Intel's 10th Gen Core Comet Lake-S Processors Debut: One Last Hurrah For 14nm (hothardware.com) 49
MojoKid writes: A couple of weeks back, Intel announced its 10th Gen Core desktop processors but today the embargo has been lifted on performance data. Intel's new 10th Gen Core series desktop chips are still based on the same architecture and leverage the same 14nm++ manufacturing process as their 9th Gen predecessors, but the company made numerous changes with Comet Lake-S in an attempt to deliver even more performance, efficiency, and value. A review of the new chips at HotHardware details features and performance of a couple of the stand-outs in Intel's initial 10th Gen Core series line-up -- the flagship Core i9-10900K and mid-range Core i5-10600K.
The Core i9-10900K features a monolithic, 10-core (20-thread) die that boosts to 5.3GHz, while the Core i5-10600K offers 6 cores / 12-threads at a 4.8GHz boost clock. Although the architecture is the same as the previous-gen, Intel has tuned its 10th Gen's frequency and voltage curves to boost performance and optimize power. The Core i9-10900K ends up being a significant upgrade over its predecessor, but more-so for multi-threaded tasks. The Core i5-10600K, however, is a decent upgrade over the previous-gen Core i5-9600K, in terms of both single- and multi-threaded performance. Both CPUs deliver competitive performance versus similarly-priced Ryzen 3000 series chips from AMD, though Intel retains an edge in gaming, while AMD delivers better overall multithreaded performance.
The Core i9-10900K features a monolithic, 10-core (20-thread) die that boosts to 5.3GHz, while the Core i5-10600K offers 6 cores / 12-threads at a 4.8GHz boost clock. Although the architecture is the same as the previous-gen, Intel has tuned its 10th Gen's frequency and voltage curves to boost performance and optimize power. The Core i9-10900K ends up being a significant upgrade over its predecessor, but more-so for multi-threaded tasks. The Core i5-10600K, however, is a decent upgrade over the previous-gen Core i5-9600K, in terms of both single- and multi-threaded performance. Both CPUs deliver competitive performance versus similarly-priced Ryzen 3000 series chips from AMD, though Intel retains an edge in gaming, while AMD delivers better overall multithreaded performance.
TL:DR; Intel 10K CPUs = budget gaming (Score:5, Insightful)
It is a strange world we live when Intel chips have become budget gaming CPUs while AMD's CPU have much better bang/buck.
e.g. 3600X, 3900X, Threadripper, etc.
Re:TL:DR; Intel 10K CPUs = budget gaming (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:TL:DR; Intel 10K CPUs = budget gaming (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Intel does still have a slight edge in gaming performance in some games, but at a hefty price to get a few more FPS. It's not just the price of the CPU, it's the more expensive motherboard and cooling system you need.
These things run hot. Intel decreased the die thickness to increase the thermal envelope for these CPUs. Without overclocking they pull 250W. You need a pretty good motherboard just to handle that, not to mention cooler.
In practice you would almost certainly be better off getting a Ryzen system
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt there is any game that uses so many threads that it benefits from modern CPUs, it does not me any sense.
On the server, if it is an mmo, yes, but on the client, no.
Re: TL:DR; Intel 10K CPUs = budget gaming (Score:1)
No they won't.
Anyone actually making that decision himself, will also be one aware of the rapid changes in that market, and do full research befory buying.
In the past, I even saw that on gamers who had never bought components themselves in their lives.
Cause the whole point you're doing it for, is to get the biggest bang, and ideally for the buck too.
The n00bs will just buy what the above people picked for them. Which will be a Ryzen 3, and a Ryzen 7 for the normal gamers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Well, that's because people have been burned by AMD. Not AMD"s fault, mind you, but the last time AMD was on top in the Athlon and K5 days, AMD got burned horren
Re: (Score:2)
I'd hardly call it FUD. I used AMD CPU's from the K6 days all the way to Socket AM3, and the only system that ran close to as well as an Intel system was the Socket A Athlon XP with the nForce2 chipset. Granted, it likely wasn't the AMD CPU's fault, but the VIA chipsets were garbage. The SiS chipsets were garbage. The nVidia chipsets after the nForce2 were absolute garbage. Even AMD's own chipsets had stability issues. Which is why in 2012 I finally said enough and built my first (and so far only) Int
Re: TL:DR; Intel 10K CPUs = budget gaming (Score:2)
Intel is still the better performer in gaming under 4k by about 10-15%. However you're paying a 200-300 dollar tax for that privilege when all's said and done. I'd rather spend that on more memory and SSD space or a better graphics card if I was going to spend it at all.
Re: TL:DR; Intel 10K CPUs = budget gaming (Score:1)
"Gaming" is a bad argument.
