Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Core i5 10600K + Core i9 10900K

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Intel Core i5 10600K + Core i9 10900K

    Phoronix: Intel Core i5 10600K + Core i9 10900K

    Intel announced at the end of April the 10th Gen Core "Comet Lake" S-Series CPUs with the Core i9 10900K being their new top-end processor with a 10 core / 20 thread processor that can clock up to 5.3GHz. The Comet Lake S-Series desktop CPUs are now shipping and this morning the embargo lifts in being able to publish the benchmarks. Here is how the Intel Core i5 10500K and Core i9 10900K processors are performing on Linux from Steam on Linux gaming to various interesting real-world workloads.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=29198

  • #2
    Quite surprising seeing 10900k get close to 3950 in some multithreaded tests (and even surpassing it in a few).
    The price/perf is great. The power draw, not so much (still very good considering it's a 14nm part).

    Comment


    • #3
      That Noctua NH-U9S was supplied by Intel or it was what you had at had at the time of the tests? For that i9 a big and fat cooler solution with 120 to 140mm fans was more appropriate. I wonder if the small NH-U9S (with 92mm fans) didn't cause the CPUS to thermal throttling.

      Comment


      • #4
        This is the competition I was hoping for the last decade. We as consumer can only win. Finally ca. 20% better then the previous gen and way cheaper. ...ok peak wattage is concerning.
        Last edited by CochainComplex; 05-20-2020, 09:59 AM. Reason: typo

        Comment


        • #5
          Intel's 10 fast cores are faster than 12 slower cores and in some cases faster than even 16 cores from the competition. People have written off Intel far too early. Sky Lake is still an excellent uArch whose only real shortcoming is its old 14nm node it's being produced on thus its power consumption can be relatively high (but not too much higher when paired with the RTX 2080 Ti and using a lesser GPU with the 10900K is stupid anyways).

          Now let's hear AMD sect followers who will proclaim that in some benchmarks needed by 0.05% of people on Earth 3900X and 3950X are faster and that AMD is superior to Intel because they can use TSMC fabs (ever heard of GloFo? and they are stuck with the 12LP+ node?) and Intel relies on its own.

          Comment


          • #6
            If AMD manages to bring Zen 3 to B450 and X470 motherboards, there will still be no reason to buy Intel!
            Hopefully AMD will invest some time also to improve the low level open source software for their CPUs.

            Comment


            • #7
              Move along, nothing to see here, Ryzen 4000 desktop coming soon.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by [email protected] View Post
                That Noctua NH-U9S was supplied by Intel or it was what you had at had at the time of the tests? For that i9 a big and fat cooler solution with 120 to 140mm fans was more appropriate. I wonder if the small NH-U9S (with 92mm fans) didn't cause the CPUS to thermal throttling.
                I agree that you really want a radiator with a chip like this, but at the same time it shows that the chip certainly doesn't require a big radiator to function properly.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by birdie View Post
                  Now let's hear AMD sect followers who will proclaim that in some benchmarks needed by 0.05% of people on Earth 3900X and 3950X are faster.
                  hey, birdie there you are.

                  no love for my post before yours?

                  This is the competition I was hoping for the last decade. We as consumer can only win. Finally ca. 20% better then the previous gen and way cheaper. ...ok peak wattage is concerning.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Slartifartblast View Post
                    Move along, nothing to see here, Ryzen 4000 desktop coming soon.
                    So much that. I was so hyped to get a 3000 series until I learned about 4000 series APUs coming out in a month and a half....ish. What's the point of the 3000 series when I can get the same thing with an iGPU that'll open up so many more possibilities as a Linux user? To me, it's the difference between running a dual-boot setup or running Xaero_Vincent's setup from here. Do I want to dual boot or do I want a wicked nice VM setup with GPU acceleration? Does that require an answer

                    10c/[email protected] is pretty amazing. The only problem is that Michael does a good job of reporting CPU issues so I've lost all confidence in Intel for the time being. They need to pull an AMD and come up with their own "Ryzen" to gain that market confidence back.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X