Just like I predicted more expensive than the 3900X for the 10900K here in Canada.

www.newegg.ca/intel-core-i9-10900k-core-i9-10th-gen/p/N82E16819118122?Description=Intel%2010900k&cm_re=Intel_10900k-_-19-118-122-_-Product

www.newegg.ca/amd-ryzen-9-3900x/p/N82E16819113103?Description=3900x&cm_re=3900x-_-19-113-103-_-Product

The Anandtech review is up:

"The one issue that Intel won’t escape from is that all this extra power requires extra money to be put into cooling the chip. While the Core i9 processor is around the same price as the Ryzen 9 3900X, the AMD processor comes with a 125 W cooler which will do the job – Intel customers will have to go forth and source expensive cooling in order to keep this cool. Speaking with a colleague, he had issues cooling his 10900K test chip with a Corsair H115i, indicating that users should look to spending $150+ on a cooling setup. That’s going to be a critical balancing element here when it comes to recommendations. "

$500 for the Core i9-10900K
$150 for the new motherboard (bare minimum)
$150 for the cooling setup (Your rig must be able to handle 250+ Watts from the CPU alone to get the full performance shown at review sites!)

So its $800 for the privilege to stay with Intel but get nothing notable in return other than a huge energy bill and $800 less in the bank account.

Edit: Based on availability and higher prices, one might have to spend over $1000 to make this upgrade happen.

Edit #2: Again its important to note that you will NOT get higher performance with the higher clocks in games if you cannot prevent this thing from throttling. All Intel did here was increase the clocks and you MUST cool the CPU accordingly or your frame rates will be less than shown on review sites and less than competing chips.

Mark LittleThe Anandtech review is up:

"The one issue that Intel won’t escape from is that all this extra power requires extra money to be put into cooling the chip. While the Core i9 processor is around the same price as the Ryzen 9 3900X, the AMD processor comes with a 125 W cooler which will do the job – Intel customers will have to go forth and source expensive cooling in order to keep this cool. Speaking with a colleague, he had issues cooling his 10900K test chip with a Corsair H115i, indicating that users should look to spending $150+ on a cooling setup. That’s going to be a critical balancing element here when it comes to recommendations. "

$500 for the Core i9-10900K
$150 for the new motherboard (bare minimum)
$150 for the cooling setup (Your rig must be able to handle 250+ Watts from the CPU alone to get the full performance shown at review sites!)

So its $800 for the privilege to stay with Intel but get nothing notable in return other than a huge energy bill and $800 less in the bank account.

Edit: Based on availability and higher prices, one might have to spend over $1000 to make this upgrade happen.

Yup. It's an expensive proposition.
I thought Anandtech would've at least run something like HWInfo to see what temps the chip was running at - although there was no report of freq throttling. 245W though. Jeez.

The most exciting thing here today is the asus strix z490m. A high end 12 phase micro ATX motherboard, something that has been sorely absent from the market for several generations. I'm tempted to build one just so I can go back to my prefered case size.

www.newegg.com/asus-rog-strix-z490-g-gaming/p/N82E16813119294?&quicklink=true

Look at this beautiful thing, slots properly set up so you can use all 3 at once (unlike many that hide the x1 slot if you use a dGPU) 12 phase VRM, 2.5GBe, and $240 isnt that bad a price IMO.

WeeRabYup. It's an expensive proposition.
I thought Anandtech would've at least run something like HWInfo to see what temps the chip was running at - although there was no report of freq throttling. 245W though. Jeez.

I mean, sure thats a lot of juice, but the FX-9000 series pulled north of 200 watts, and often need a bit more to run perectly stable, and their heat was manageable. Very dissapointed to see no temperature data from Anandtech, looking forward to seeing what temps people get out of a 10900k with an arctic cooling AIO, and those worked wonders on AMD cpus and worked the best on intels as well. My 9700k with a 120mm AIO only hits the mid 60C range with 186+ watts of power draw, so another 80 watts should be doable with a quality 240mm AIO.

Mark LittleThe Anandtech review is up:

"The one issue that Intel won’t escape from is that all this extra power requires extra money to be put into cooling the chip. While the Core i9 processor is around the same price as the Ryzen 9 3900X, the AMD processor comes with a 125 W cooler which will do the job – Intel customers will have to go forth and source expensive cooling in order to keep this cool. Speaking with a colleague, he had issues cooling his 10900K test chip with a Corsair H115i, indicating that users should look to spending $150+ on a cooling setup. That’s going to be a critical balancing element here when it comes to recommendations. "

$500 for the Core i9-10900K
$150 for the new motherboard (bare minimum)
$150 for the cooling setup (Your rig must be able to handle 250+ Watts from the CPU alone to get the full performance shown at review sites!)

So its $800 for the privilege to stay with Intel but get nothing notable in return other than a huge energy bill and $800 less in the bank account.

Edit: Based on availability and higher prices, one might have to spend over $1000 to make this upgrade happen.

Edit #2: Again its important to note that you will NOT get higher performance with the higher clocks in games if you cannot prevent this thing from throttling. All Intel did here was increase the clocks and you MUST cool the CPU accordingly or your frame rates will be less than shown on review sites and less than competing chips.

What do they mean "around the same price"? The 3900x is going for $417 right now, $100 or approximately 25% cheaper than the 10900k...how is that considered "around the same price"?