No new game will be coded so badly that it doesn't use all the cores. That is only for old games that were designed for old consoles with limited cores.
New game engine designs will use all your cores to the fullest.
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed.
After watching the UE5 on PS5 [youtube.com] tech demo several things come to mind:
* 2010 was the decade of quad-core
* 2020 will be the decade of octa-core
* PS5 has a custom 12-channel memory controller which means these three will become important to handle the HUGE bandwidth requirements:
o PCIe 4.0
o NVMe SSD
o DDR5 (or DDR4 3200+)
* Software rendering is in vogue again <-- it is here where the high core count of Ryzen is kicking intel to the curb.
Intel's CPUs are "goo
Re: (Score:2)
Following up my previous post [slashdot.org] then When should I upgrade? Is a natural question.
Here is a summary:
=== CPU Upgrade Cheat Sheet ===
Do you "need" to upgrade? No --> re-asses upgrading till 2025.
Can you wait till Spring 2021? Yes --> check Ryzen 4000 and DDR5 prices & performance.
Can you wait till Fall 2020? Yes --> check Ryzen 4000 prices & performance.
Need it today? Yes --> Highly recommend a R9 3600 (or R9 3900X) + X570 + DDR4 3200+ as this offers as great "future proofing" (well, as any
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
how does AMD/Intel performance per watt compare?
Re:TL:DR; Intel 10K CPUs = budget gaming (Score:4, Informative)
They trade places for the most part but scale up based on core count.
GamersNexus has this i9 10900K review [gamersnexus.net]. You'll want to look at this power usage chart [gamersnexus.net]
Don't let intel's low TDP spec. fool you -- that is only for idle. The i9 10900K can easily scale up past 250 W under load even though the specs say it uses 125 W.
You'll also want to read Anandtech's i9 10900K review [anandtech.com] as it discusses power usage. They have a graph [anandtech.com] of power usage under load with y-Cruncher. Page 5 [anandtech.com] also has more details and graphs on power consumption. This graph [anandtech.com] shows power under full load along with CPU price.
One last hurrah? (Score:4, Informative)
One last hurrah for 14nm? This is the third generation to unexpectedly use 14nm per Intel's Tick-Tock model.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:One last hurrah? (Score:5, Funny)
May 20, 2021: "Chocolate Lake-S Processors Debut: One Last One Last Hurrah For 14nm"
In Homer’s voice: mmmmm, chocolate lake. *drools*
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Considering they only really started doing the tick-tock thing with the later Pentium 4 chips, I think it's been broken now longer than it was ever working.
10th gen Core? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Whats the point of measuring generations by dumb marketing names? Shouldn't it go by technology or intrinsic design like 3rd gen with x feature or the xth generation of processors by intel period? Core is just some silly branding with nothing really unifying the processors underneath it.
They could go back to the old 80x86 model numbers.
How does 801886 sound?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: 10th gen Core? (Score:1)
I don't think they all deserve a new major number. At least the last few ones are, at best, point releases.
Price competitive? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I've found some prices at a Canadian Retailer [canadacomputers.com] but they say out of stock right now. $399 for the 10600K, while the 3600x is currently at $319 on sale. The 3700x is also on sale for $429. I'd gladly choose the 3700x for an extra $30 if I was building as system right now. 33% more actual cores/threads with a slight hit on single core speed.
Re: (Score:2)
PCI-e gen 4 and a socket that might last more than a year too.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, from what I understand, many of the motherboard manufacturers have stated that their boards will support PCI-E Gen 4 even if the current CPU does not support it right now. So you could upgrade the CPU in the future and get Gen 4 once Intel figures it out. Still seems like a bad bet though as there's no guarantee that Intel will release a chip with Gen 4, and even then it's an expensive update when you can have Gen 4 right now with AMD.
Intel are flogging a dead horse (Score:3)
They need to move to 7nm like AMD and make a decent chip. Intel's ailing architecture is partly the reason why Apple laptops are getting too hot (which is also Apple's fault because of its obsession with reducing size at the expense of adequate cooling). You'd be nuts to buy an Intel-based computer today. My next one is going to be an AMD Ryzen 3600 and my old Late 2013 MacBook Pro will be stuffed in a drawer.
