Slides reveal Intel's entire 10th-gen series: Up to 5.3 GHz and 10 cores

mongeese

TS Maniac
Staff member

Two Intel presentation slides detailing all their major processors have been leaked and published by Informatica Cero and confirmed by VideoCardz, who also helped to fill in some of the blanks. While the specs are in no way guaranteed, at this point, they seem quite likely to be accurate.

Core i9 & Core i7

The i9-10900K has two extra cores and its base, single-core boost, and all-core boost frequencies are 100 MHz faster than this year’s i9-9900K. It also introduces new Velocity clocks, which replace the boost frequencies below a certain, yet-unknown temperature threshold. Kept sufficiently cool, a 10900K might be a serious upgrade over the 9900K.

Model Cores/
Threads
Base (GHz) All/Single Core Boost (GHz) Single Core Turbo 3.0 (GHz) All/Single Core Velocity (GHz) TDP (Watts)
i9-10900K 10/20 3.7 4.8/5.1 5.2 4.9/5.3 125W
i9-10900 10/20 2.8 4.5/5.0 5.1 4.6/5.1 65W
i7-10700K 8/16 3.8 4.7/5.0 5.1 - 125W
i7-10700 8/16 2.9 4.6/4.7 4.8 - 65W

The i7-10700K, on the other hand, is literally a 9900K: it has the same 8/16 core/thread configuration and the same boost clock speeds, which would put it a few percents faster than the 9700K.

Core i5

Model Cores/
Threads
Base (GHz) All/Single Core Boost (GHz) TDP (Watts)
i5-10600K 6/12 4.1 4.5/4.8 125W
i5-10600 6/12 3.3 4.4/4.8 65W
i5-10500 6/12 3.1 4.2/4.5 65W
i5-10400 6/12 2.9 4.0/4.3 65W

Intel has finally relented and is giving their mid-tier i5 parts hyperthreading. They’re all getting a 200 MHz increase to their boost clocks as well, and the combination amounts to a decent upgrade.

Core i3

The budget i3 range is also getting the hyperthreading upgrade. The i3-10320 is getting a 200 MHz boost, and the other two models are getting a 100 MHz increase. We can conclusively say that the 10th gen i3 series is better than the 7th-gen flagship i7-7700K, which is absolutely awesome.

Model Cores/
Threads
Base (GHz) All/Single Core Boost (GHz) TDP (Watts)
i3-10320 4/8 3.8 4.4/4.6 65W
i3-10300 4/8 3.7 4.2/4.4 65W
i3-10100 4/8 3.6 4.1/4.3 65W

Platform upgrades with tenth-gen are pretty minor, there’s no PCIe 4.0 to be seen here. However, Intel now officially supports DDR4-2933, Wi-Fi 6 and 2.5G ethernet which is solid. They’ve also abandoned their ridiculous 95W TDP claim and replaced it with a more realistic 125W TDP on the overclockable models.

As a whole the tenth generation isn’t revolutionary, and for all but the most dedicated enthusiasts, the upgrade from ninth gen isn’t worth it. But it’s one of the bigger updates that’s happened in the last three to four years on Intel’s side, so it’ll be nicely competitive if pricing is in order.

Release dates are still a mystery, but given the proximity of this leak to CES 2020 (starting on Jan 7), you can almost bet you’ll see these specs on the big screen when Intel takes the stage.

Permalink to story.

 

VitalyT

Russ-Puss
TechSpot Elite
Platform upgrades with tenth-gen are pretty minor, there’s no PCIe 4.0 to be seen here. However, Intel now officially supports DDR4-2933, Wi-Fi 6 and 2.5G ethernet which is solid.
What's is solid in another gen without PCIe 4.0?

You can buy an AMD board with WiFi-6, 2.5G Ethernet and PCIe 4.0 for a few month now.

M.2 drives for PCIe 4.0 already take very good advantage of the faster bus lane. And rumors have, so will new nVidia cards, due to be announced soon. Who will be buying Intel then?
 
Last edited:

R00sT3R

TS Guru
Yeah... but how hot will they run? Will you need your own personal nuclear power station-style cooling tower outside your house to cool it?
Well unless you like to sit there and run Prime95 stress test all day long, its a total non issue.

I have a 9900K (all core 4.8Ghz) cooled by a $60 Dark Rock 4 and it stays well below 65c in the most demanding of gaming tasks. Only when doing something like video encoding will temps go above that, but they still stay below 80c. Which is well within thermal limits.
 

bviktor

TS Booster
Gen4 M.2 drives not only "take advantage" of PCI-E 4, they're already pushing the limits. GB's Aorus gets you 5GB/s sequential, and the upcoming Lexar SSD will have an insane 7GB/s. The theoretical maximum for PCI-E 4.0 x4 is 7.88 GB/s...

I don't know what Intel were thinking with this glaring omission.
 

Hardware Geek

TS Maniac
What's is solid in another gen without PCIe 4.0?

You can buy an AMD board with WiFi-6, 2.5G Ethernet and PCIe 4.0 for a few month now.

M.2 drives for PCIe 4.0 already take very good advantage of the faster bus lane. And rumors have, so will new nVidia cards, due to be announced soon. Who will be buying Intel then?
And yet another new socket and chipset required as well. Intel just was not anywhere near ready for AMD to be competitive again.
 

Vulcanproject

TS Evangelist
Intel were gifting the midrange to AMD's 6 core parts because they lacked hyperthreading. I would never even look at an Intel 6 core without it the past few years because of that, they gave away far too much multithreaded performance. Ryzen 2600 and 3600 were just the easy default choice for anyone buying in that segment.

Now Intel are getting competitive again with the i5 10400 and 10500. Those bottom two 6C/12T parts are going to look much more attractive than the old i5 8400/9400, especially for gamers.