I just don't see this chip as being a contender, even less so when AMD Zen 3 comes out. Unless you just have to have Intel (or nothing at all), there is absolutely nothing attractive about this chip. The power consumption alone is scary, the requirements to cool it is downright horrifying.

Good God, it's going to be a bloodbath when Zen 3 comes out.

trparkyI just don't see this chip as being a contender, even less so when AMD Zen 3 comes out. Unless you just have to have Intel (or nothing at all), there is absolutely nothing attractive about this chip. The power consumption alone is scary, the requirements to cool it is downright horrifying.

Good God, it's going to be a bloodbath when Zen 3 comes out.

Exactly more of the same for even more money. So you can get 5 more FPS for about 750 800 US.

TheinsanegamerNI mean, sure thats a lot of juice, but the FX-9000 series pulled north of 200 watts, and often need a bit more to run perectly stable, and their heat was manageable.

You forgot the differences. 250 W coming from 200 mm² is not as easy to cool as 250 W coming from 315 mm².

Also, AMD said the TDP is 220 W:

Intel still says 125 W:


I still consider the 10900K to be less of a freak than the FX, because it's more competitive. Don't quote me on that tho, don't remember those FX reviews..

Just in case you're wondering about where the TPU reviews are... the samples from Intel USA have been en-route for two weeks now. DHL air freight had major difficulties finding flights... last I heard was they were in Amsterdam, on Monday. National holiday here tomorrow, so maybe Friday.

AnarchoPrimitivWhat do they mean "around the same price"? The 3900x is going for $417 right now, $100 or approximately 25% cheaper than the 10900k...how is that considered "around the same price"?

That was a quote from the Anandtech article. I placed quotes around that paragraph. I put the right price for the Intel part of $500 or more in my comment.

W1zzardJust in case you're wondering about where the TPU reviews are... the samples from Intel USA have been en-route for two weeks now. DHL air freight had major difficulties finding flights... last I heard was they were in Amsterdam, on Monday. National holiday here tomorrow, so maybe Friday.

Well that just sucks. :(

W1zzardNational holiday here tomorrow, so maybe Friday.

Excuse my noobility, but where is here?

MatsExcuse my noobility, but where is here?

Germany

W1zzardGermany

Sehr gut. Keep up the good work, I'm looking forward to the reviews.

MatsExcuse my noobility, but where is here?

Netherlands edit : I stand corrected.

btarunrAcross the pond, the i9-10900K is listed for €589,

If you're going to use a phrase that is almost always used to refer to the UK /US then at least quote in £'s and not euros :rolleyes:

xman2007Netherlands

HAHA.

Please, someone else also tell me that here is NL, when Wz already said it's DE.

trparkyWell that just sucks. :(

Or blows if you consider the amount of cooling TR will need to review that thing.

Someone over at Anandtech said this (and I quote).

Chasing clocks and high power to counter AMD. Ah, Netburst, good times.

Yep, I agree.

Which location W1zzad was referring to, which obviously isn't where the chips are.

W1zzardJust in case you're wondering about where the TPU reviews are... the samples from Intel USA have been en-route for two weeks now. DHL air freight had major difficulties finding flights... last I heard was they were in Amsterdam, on Monday. National holiday here tomorrow, so maybe Friday.

You're the only one who'll look dumb if you'll ask me a third time, so don't. :p

Truly a magnificent gaming processor. It gives so much headroom, you don't need to upgrade every year like you do with AMD. Where's the 14nm+++++ jokes now?

dicktracyWhere's the 14nm+++++ jokes now?

Here.

dicktracyIt gives so much headroom, you don't need to upgrade every year like you do with AMD.

1080p medium with 2080 Ti, yeah, truly magnificent.

dicktracyTruly a magnificent gaming processor.

You forgot your sarcasm tag.

dicktracyTruly a magnificent gaming processor. It gives so much headroom, you don't need to upgrade every year like you do with AMD. Where's the 14nm+++++ jokes now?

2 FPS faster than the 9900K meh.............

MatsHere.



1080p medium with 2080 Ti, yeah, truly magnificent.

You're comparing stock versus overclocked. As far as I can see, 9700k, 9900k, 10900k and the entire 10th gen lineup at merely stock speed destroys the entire Zen 2 lineup at gaming.
This is, once again, grandpa Skylake with 14nm+++++++ beating the latest the greatest 7nm processor from AMD simply by adding 2 more cores to the ancient architecture ROFL.

dicktracyYou're comparing stock versus overclocked.

You're right, I did. Edit: Or did I? The overclocked 3900X in there uses 100 W less.

dicktracyThis is, once again, grandpa Skylake with 14nm+++++++ beating the latest the greatest 7nm processor from AMD simply by adding 2 more cores to the ancient architecture ROFL.

Well, in the end it's not the age that makes the difference here. AMD can't push the clocks like Intel can, and I don't think AMD will change this anytime soon. That TSMC process isn't made for high clocks AFAIK.

However, Intel didn't "simply" do this, they had to make the hottest mainstream CPU ever, a desperate move that worked. With hottest I mean in relation to die size, because this time around it's much smaller than, say, hottest FX in the past.

If you don't think Intel have something better to come up with during the next year then I guess I can't blame you. This is the best you can get, no need to upgrade.