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

CharmsD

Posts: 413   +253
When you reply to the comment directly above quotes are unneeded.

Sorry were you having a private conversation on an open forum?
First week on the internet 'ey. If someone is being quoted and asked a direct question, the question is probably intended for them. It has nothing to do with privacy on PUBLIC/PRIVATE forums.
 

Lew Zealand

Posts: 1,311   +1,262
TechSpot Elite
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?
I'm not saying I want anyone to beat anyone else, though alternating 1-ups will work in our favor the best. IMO these extra 2 cores won't catch up to AMD at the current price points as this 10-core will probably compete well with AMD's 12-core in productivity but it likely will be a >$500 part based on Intel's recent pricing. IMO Intel will do this because of the perceived gaming advantage. If I'm wrong, that will work in everyone's favor.

Actually what I'm anticipating is what will happen a year+ from now. Intel maybe with 10nm parts vs. AMD with Ryzen 4000. I'm guessing Intel will have better IPC vs AMD by that time, but probably lower clock speeds than Intel's 14nm+++ parts (like the mobile situation today). Intel may "win" the productivity speed crown at that time though pricing is anyone's guess.

However if Intel can get their clock speed up like they have with 14nm, they could leave AMD well behind again in the following 6 months to a year. That's the situation which I hope doesn't happen. As you suggest, competition is good for the consumer.
 
[parsehtml]
<p><img src="https://static.techspot.com/images2/news/bigimage/2020/02/2020-02-15-image-3.jpg"></p>

<p>Intel’s tenth generation processors aren’t confirmed, yet there’s little mystery surrounding them. In late December, <a href="https://informaticacero.com/exclusivo-asi-formara-la-decima-generacion-core-de-intel-i9-10900k-buque-insignia/">Informatica Cero</a> obtained slides detailing the entire lineup, and their information has been almost confirmed by about a dozen <a href="https://twitter.com/TUM_APISAK">online</a> <a href="https://mobile.twitter.com/_rogame">sightings</a>.</p>

<p>The flagship is the decacore i9-10900K, with a reported 5.1 GHz single-core boost and a 5.3 GHz single-core velocity boost. Two of its Fire Strike Physics scores have been uncovered, and at 28,462 and 28,988, they’re 15% and 17% higher than the 9900K’s average score of 24,741.</p>

<p>Its Time Spy CPU result of 13,142 is 19.5% higher than the 9900K’s average score of 10,997 as well. Both the 10900K and 10900 have been listed on <a href="https://2.taobao.com/item.htm?id=610456740332">Taobao</a>, with photographs.</p>

<p class="byline" style="text-align: center;">The table below has been put together based on details provided by Informatica Cero and Videocardz.</p>

<table class="article-table alt" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr class="title">
<td width="18%">Model</td>
<td>Cores/<br>
Threads</td>
<td>Base (GHz)</td>
<td>All/Single Core Boost (GHz)</td>
<td>Single Core Turbo 3.0 (GHz)</td>
<td>All/Single Core Velocity (GHz)</td>
<td>TDP (Watts)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>i9-10900K</td>
<td>10/20</td>
<td>3.7</td>
<td>4.8/5.1</td>
<td>5.2</td>
<td>4.9/5.3</td>
<td>125W</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>i9-10900</td>
<td>10/20</td>
<td>2.8</td>
<td>4.5/5.0</td>
<td>5.1</td>
<td>4.6/5.1</td>
<td>65W</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>i7-10700K</td>
<td>8/16</td>
<td>3.8</td>
<td>4.7/5.0</td>
<td>5.1</td>
<td>-</td>
<td>125W</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>i7-10700</td>
<td>8/16</td>
<td>2.9</td>
<td>4.6/4.7</td>
<td>4.8</td>
<td>-</td>
<td>65W</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>i5-10600K</td>
<td>6/12</td>
<td>4.1</td>
<td>4.5/4.8</td>
<td>-</td>
<td>-</td>
<td>125W</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>i5-10600</td>
<td>6/12</td>
<td>3.3</td>
<td>4.4/4.8</td>
<td>-</td>
<td>-</td>
<td>65W</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

<p>In second place is the Core i7-10700K and i7-10700, which aren’t for sale – what a shame.</p>

<p>The 10700K has been spotted with a 5.3 GHz boost which is higher than the 5.0 GHz Informatica Cero’s info suggested, while the 10700 itself is falling a bit short at only 4.6 - 4.7 GHz. What’s more interesting is a Fire Strike Extreme Physics score for the 10700, which is 23.7% higher than the 9700’s average score at 23,326.</p>

<p>Taobao is also listing a Core i5-10600K and non-K models. Informatica Cero’s info, 3DMark entries, and <a href="https://www.techspot.com/downloads/27-cpu-z.html">CPU-Z</a> screenshots all suggest these processors will be Intel’s first multi-threaded mid-range parts, with six cores and twelve threads.</p>

<p>The other mid-range and budget parts haven’t appeared much outside of Informatica Cero’s slides, so we’ll direct you back to <a href="https://www.techspot.com/news/83349-slides-reveal-intel-entire-10th-gen-series-up.html">that article</a> if you’re curious about those as well.</p>

<p><img src="https://static.techspot.com/images2/news/bigimage/2020/02/2020-02-15-image.jpg"></p>

<p class="byline"><a href="https://hk.xfastest.com/46193/xfastest-got-the-new-intel-comet-lake-s-cpu-core-i9-10900-es/">Xfastest</a> apparently got their hands on this 10900 engineering sample.</p>

<p>Seeing that Intel is shipping engineering samples in a fairly large volume, they must be getting close to release. And with such enticing leaks, that’s exciting.</p>