Re:Intel are flogging a dead horse (Score:4, Interesting)
>"You'd be nuts to buy an Intel-based computer today. My next one is going to be an AMD Ryzen 3600"
I nursed an old computer at home for many years (Asus M4A89TD-Pro M3, AMD Phenom 2 1099T, 8GB G.Skill DDR3 1600 RAM, SATA SSD). Skipped through the Intel domination period. Then finally, late last year, pulled out the motherboard and replaced it with:
* ASUS Prime X570-P Ryzen 3 AM4 with PCIe Gen4, Dual M.2 HDMI, SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.2 Gen 2 ATX Motherboard $170
* AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 8-core, 16-Thread Unlocked Desktop Processor with Wraith Prism LED Cooler $329
* Kingston Technology HyperX Fury Black 32GB 3466MHz DDR4 CL19 DIMM(Kit of 2) Memory HX434C19FBK2/32 $206
* Corsair Force Series MP600 1TB Gen4 PCIe X4 NVMe M.2 SSD $206
And loaded up Linux. I have been massively impressed. Uses so much less power (about half), is now super quiet, tremendously faster processing (twice the single thread speed, 400- 600% the multithread performance), storage speed 450% faster (both read AND write), rock solid reliable. I am very glad I waited a little longer to get into the Zen 2 & Gen4 PCIe.
Re: (Score:3)
My Thuban (a 1055T) died after only 3 years. The chip itself, not the motherboard it was in. It was a sad day. Had to go back to quad core in 2014 or so.
The Thubans turned out to have sketchy longevity. Surprised you still have a working one.
Re: (Score:2)
>"Wow you were running a Thuban for 9 years?"
8 years. It was a great computer. Ran kinda hot, though. But I had good fans and a filtered-air case. During the 8 years, I upgraded the memory once, the video once, and went from HDD to SDD. SSD made a huge difference.
Two of my friends looked at what I built and built the same thing. One STILL hasn't upgraded yet, the other upgraded only 6 mo before me (to a 2700X).
Re: (Score:2)
I am very glad I waited a little longer to get into the Zen 2 & Gen4 PCIe.
Not sure why. That's like saying I stuck with my 18" CRT TV for 20 years and finally upgraded to a top of the line 65" QLED. Such an amazing improvement, well worth the wait.
Re: (Score:2)
>"Not sure why. That's like saying I stuck with my 18" CRT TV for 20 years and finally upgraded to a top of the line 65" QLED. Such an amazing improvement, well worth the wait."
No, it is more like I had a 42" florescent LCD and could have been stuck with a 55" LED LCD instead of a 65" QLED LCD had I not waited the extra 1 year. The Ryzen is that much better than anything before it. I wanted an AMD processor and the ones before the Ryzen were mediocre. Because my old system was still fast enough and st
Re: (Score:2)
No, it is more like I had a 42" florescent LCD and could have been stuck with a 55" LED LCD instead of a 65" QLED LCD had I not waited the extra 1 year.
What? A 10" bigger QLED is going to cost hundreds more than the LED version and prices don't drop that fast each year (maybe over a few years).
The Ryzen is that much better than anything before it.
I'm pretty sure it's just incrementally better than the previous generation. The big deal is that now it's better than Intel in single thread performance.
I wanted an AMD processor and the ones before the Ryzen were mediocre ... I am glad I didn't get stuck with a non-Ryzen.
And now it's starting to make sense.
Re: (Score:2)
I nursed an old computer at home for many years (Asus M4A89TD-Pro M3, AMD Phenom 2 1099T, 8GB G.Skill DDR3 1600 RAM, SATA SSD).
I am still using my Phenom 2 940 you insensitive clod!
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
14nm ain't done yet (Score:3)
Intel launches Rocket Lake-S (likely Willow Cove cores on 14nm) next year. If all goes according to plan, Rocket comes out in Q1 2021, giving Comet less than a year on the market as Intel's top-performing desktop CPU.
Re: (Score:2)
Surely you aren't implying this isn't the last 'one last hurrah' for Intel's 14nm process?
Re: (Score:2)
Intel hasn't announced another 14nm uarch after Rocket. That being said, they might try it anyway.
Yeah, no way in hell I'm getting Intel. (Score:2, Interesting)
IME -- not mentioned, means not changed.
Spectre/Meltdown -- not mentioned.
Outdated tech.
No compatibility with older/newer boards probably.
Slower in multi-treading. So in all games for new consoles and PCs too. -- not mentioned.
It's fuckin Intel. I do not reward anti-competitive bullshit. Call me when everyone at Intel's upper management has been in prison for 5 years. And Intel got a new head, made of less evil people. Then we can talk.
Re: (Score:1)
Did Intel fix the security problems? (Score:1)
Or are they still trying to be the "World's leader in CPU security flaws = Intel."?
I just visited OpenBSD's site, and saw no mention of re-enabling Intel Hyper-threading. That was OpenBSD's response to a CPU security flaw that involved hyper-threading, disable hyper-threading, (on Intel CPUs, NOT AMD).
So how much faster are these new Intel CPUs with 100% of the security mitigations in place, when compared to AMD's CPUs with their own set of mitigatio