Intel's 10th-gen processors haven't been announced, but they are for sale

Lew Zealand

Posts: 1,292   +1,244
TechSpot Elite
15-17% puts them above equivalently priced Ryzen 3xxx performance. And with a single core speed improvement it will take its gaming prowess even higher.
You missed something there: there is no similarly priced Ryzen product. Because there is no price on the 10 core Intel chip, which is the only chip showing the 15-17% improvement. We already know the performance of the other chips as they are the 9900K, 8700K, and 7700K. And we don't know their prices, either.

As for single core improvement, that will be around 2 (maybe 4?) percent based on clock speed improvement. Nice, but probably not worth wasting the money paying for the other 9 cores.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Burty117 and 0dium

Vulcanproject

Posts: 1,080   +1,724
The multithreading is what is important for these parts. AMD basically forced Intel to stop messing around by delivering crippled multithreaded performance unless you paid top dollar.

It didn't really matter to games that much but it looked bad in productivity. That was definitely moving people outside of gamers into the arms of AMD. For example I would not have a problem giving away a few frames in games if I saved a big chunk transcoding video.

Now they will deliver i5-10600K which is an i7 8700k for the midrange. A superb gaming CPU even now and does the business besides just games with 12 threads. It should do very well against a 3600x.

If they aren't ridiculous with the price then once again the ball will pass to AMD and Zen 3 to up the stakes later this year.
 

cfbcfbcfb

Posts: 27   +17
PCIe 4.0 is a big deal for... sequential file reads? Don't get me wrong, I'd prefer having it over but having it, but a 100 MHz clock increase is probably a bigger deal, and that doesn't matter much either.
I wonder what exactly anyone would do with 4.0. Who transfers hundreds of gigabytes at a time and needs it to happen instantly? What GPU would demand this that'd be released in the next 3-4 years?

Pretty much nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CharmsD and Anatun

krizby

Posts: 340   +214
TechSpot Elite
Did you read the conclusion? It said the only time to consider a premium CPU is if buying a $1000+ card, otherwise all the other graphics cards perform generally the same with the CPUs. As such, I was referring to the majority of people that will be buying midrange /upper midrange cards like the Ampere 3060-3080.
3070 will just be as fast as 2080 Ti, you can bet on it. And yes people generally want couple the fastest CPU with the fastest GPU, in this case 3080 Ti will be held back at 1440p for sure. Time to grab those 4k 144hz screens I guess :D.
 

captaincranky

Posts: 16,044   +4,849
According to Intel's "road map", they should be at 8 nm by now? Methinks that was just a bunch of bullshit, (with a sprig of parsley), that was served at a stockholders luncheon.

At the rate Intel , is, "moving forward", in another 5 years or so, we'll have 14 nm parts with model numbers into 6 or 7 digits.

Truth be told though, I'm not even sure Intel 10 nm parts, would make me willing to allow M$ to pound Windows 10 into my fragile, aging, rump. :eek:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zorak and 0dium

Shadowboxer

Posts: 569   +333
You missed something there: there is no similarly priced Ryzen product. Because there is no price on the 10 core Intel chip, which is the only chip showing the 15-17% improvement. We already know the performance of the other chips as they are the 9900K, 8700K, and 7700K. And we don't know their prices, either.

As for single core improvement, that will be around 2 (maybe 4?) percent based on clock speed improvement. Nice, but probably not worth wasting the money paying for the other 9 cores.
Yes I did assume it would cost the same as the 10900K. I don’t know if it will. I’m just quite surprised to see those sort of gains on 14nm chips.

As for the single core improvement, no it’s not worth paying for if you have something like a 9900K already. But coming from Older hardware it would be good to know you are buying the CPU with the fastest single core speed on the market. If you’re a gamer then you would be buying the best.

The point I’m making is that it would be very good for the industry if Intel can beat AMDs 3xxx series. Competition is good for the consumer and that means we need Intel and AMD to be one upping each other every year. If the 10900k does cost the same as a 9900K or a 3900X but performs 15% faster than a 9900K we will have a new best in class.

I can’t imagine why anyone wouldn’t want Intel to beat AMD with their new CPU launch?
 

