ability to deliver these parts as originally planned, considering the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on supply chains worldwide.

Permalink to story.

 

wiyosaya

Posts: 5,104   +3,186
This may be a bad time for them to release, IMO, as the release may be buried in the coronavirus crisis. Not to mention how well it will benchmark.

And with Zen 3 coming out????
 

doakills

Posts: 6   +2
Just upgraded my old 4670K to a Ryzen 7 3800x. God dang, that is all. Upgrade list; b450 mobo, 16gb 3200 ram, 1 nvme + 1 Sata M.2, New power supply, and a replacement AIO unit. Speeds are crazy compared to my old processor (as it should be, 7 years old, lol). The heat from this AIO at idle is around 26-28C, full load 47-55c, though I am missing 1 fan in front of my case as I'm waiting on a replacement.

Overall, no regrets. Makes me ?? watching Intel not just launch a new architecture? There still at 14NM and makes me wonder if we will ever see there 10nm or something better before AMD even puts out there 5nm setup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lionvibez

Lounds

Posts: 402   +299
The Ryzen 5 3600 is already as low as £160 in the UK I can't see the i5 10600k coming in anywhere near that price point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pcnthuziast

pcnthuziast

Posts: 786   +378
The Ryzen 5 3600 is already as low as £160 in the UK I can't see the i5 10600k coming in anywhere near that price point.
Just a re-release of the 8700k as a slightly faster i5. It will be faster in gaming and a couple scenarios where intel already has advantages, be about even in other categories and sell for at least twice as much at launch.
 

Vulcanproject

Posts: 1,074   +1,713
At least they are all hyper threaded now, AMD forced this. After getting crushed constantly in multi threaded tests the past 3 years Intel have finally realized they can't keep it to only the highest end, because it makes people just walk into the arms of AMD's midrange.

i5-10600K looks a good pick IF pricing is reasonable. Should be a very strong competitor to the 3600x, not just at stock but also with that potential to overclock and potentially hit 5GHz. Like many here I'm skeptical about pricing but Intel have to stop the rot somehow.
 

Cooe14

Posts: 61   +77
Just like laptops, that 5.3GHz TVB boost clock is only going to happen when temps are <65°C.... Or basically, you'll never see that clock-speed under any kind of real load. Intel's marketing BS these days literally makes me sick it's so blatant & egregious.
 

Cooe14

Posts: 61   +77
At least they are all hyper threaded now, AMD forced this. After getting crushed constantly in multi threaded tests the past 3 years Intel have finally realized they can't keep it to only the highest end, because it makes people just walk into the arms of AMD's midrange.

i5-10600K looks a good pick IF pricing is reasonable. Should be a very strong competitor to the 3600x, not just at stock but also with that potential to overclock and potentially hit 5GHz. Like many here I'm skeptical about pricing but Intel have to stop the rot somehow.
Someone already reviewed the i5-10600K (qualification sample, so final clocks & all that) vs the R5-3600X, and the Ryzen chip absolutely DESTROYED it. The only chip that was somewhat competitive they tested was the i7-10700 which was essentially a dead ringer for the R7-3700X (which means the i7-10700K should be just a warmed over i9-9900K performance-wise).
 

Cooe14

Posts: 61   +77
Just a re-release of the 8700k as a slightly faster i5. It will be faster in gaming and a couple scenarios where intel already has advantages, be about even in other categories and sell for at least twice as much at launch.
Except the R5 3600 can often match or beat the i5-8700K in modern titles, so it doesn't even have a solid gaming advantage in that fight... That would be a totally pointless endevour when faster Comet Lake-S 6c/12t parts exist.
 

Vulcanproject

Posts: 1,074   +1,713
Someone already reviewed the i5-10600K (qualification sample, so final clocks & all that) vs the R5-3600X, and the Ryzen chip absolutely DESTROYED it.
If the 10600k had low engineering sample clocks which is most likely the case a 3600x is going to win easily.