The new Intel chipsets are not helping themselves lacking the latest features, but if they can be priced right then it's ok.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boshum

paul s2

TS Member
Intel security inside.


Software and workloads used in performance tests may have been optimized for performance only on Intel microprocessors. Performance tests, such as SYSmark* and MobileMark*, are measured using specific computer systems, components, software, operations, and functions. Any change to any of those factors may cause the results to vary. You should consult other information and performance tests to assist you in fully evaluating your contemplated purchases, including the performance of that product when combined with other products.

Performance results are based on the date the systems are tested and may not reflect all publicly available security updates. See configuration disclosure for details. No product or component can be absolutely secure.
 

Evernessince

地獄らしい人間動物園
Well unless you like to sit there and run Prime95 stress test all day long, its a total non issue.

I have a 9900K (all core 4.8Ghz) cooled by a $60 Dark Rock 4 and it stays well below 65c in the most demanding of gaming tasks. Only when doing something like video encoding will temps go above that, but they still stay below 80c. Which is well within thermal limits.
4.8 GHz is pretty safe on a 9900K. It's going above that where temperatures and power consumption go way up. You don't see much performance boost either. the 9900K only gains 3% going from 4.8 to 5.2 in games.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 0dium and penn919

QuantumPhysics

TS Evangelist
Yeah... but how hot will they run? Will you need your own personal nuclear power station-style cooling tower outside your house to cool it?

I built one computer with a 7980xe i9 and a 9900KS i9 - and I built one for my cousin with a 9900k i9.

I used LIQUID COOLING AIO in all 3.

I absolutely see no reason why anyone buying one of these should use anything less than an AIO.
(I use Alienware's proprietary AIO and EVGA AIO for the other). Thus far, I get temperatures that remain lower than 50 degrees even after 2 hours of Call of Duty or Fallout .
 

azicat

TS Booster
Pricing will be the key, IMO. Those 6/12 i5s are only going to be competitive if they are priced to match the R5 3600 range; similarly with their corresponding motherboards. My gut feeling is that this is unlikely.

I also feel sorry for those who bought non-hyperthreaded 9 series CPUs this year for their systems.
 

hahahanoobs

TS Evangelist
And of course they will require the new motherboards. No, thanks. I will gladly choose Ryzen as my next CPU.
No new mobo because, no new chipset, no new features.
Yup. AMD is awesome for not "making" us change mobo.....

So 14++++++++++++++++nm again? intel fail yet again
Fail how? Far more optimization and performance (clocks+IPC+memory latency) for Intel, versus far less optimization for MT for AMD....

Not everyone plays Cinebench.
 

Mr Majestyk

TS Maniac
Nothing appealing about these at all IMO. How slow do they run with all the exploits patched. We already know they’ll only be a few % faster than 9xxx series other than if HT is needed, and the Zen 3 are making big gains. AMD is going to do even better next year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0dium

hahahanoobs

TS Evangelist
Nothing appealing about these at all IMO. How slow do they run with all the exploits patched. We already know they’ll only be a few % faster than 9xxx series other than if HT is needed, and the Zen 3 are making big gains. AMD is going to do even better next year.
How many consumers are complaing about slow Intel chips now? Where are the articles reporting consumers are not happy as a result? So why would newer chips be worse? Think, please. Your desperation is showing.
 

Evernessince

地獄らしい人間動物園
No new mobo because, no new chipset, no new features.
Yup. AMD is awesome for not "making" us change mobo.....
Right, and X570 with PCIe 4.0 would be? Oh that's right, more bandwidth on AMD's consumer platform then Intel's HEDT.

If you are taking the angle that AMD provides long lasting platforms by not providing new features and new chipsets, you are fighting against facts. Intel's platforms don't last 1-2 generations because each is innovative, they do so because Intel likes milking customers. Intel's platform is behind AMD's right now, just like their server and HEDT chips, because they planned on AMD releasing a dud in the original Ryzen and choose money over innovation, like they always have.
 
Last edited:

FatBoyDiesel

TS Rookie
4.8 GHz is pretty safe on a 9900K. It's going above that where temperatures and power consumption go way up. You don't see much performance boost either. the 9900K only gains 3% going from 4.8 to 5.2 in games.
Basically Intel's equivalent to AMD's GPUs when overclocks nowadays.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0dium

FatBoyDiesel

TS Rookie
I built one computer with a 7980xe i9 and a 9900KS i9 - and I built one for my cousin with a 9900k i9.

I used LIQUID COOLING AIO in all 3.

I absolutely see no reason why anyone buying one of these should use anything less than an AIO.
(I use Alienware's proprietary AIO and EVGA AIO for the other). Thus far, I get temperatures that remain lower than 50 degrees even after 2 hours of Call of Duty or Fallout .
What size AIO?
 

FatBoyDiesel

TS Rookie
Right, and X570 with PCIe 4.0 would be? Oh that's right, more bandwidth on AMD's consumer platform then Intel's HEDT.

If you are taking the angle that AMD provides long lasting platforms by not providing new features and new chipsets, you are fighting against facts. Intel's platforms don't last 1-2 generations because each is innovative, they do so because Intel likes milking customers. Intel's platform is behind AMD's right now, just like their server and HEDT chips, because they planned on AMD releasing a dud in the original Ryzen and choose money over innovation, like they always have.
Yeah. And Intel's got a thing for adding pins or rearranging them every couple of generations to milk chipset sales, too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hardware Geek

xiromisho

TS Member
Yeah... but how hot will they run? Will you need your own personal nuclear power station-style cooling tower outside your house to cool it?
Right? This is still 14nm... 8 cores and 16 threads of 9900k remains Intels hottest chip... 2 more cores shoved into the package in 14nm? That's a hit box.