Friday, October 25th 2019
Intel Core i9-10980XE "Cascade Lake-X" Benchmarked
One of the first reviews of Intel's new flagship HEDT processor, the Core i9-10980XE, just hit the web. Lab501.ro got their hands on a freshly minted i9-10980XE and put it through their test bench. Based on the "Cascade Lake-X" silicon, the i9-10980XE offers almost identical IPC to "Skylake-X," but succeeds the older generation with AI-accelerating DLBoost instruction-set, an improved multi-core boosting algorithm, higher clock speeds, and most importantly, a doubling in price-performance achieved by cutting the cores-per-Dollar metric by half, across the board.
Armed with 18 cores, the i9-10980XE is ahead of the 12-core Ryzen 9 3900X in rendering and simulation tests, although not by much (for a chip that has 50% more cores). This is probably attributed to the competing AMD chip being able to sustain higher all-core boost clock speeds. In tests that not only scale with cores, but are also hungry for memory bandwidth, such as 7-zip and Media, Intel extends its lead thanks to its quad-channel memory interface that's able to feed its cores with datasets faster.
As we move to gaming and gaming-related 3D benchmarks, we see the i9-10980XE only marginally ahead of the 3900X in the 3DMark Physics test. This lends credibility to the report where the unreleased 16-core 3950X was seen beating the i9-10980XE in this particular test. With gaming still being the forte of mainstream-desktop processors with lower core counts and higher clock-speeds, we see the likes of the i9-9900K racing ahead on account of significantly higher speeds while having sufficient muscle to handle games. Find more interesting results in the Lab501 review here.
Source:
Lab501
Armed with 18 cores, the i9-10980XE is ahead of the 12-core Ryzen 9 3900X in rendering and simulation tests, although not by much (for a chip that has 50% more cores). This is probably attributed to the competing AMD chip being able to sustain higher all-core boost clock speeds. In tests that not only scale with cores, but are also hungry for memory bandwidth, such as 7-zip and Media, Intel extends its lead thanks to its quad-channel memory interface that's able to feed its cores with datasets faster.
81 Comments on Intel Core i9-10980XE "Cascade Lake-X" Benchmarked
3950X will obliterate the Core i9-10980XE.
That's not even accurate according to Intel's own information: ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/198017/intel-core-i9-10980xe-extreme-edition-processor-24-75m-cache-3-00-ghz.html
Nevermind that it's barely faster than a product costing $499...
Will they be so proud of this ancient CPU design being handily bested by AMDs 16 core (non Threadripper) part, for a fraction of its cost?
No?
Fine, then don't.
- HEVC advantage, optane and TB3
- lower idle consumption and better overclocking experience
(unlike the sterile, meaningless and incremental one on AMD's zen cpus)
- none of the countless problems faced by AMD mobos and memory
- super ST performance, being more reflective and reliable in today's usages
- superior gaming experience
- availability of ITX option - Asrock X299-ITX/Server counterpart
- AMD's lack of optimization in windows
So many unmentioned advantages. I say its a good placeholder until the actual zen response (Tiger-Lake/Ice Lake) arrives. Kudos to AMD for catching up to Coffeelake though.
- HEVC advantage, optane and TB3
- lower idle consumption and better overclocking experience
(unlike the sterile, meaningless and incremental one on AMD's zen cpus)
- none of the countless problems faced by AMD mobos and memory
- super ST performance, being more reflective and reliable in today's usages
- superior gaming experience
- availability of ITX option - Asrock X299-ITX/Server counterpart
- AMD's lack of optimization in windows "
LOL, what do you smoke dude :D
Other than maybe the first one the rest is pure BS or urban legends, and even the first one is only if you specifically need any of these three (but honestly Optane is pretty overhyped so far, PCI-E 4 NvmE SSD-s are not much worse).
Based on your considerations,
You should take the 9900k, not the 10980xe.
The 10980xe is simply useless for you.
- This simply isn't true. Full system power consumption for the 3900X under load is 55W compared to 9980XE at 101W. The 9980XE also doesn't really have any overclocking headroom.
- Those problems haven't really existed since the 2000 series revised memory management. The current 3000 series IMC actually holds the world record for highest overclock on DDR4.
- Actually, clock-for-clock, AMD now has superior IPC and therefore superior single-threaded performance to Intel's architecture. Clockspeed is the only reason Intel still has a Single-threaded advantage, and for highly-threaded CPUs like this that's irrelevant since AMD's clockspeeds are much more comparable to Intel's here.
- AMD X570 has ITX boards available, from ASRockand from Gigabyte.
- This is Microsoft's problem, not AMD's, and has already been resolved by Microsoft updating the task scheduler.
Do you have any other terrible, untrue points to make?Higher sustained boost clocks is my guess. Could be either a chip with good boost behaviour, or even that the limitation of threads causes an anomaly where 6/12 forces a workload into an HT thread that would ordinarily be handled on a 7th physical core, limiting the performance of that thread in theory, but in practice keeping that one physical core operating more quickly and therefore at higher boost.
Odd but true.
Edit:
So for example, the ASRock Aqua X570 has Thunderbolt 3 built into the io. Its probably one of the most expensive boards but its not the only AMD X570 board that now has Thunderbolt 3.
So again if TB3 means Thunderbolt 3 then take that off the list,.....
2) LOL what? X299 idle is not low by any means. Overclocking I could give you if you want a household heater.
3) Early adoption of AMD 1st gen Ryzen maybe what issues are you talking about now. 3rd Gen Ryzen is has very good motherboards and memory support.
4) Uhm Intel's HEDT uses a different internal memory architecture than desktop Intel chips. This leads to higher latencies and with that a loss is ST performance giving the lead to AMD whoops so much for ST performace. Check the game benchmarks above. And also pay attention to the point that the 10980xe and Ryzen 3900x have similar clock frequencies and AMD won when it came to games every time in the charts picked. Even going to the source site it is hard to find any real win for Intel even when cherry picking your data.
5) See 4.
6) X399 yeah. Although there are quite a few X570 boards if the 3950X is an option in that size category depending on your needs.
7) It's new? And optimizations are coming with every new version of Windows 10. Although this really isn't a thing that should be an issue given that Ryzen is fast enough already.
Both have more cores the games can use but the 9900k/9700k is better right? so why are they doing worse?
EDIT, guess Glacier's speculation will have to do, but its still just odd to me, I would think processor makers could figure stuff like this out.
However, I was talking in terms of currently available hardware. USB 4 isn’t something we can take advantage of quite yet.
Thunderbolt support would be an interesting option (better to have it and not need it then to need it and not have it) but 99.9% of users don’t need it. I’ve had Thunderbolt 3 support for quite some time and never had need of it.