<p>However, Intel has spent the past five years plucking performance out of an architecture and node they introduced in 2015. Their <a href="https://www.techspot.com/review/1041-intel-core-i7-6700k-skylake/">then-flagship 6700k</a> quad-core gaming piece had a 91W TDP and a $339 price tag. The present day’s <a href="https://www.techspot.com/review/1744-core-i9-9900k-round-two/">9900K</a> is a $488 octa-core furnace that regularly consumes in excess of 150W (but is marketed with a misleading 95W TDP, <a href="https://www.techspot.com/review/1744-core-i9-9900k-round-two/">mind you…</a>). Consequently, we can only expect that they’ve continued wringing more performance out of something that should’ve been put down years ago and have produced yet another literal burning hole in your pockets and CPU sockets.</p>

<p>And thus, we’d like to remind readers that the sanguinity of leaks should invoke some suspicion. The 10900K and 10700K will probably both turbo over 5 GHz and outdo their predecessors by anywhere from 15-20% in certain (ideal) workloads.</p>

<p>But like the 9900K, which requires specific and pricey motherboards and coolers to sustain peak performance, these new processors might conceal hidden compromise. Please wait for reviews before purchasing these chips, even if Taobao’s listing makes for an enticing offer.</p>
<p><a rel='alternate' href='https://www.techspot.com/news/84033-intel-10th-gen-processors-havent-announced-but-they.html' target='_blank'>Permalink to story.</a></p><p class='permalink'><a rel='alternate' href='https://www.techspot.com/news/84033-intel-10th-gen-processors-havent-announced-but-they.html'>https://www.techspot.com/news/84033-intel-10th-gen-processors-havent-announced-but-they.html</a></p>[/parsehtml]
Amazon is selling them for March 2 delivery.
 

mongeese

Posts: 377   +57
Staff member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #54
Amazon is selling them for March 2 delivery.
That's the 10900X, not the 10900K. The former is a Cascade Lake-X chip released last November for $590, the latter is an upcoming Comet Lake-S chip. They're both 10 core / 20 thread parts, but the 10900X has a 4.3 GHz all core boost and a 4.7 GHz Turbo Boost Max 3.0 clock while the 10900K is expected to have a 4.8 GHz boost and a 5.2 GHz Turbo Boost Max 3.0 clock. There are also a few platform differences.

The existence of the 10900X is something to note, though - what can we really expect from this new chip, if Intel released something so similar only a few months ago?
 

Irata

Posts: 524   +646
TechSpot Elite
What does that have to do with what I said about "misleading" TDP's?
I must have misunderstood you - didn't think mentioning the power use of a LN2 overclocked 32 core chip had anything to do with real life advertised vs. actual TDP.

This was in response to you saying that you did not care much about a CPU's additional power draw if it does extra work (assuming extra fps here).

I wanted to stress that there is a point of diminishing returns, I.e. that additional power draw of one PC component will negatively affect other components at some point and increase overall cost.
 

hahahanoobs

Posts: 2,982   +1,174
I must have misunderstood you - didn't think mentioning the power use of a LN2 overclocked 32 core chip had anything to do with real life advertised vs. actual TDP.

This was in response to you saying that you did not care much about a CPU's additional power draw if it does extra work (assuming extra fps here).

I wanted to stress that there is a point of diminishing returns, I.e. that additional power draw of one PC component will negatively affect other components at some point and increase overall cost.
No such response needed, but thank you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Irata
I'm using an Optane 900p because my computer my computer reads and processes tiny, random files all day. If I spent more time allocating 160GB Steam game installs, then a large jump in sequential transfers would be great. But after a day of use HWinfo64 generally shows only a few hundred megabytes per second peak transfer speed. Run a disk transfer speed test, and it's up at a couple gigabytes.
With my 9900k I'm getting 320 MB/s 4k random read @ QD=1 with Optane 900p 480GB. On my 3900x 4k rr @ QD =1 with 900p is ~200 MB/s.

This is due to higher latency on Amd plattform.

Sequencial read and write is not that important, if you aren't moving large files from one equal fast "ssd" to another.

I'm upgrading plattform when next gen Optane is in my hands :)
 

Ben Myers

Posts: 88   +30
As with any of the new high-end CPUs, do your homework! You may find you need, not just a specific motherboard, but also the motherboard BIOS flashed with a version compatible with the CPU and very, very specific memory with very, very specific timings.

The wounds I got from building a bleeding edge box with the bestest and fastest 18-core i9 Extreme are still not healed. I had to get a low-end i9 to flash the Asus motherboard BIOS and then ordered very exacting DDR4 memory direct from Crucial, because I did not trust any of the usual retail vendors to send me the right memory.
 
As with any of the new high-end CPUs, do your homework! You may find you need, not just a specific motherboard, but also the motherboard BIOS flashed with a version compatible with the CPU and very, very specific memory with very, very specific timings.

The wounds I got from building a bleeding edge box with the bestest and fastest 18-core i9 Extreme are still not healed. I had to get a low-end i9 to flash the Asus motherboard BIOS and then ordered very exacting DDR4 memory direct from Crucial, because I did not trust any of the usual retail vendors to send me the right memory.
Say what?
I have had 4x x299 cpu's and 3x motherboards. Using g.skill b-die only. No problems what so ever with Asus, msi or Asrock.

Do you trying to make things as hard as possible?
 

Ben Myers

Posts: 88   +30
Say what?
I have had 4x x299 cpu's and 3x motherboards. Using g.skill b-die only. No problems what so ever with Asus, msi or Asrock.

Do you trying to make things as hard as possible?
Did I say: "do your homework!"??? Ever do a system with an 18-core i9 Extreme?