At the quoted final retail clocks here it will not, they should be a close match up. On paper the revised instruction set 10600k (4.1/4.8) should be a bit faster than an 8700k (3.7/4.7), more than enough to go toe to toe in that segment. Not to mention overclocking, where the 3600x is basically all it has to give out the box. Pricing is something else.
 

Cooe14

Posts: 61   +77
If the 10600k had low engineering sample clocks which is most likely the case a 3600x is going to win easily.

At the quoted final retail clocks here it will not, they should be a close match up. On paper the 10600k should be a bit faster than an 8700k, more than enough to go toe to toe in that segment. Pricing is something else.
I already told you that they tested qualification samples and that they explicitly tested the clock-speeds to make sure they were correct... Can you not read or something?... -_-
If there's a reason for the mediocre performance, it would be the motherboard used (a CHEAP early production Dell unit), but the i7-10700 performed exactly where you'd expect, so I don't really buy that one either.
 

Vulcanproject

Posts: 1,074   +1,713
I already told you that they tested qualification samples and that they explicitly tested the clock-speeds to make sure they were correct... Can you not read or something?... -_-
Oh I can read, but I'm not naive enough to believe everything written on the internet by that well known source you quoted............'someone.'

Someone already reviewed the i5-10600K
I don't trust 'someone.' I trust tests from 'that guy.' If you had quoted 'that guy' I might have ate it up.

So alternative to this I'm more inclined to look at these legit seeming leaks, coming very close to launch and aligning with others we have heard up to this point lending them further credence.

As I stated, making our own assumptions if they are accurate then a 10600k is going to be faster than an 8700k, which already does perfectly well against a 3600x. If they are not then we'll see. Soon enough.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 5,104   +3,186
Next year :)
From the article:
Power efficiency won't be a strong point for the i9-10900K (which remains a 14nm part), which means Intel will have to play with pricing to get a winning formula against losing more market share to AMD. The latter is expected to unveil its Zen 3 CPU lineup in the second half of this year, and those will be improvements on 7nm, Zen 2 CPUs, which are already proving to be a better deal.
Second half of this year according to the article. ;)
 

Puiu

Posts: 3,868   +2,368
I was expecting at least a 12 core part from them, but it seems they just focused on adding a bit more Hz.
 

Evernessince

Posts: 4,977   +5,083
I think Intel could still do very well if they price these competitively. Even with all the caveats these will still be good gaming processors after Ryzen 4000 series drops. I don't know how Intel is going to advertise that 10 core CPU. Is it a gaming CPU or a productivity? If it's a gaming CPU I don't see how it would beat the 9900K or how Intel would explain how increasing core counts helps gaming when their competitor had 12 and 16 core CPU out a year ago. Suffice it to say, these CPUs need to be priced to bring more value than last generation.
 

Nobina

Posts: 2,407   +2,001
I'm probably gonna be in the market for a new CPU after this piece of **** pandemic is over, already have a potential buyer for my old hardware. Since Intel is about to drop these new CPUs it makes it a bit more difficult to choose. From what I see here it's not gonna be anything special so I take it just stick to AMD. I'm eyeing R5 3600 for the value.
 

Lounds

Posts: 402   +299
It'll be interesting to see performance per watt after overclocked. Because if a i5 10600k is using double the wattage of the 3600 for what 10% gain, is it really worth it lol.
 

Theinsanegamer

Posts: 1,834   +2,116
Except the R5 3600 can often match or beat the i5-8700K in modern titles, so it doesn't even have a solid gaming advantage in that fight... That would be a totally pointless endevour when faster Comet Lake-S 6c/12t parts exist.
Source on the 3600 beating a 8700K in modern titles? Every review out there shows ryzen 3000 ever so slightly behind intel, its the only thing intel wins at.
 

Azurelas

Posts: 13   +8
If you're primarily a PC gamer then these chips make sense. Otherwise it'll be expensive since the cooling requirements when overclocked will probably be enough to forgo central heating in winter.