Intel Core i7-10700F Cinebenched, Roughly Matches Ryzen 7 3700X

[btarunr]

The Core i7-10700F is an upcoming 8-core/16-thread processor that's expected to be significantly affordable compared to the i7-10700K. Unlike the i7-10700K targeted at overclockers, the i7-10700F is multiplier locked, has lower nominal clock speeds of 2.90 GHz, and lacks integrated graphics (hence the "F" extension). PC enthusiasts on Korean tech community QuasarZone posted a screenshot of an alleged i7-10700F test run on Cinebench R20. The chip is shown scoring 4781 points in the multi-threaded test, and 492 points single-threaded. These scores roughly compare with AMD's Ryzen 7 3700X processor. No other details such as motherboard or memory configuration were put out.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[madness777]

Looks really close to a stock 9900k
Hopefully they don't shoot themselves in the foot with the pricing

 

[HwGeek]

Do we know if there will be support for 10nm+ future CPU support on this platform?
because if not then why bother investing in it?
we already got 9900K for best gaming rigs, going for 10th gen on new socket with same old pcie gen3 looks stupid while we have x570/b550 coming with support upto 16C on AM4.
unless Intel is doping prices by 50% - I see no change in DIY sales.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

I wonder why the GPU model is redacted?

 

[kapone32]

I wonder why the GPU model is redacted?

So they can sell it for maybe $300 US and call it the most affordable "fastest Gaming CPU".

 

[Ed_1]

Do we know if there will be support for 10nm+ future CPU support on this platform?
because if not then why bother investing in it?
we already got 9900K for best gaming rigs, going for 10th gen on new socket with same old pcie gen3 looks stupid while we have x570/b550 coming with support upto 16C on AM4.
unless Intel is doping prices by 50% - I see no change in DIY sales.

I would say if you have a 9900k why would you upgrade period right now (Intel or AMD), unless your workload changed massively.

There was rummors that the 1200 socket would also support 10nm desktop chips that come later but not much info lately on support.

 

[lemonadesoda]

"F" stands for...

 

[john_]

Even if this socket does support 10nm, I think it will be better to wait and see what kind of 10nm support that will be. We could end up with CPUs that don't turbo boost high enough, so not something different compared to typical high performance 14nm models, except probably power consumption, or we could end up with desktop parts that don't offer more than 6 cores, for whatever reasons, or we could end up with a variety of CPUs that are difficult to be found in market at reasonable quantities and prices.

 

[Kokotas]

10nm will be on lga 1700 so no.

 

[Ed_1]

Even if this socket does support 10nm, I think it will be better to wait and see what kind of 10nm support that will be. We could end up with CPUs that don't turbo boost high enough, so not something different compared to typical high performance 14nm models, except probably power consumption, or we could end up with desktop parts that don't offer more than 6 cores, for whatever reasons, or we could end up with a variety of CPUs that are difficult to be found in market at reasonable quantities and prices.

I doubt very much 10nm in the foreseen future will boost to 5+ghz. I also doubt Intel will give much info on next desktop 10nm as that would effect sales of these CPU's possibly.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

Even if this socket does support 10nm, I think it will be better to wait and see what kind of 10nm support that will be. We could end up with CPUs that don't turbo boost high enough, so not something different compared to typical high performance 14nm models, except probably power consumption, or we could end up with desktop parts that don't offer more than 6 cores, for whatever reasons, or we could end up with a variety of CPUs that are difficult to be found in market at reasonable quantities and prices.

At this point, I don’t know that I would count on 10nm amounting to anything on the desktop. Yeah, there is some out in production on mobile, but it would appear that clock speed is still an issue. There’s a reason they kept 14nm going on desktop, and it’s to hit the higher clocks. We should be talking about the node past 10nm by now, so I have a bad suspicion that this new platform won’t have much future in it. Then again, neither does the current Intel socket.

 

[Dave65]

"F" stands for...

FLOP

 

[Sybaris_Caesar]

Pricing is everything. If Intel keeps the same price as 9700F it's replacing at $330, it'll become a good viable to ryzen 3700x. Though 3700x would be cheaper now.
Although visibility in market is still a thing. There's a reason why we almost see no discussion about any other Intel chips beside K-series after Ryzen came along.

 

[Imsochobo]

Pricing is everything. If Intel keeps the same price as 9700F it's replacing at $330, it'll become a good viable to ryzen 3700x. Though 3700x would be cheaper now.
Although visibility in market is still a thing. There's a reason why we almost see no discussion about any other Intel chips beside K-series after Ryzen came along.

remove the I3 and I5 K chips, 9700K and 9900K is the two chips lol

 

[champsilva]

"F" stands for...

no igp.

 

[spectatorx]

"F" stands for...

"Press 'F' to pay respects.".

 

[dicktracy]

Fastest gaming CPUs bout to become even more affordable

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

Pricing is everything. If Intel keeps the same price as 9700F it's replacing at $330, it'll become a good viable to ryzen 3700x. Though 3700x would be cheaper now.
Although visibility in market is still a thing. There's a reason why we almost see no discussion about any other Intel chips beside K-series after Ryzen came along.

I see AMD just adjusting price once the 10xxx series launches. Ryzen 4000 won’t be that far away by then.

 

[Tomgang]

Wake me up when Intel finally moves to 10 nm for desktop. Until then I will bet my money on amd zen.

As usual there is not much existing news about Intel new chips as long they stay on 14 NM. Performance much like amd zen 2 but with a much higher Power consumption

 

[DeeJay1001]

If this has the same core/thread count as Ryzen and they are basically tied in cinebench then I dont see how intel stands a chance. This chip will have to be priced sub $300 for anyone other than intel diehards to consider it.

 

[Captain_Tom]

So they can sell it for maybe $300 US and call it the most affordable "fastest Gaming CPU".

It's a less efficient 3700X, launching 6-12 months after the 3700X, and for the same price at best as the 3800X (3800X is $300 at some stores now, and will be by the time this comes out). This is a complete joke lol.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

I can get the 3800x for $299, and the 3700x for $279 today. The 2700x is down closer to $150. I can see Intel relying heavily on boost clocks to help sell these. It would probably work well for the gaming crowd, but you’ll see Ryzen pull away on sustained multi core loads.

 

[Houd.ini]

100 points lower multihreaded than my 3700x with 2400 ram and 1200 FCLK with PBO on an ancient ABBA bios. Wonder what the clock speed and power consumption is like...

 

[ppn]

9700KF goes 369, so if they give us free HT at the same price. who cares about 3700X at 309. If you buy 3700X be aware it will cost 109 when 4700X reseases,. so, get shrewd by intel or by amd it all the same.

 

[ARF]

"F" stands for...

Faulty, false, fake, because its die is not good enough to qualify for the fully enabled chips.