Irata

Posts: 512   +623
TechSpot Elite
I think the 8 cores & 16 threads at 4.5ghz on all (even if with overclocking) are more than enough horsepower @ for Ampere/RDNA2 and probably the next 4 generations of graphics cards @ 1440p+. Once you pass 1440p, its mostly the GPU anyways.
But at some point those high end GPU should saturate the 16x PCIe 3 bus. Current gen not, but what about the next gen or the one after that
 

Top S

Posts: 14   +5
If performance holds up I'm going with Comet Lake over Ryzen.

3970X on LN2 can pull 1100w alone @ 4.9GHz....

I couldn't care less about a 150W power draw from CPU when actually putting it to work versus what a chip pulls when browsing and watching YouTube. Aren't we all using 500W+ PSU's? I imagine it's sub 100W while doing that?
How is a 32-core chip under LN2 any relevant to this discussion?
PSU, or even electricity cost, is never the major issue of high power consumption on desktops and laptops. The cooling required (especially in small form factors or laptops), the motherboard required, or simply the bad experience gaming near it in summer are much bigger ones.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Irata

Irata

Posts: 512   +623
TechSpot Elite
How is a 32-core chip under LN2 any relevant to this discussion?
PSU, or even electricity cost, is never the major issue of high power consumption on desktops and laptops. The cooling required (especially in small form factors or laptops), the motherboard required, or simply the bad experience gaming near it in summer are much bigger ones.
That - all the extra heat is in the case affecting / heating up the other components. Sure, you can watercool the CPU and add extra case fans but there are still the vrm and other components that heat up.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 0dium and Top S

hahahanoobs

Posts: 2,982   +1,174
How is a 32-core chip under LN2 any relevant to this discussion?
PSU, or even electricity cost, is never the major issue of high power consumption on desktops and laptops. The cooling required (especially in small form factors or laptops), the motherboard required, or simply the bad experience gaming near it in summer are much bigger ones.
It was just a fun fact. You're welcome btw.

"PSU, or even electricity cost, is never the major issue of high power consumption on desktops and laptops."

What? I'm not sure I know what you're talking about. Are you agreeing with me or not?
 

hahahanoobs

Posts: 2,982   +1,174
That - all the extra heat is in the case affecting / heating up the other components. Sure, you can watercool the CPU and add extra case fans but there are still the vrm and other components that heat up.
What are you talking about?! Explain.
 

Irata

Posts: 512   +623
TechSpot Elite
What are you talking about?! Explain.
You have a PC case containing components that all consume energy and radiate heat. All those components affect each other, so if one of them generates a lot of heat, it will in turn heat up all the other components and that heat needs to be evacuated from the case.

Also, the VRM, PSU etc do not operate at 100% efficiency and fans will also use some power so if the CPU uses 100W+, overall system consumption will go up even more.

Another question is if the GPU can boost as high in a hot case as it can in a cold one?

You can use watercooling and have many case fans which will help but that adds to the overall system cost, so those extra few fps will come at a high cost.
 

Top S

Posts: 14   +5
It was just a fun fact. You're welcome btw.

"PSU, or even electricity cost, is never the major issue of high power consumption on desktops and laptops."

What? I'm not sure I know what you're talking about. Are you agreeing with me or not?
I said I do care about high CPU power draw due to the cooling required/noise, the motherboard (VRM etc) required, and the heat emission to the room, etc, even though I do have capable PSUs
 

hahahanoobs

Posts: 2,982   +1,174
You have a PC case containing components that all consume energy and radiate heat. All those components affect each other, so if one of them generates a lot of heat, it will in turn heat up all the other components and that heat needs to be evacuated from the case.

Also, the VRM, PSU etc do not operate at 100% efficiency and fans will also use some power so if the CPU uses 100W+, overall system consumption will go up even more.

Another question is if the GPU can boost as high in a hot case as it can in a cold one?

You can use watercooling and have many case fans which will help but that adds to the overall system cost, so those extra few fps will come at a high cost.
What does that have to do with what I said about "misleading" TDP's?
 

hahahanoobs

Posts: 2,982   +1,174
I said I do care about high CPU power draw due to the cooling required/noise, the motherboard (VRM etc) required, and the heat emission to the room, etc, even though I do have capable PSUs
And that has nothing to do with what I said.