Friday, December 27th 2019
Intel Enthusiast-Grade K Processors in the Comet Lake-S Family Rumored to Feature 125 W TDP
This piece of news shouldn't surprise anyone, except for the fact that Intel is apparently signing on a TDP of 125 W for even its K-series unlocked processors for their next-generation Comet Lake-S family. Intel's current Comet Lake 9900K CPU features a TDP of "only" 95 W - when compared to the rumored 125 W of the 10900K), whilst their current top offering, the i9-9900KS, features a 127 W TDP. Remember that Intel's 10900K should feature 10 cores and 20 threads, two extra cores than their current 9900K - this should explain the increased TDP, a mathematical necessity given that Intel can only count on marginal improvements to its 14 nm fabrication process to frequencies and power consumption of its CPUs.
A leaked slide from momomo on Twitter shows, if real, that Intel's future enthusiast-grade CPUs (likely i5-10600K, i7-10700K and i9-10900K) will feature this 125 W TDP, while other launches in that family will make do with the more traditional 65 W TDP (interesting to see that Intel has some 10-core CPUs with 65 W TDP, the same as their current 9900, despite two more cores). A footnote on the leaked slide shows that these K processors can be configured for a 95 W TDP, but this would likely come at a significant cost to operating frequency. Intel seems to be bringing a knife to a gunfight (in terms of core counts and TDP) with AMD's Ryzen 3000 and perhaps Ryzen 4000 CPUs, should those and Intel's future offerings actually coexist in the market.
Sources:
user momomo @ Twitter, via Videocardz
A leaked slide from momomo on Twitter shows, if real, that Intel's future enthusiast-grade CPUs (likely i5-10600K, i7-10700K and i9-10900K) will feature this 125 W TDP, while other launches in that family will make do with the more traditional 65 W TDP (interesting to see that Intel has some 10-core CPUs with 65 W TDP, the same as their current 9900, despite two more cores). A footnote on the leaked slide shows that these K processors can be configured for a 95 W TDP, but this would likely come at a significant cost to operating frequency. Intel seems to be bringing a knife to a gunfight (in terms of core counts and TDP) with AMD's Ryzen 3000 and perhaps Ryzen 4000 CPUs, should those and Intel's future offerings actually coexist in the market.
96 Comments on Intel Enthusiast-Grade K Processors in the Comet Lake-S Family Rumored to Feature 125 W TDP
Perhaps some individuals *cough, cough* should take a few minutes to research the intersection between Social Identity Theory and brand loyalty so as to get a grasp upon their own behavior.
My CPU runs quite warm under load. It also pulls more wattage than just about anyone else's on the page. Actual enthusiasts build around that instead of complaining about it. If I can dissipate 800w of CPU then you can all figure out these little 200w loads in full tower cases.
Die size of the new cometlake 10 core is expected to be 200mm².
Existing 10 core 7900x is 322 mm².
The 7900x is a 140W TDP Chip , 140 / 322 = 0.435W / mm²
10 core comet lake is 125W , 125 / 200 = 0.625W / mm²
This 10 core comet lake is 44% more than an 7900x.
Then , thermal conduction is directly proportional to surface area.
So the 10 core comet lake has 38% less surface area than the 7900x
Means the rate of conduction of 10 core comet lake is at least 38% lower than the 7900x
So this thing has 44% more heat density and 38% less thermal conductivity than a 7900x .
Means the "125W TDP" new chip actually requires a BIGGER cooler than 7900x.
Despite the 7900x technically has a higher TDP.
A thicker IHS , or should say the thickness of anything between the heat source and the cooler hurts the heat transfer, and this is a known problem for 9900k from Der8auer 's results.
The surface area provided by the IHS is also a factor, bigger is better of cause.Heat transfer rely on temperature differences.
Let's say the Temperature of the top of the CPU is T1, and the Temperature of the bottom of the Cooler is T2 .
The bigger the difference between T1 and T2 , the better the heat transfer.
A bigger cooler usually faster in dissipating heat, so the bottom of the cooler remains cooler, thus helping the heat transfer.
Of cause there are diminishing returns upon certain level.
It is like an equilibrium.
The fact that a cooler is rated for 150W doesn't mean it'll be fine for all 150W CPUs. It means it was made for (and tested with) some particular CPUs that were seen as representative.
All currently sold coolers have been designed for 14nm CPUs.
"TDP 150W" means a cooler should be fine for a CPU that (constantly) consumes 150W of power and heats up similarly to pre-7nm CPUs.
For a 7nm CPU you need a much more powerful solution. Check what AMD recommends for 3950X.
The size of a 9900k is 1406.25 mm², consider 65% as IHS size ~900 mm²
The size of a 7900x is 2362.5 mm², consider 65% as IHS size ~1500 mm²
So the 10 core CometLake now has
44% more heat density
38% less thermal conductivity (die)
40% less thermal conductivity (IHS)
than a 7900x .
What a furnace. :roll:
TDP in consumer CPUs is given for base clocks. Everything above impacts how long boosts will be possible. You can pair a 150W cooler with a 9900K. It'll be fine.
Of course you'll need something bigger for sustained boost under load - if that's how you're going to use that CPU.
The problem here is that we test consumer CPUs by running hour-long benchmarks under very strong coolers, so the CPU isn't limited and pulls as much as it can. This isn't realistic.
Also, "thermal throttling" is not something to be afraid of. It's a safety mechanism.
Intel CPUs are very efficient when you don't mess with them (OC, voltage manipulation etc) - on par with Zen2, miles ahead of early Ryzen CPUs.
CPUs are by and large power-limited. It does not quite apply to single-core loads - where Zen2 goes and happily consumes 20W or a bit more on a single core - or gaming where many threads can be in use but core utilization is fairly low. It does apply fully to productivity use cases - rendering, encoding etc. Thanks to better power efficiency Zen2 can retain more of its clock speed than Coffee Lake at the same power level.
9900K die size is 174mm2.
I'm not sure why you're looking at IHS size, let alone multiply it by 0.65.TPU, among others, test efficiency (i.e. amount of energy used to complete a task). Here's the graph. No futher comment needed, hopefully.
The gap is still huge in single-core because of how much IF pulls (but that's a fundament of Zen architecture).
www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-3700x/18.html
IHS size is also one important aspect in the equation.
Since the path is: Die -> TIM -> IHS -> TIM ->Cooler .
The horizontal heat transfer within the IHS will always be faster than heat transfer through TIM, so the IHS is an important part of the system.