Intel 10th Generation Comet Lake Desktop Processors and 400-Series Chipsets Announced, Here's what's New

[ARF]

When did mobile performance get involved in a thread about desktop parts?
Come on, people, try to maintain some civility and stick to the actual subject at hand, this flame war is getting tedious.

Choice, competition, alternative. I would take a 35-watt Ryzen 9 4900HS over the 65-watt Ryzen 7 3700X.
The performance is very, very close.

AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS Benchmark, Test and specs

The AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS is a 8 core processor. It can handle 16 threads simultaneously and was introduced in Q2/2020. The AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS is based o

www.cpu-monkey.com

AMD Ryzen 7 3700X Benchmark, Test and specs

The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X has 8 cores with 16 threads and is based on the 3. gen of the AMD Ryzen 7 series. The processor uses a mainboard with the AM4 (P

www.cpu-monkey.com

AMD CEO: Ryzen CPUs Now Account To More Than 50% Premium Processor Sales Globally, Strong Demand For Ryzen 3000 & Ryzen 2000 CPUs

In its recent earnings call, AMD's CEO, Dr.Lisa Su, stated that Ryzen CPUs now accounts for 50% of the premium processors sales globally.

wccftech.com

No matter how many consumers prefer AMD Ryzen, it seems the market share change just comes slowly.
Even worse, after the original Ryzen first generation release in 2017, AMD actually had been losing market share until some point after beginning of 2019.

 

[coozie78]

Choice, competition, alternative. I would take a 35-watt Ryzen 9 4900HS over the 65-watt Ryzen 7 3700X.
The performance is very, very close.

AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS Benchmark, Test and specs

The AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS is a 8 core processor. It can handle 16 threads simultaneously and was introduced in Q2/2020. The AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS is based o

www.cpu-monkey.com

AMD Ryzen 7 3700X Benchmark, Test and specs

The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X has 8 cores with 16 threads and is based on the 3. gen of the AMD Ryzen 7 series. The processor uses a mainboard with the AM4 (P

www.cpu-monkey.com

View attachment 153526

AMD CEO: Ryzen CPUs Now Account To More Than 50% Premium Processor Sales Globally, Strong Demand For Ryzen 3000 & Ryzen 2000 CPUs

In its recent earnings call, AMD's CEO, Dr.Lisa Su, stated that Ryzen CPUs now accounts for 50% of the premium processors sales globally.

wccftech.com

No matter how many consumers prefer AMD Ryzen, it seems the market share change just comes slowly.
Even worse, after the original Ryzen first generation release in 2017, AMD actually had been losing market share until some point after beginning of 2019.

Interesting comparisons, wouldn't it be fun to put one of those mobile chips into a tiny little desktop or Mac style all-in-one?
That bump in AMD market share coincides nicely with the release of the Zen 3XXX series.
Don't forget, the bulk of the Intel market is with OEMs, most of which know and trust Intel over AMD, as do their customers. The initial Zen release was plagued with issues, something DIY/enthusiasts might tolerate, not so business users. Or their IT departments.

 

[ARF]

Interesting comparisons, wouldn't it be fun to put one of those mobile chips into a tiny little desktop or Mac style all-in-one?
That bump in AMD market share coincides nicely with the release of the Zen 3XXX series.
Don't forget, the bulk of the Intel market is with OEMs, most of which know and trust Intel over AMD, as do their customers. The initial Zen release was plagued with issues, something DIY/enthusiasts might tolerate, not so business users. Or their IT departments.

What would happen if AMD overclocks the Ryzen 9 4900H/HS to 105 or 125-watt?

 

[EarthDog]

14nm in 2020 is a sad state of affairs. I would avoid any of these relic Intel CPUs until they can move to 7nm in 2022.

Funny how well these "relics" keep up in a core for core, thread for thread situation, isn't it? AMD owns price and has for quite a while. It's nice to see them back with a comparable/better cpu which helps drive intel back down to sane.

 

[$ReaPeR$]

Funny how well these "relics" keep up in a core for core, thread for thread situation, isn't it? AMD owns price and has for quite a while. It's nice to see them back with a comparable/better cpu which helps drive intel back down to sane.

yeah.. its funny how you can "compete" when you throw power efficiency out the window..

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Funny how well these "relics" keep up in a core for core, thread for thread situation, isn't it? AMD owns price and has for quite a while. It's nice to see them back with a comparable/better cpu which helps drive intel back down to sane.

Would be except the sane bit of the pricing, these still aren't sane prices.

I wouldn't touch any of this, too dear ,too late, too much power used.
And as for the pciex4 situation , it's going to go exactly the same as AMD'S , the drop in next generation (actual) will be better served by a fan wearing x590 I'd wager, still it's baby steps in the right direction I suppose.

The power draw from an all intel system this fall is going to be exceptionally high to gain that single core 5.3 on i9s only and in general way too high for a marginal win in gaming for it to be worthwhile to me.

 

[Bee9]

This is an enthusiast site and those who want to game with modern titles will find 4c/8t hold back some games at 1080p and 1440. But we arent talking peoples salaries and 1st/3ed world bullshit... that's just ranting.

That said, I dont like the core/thread war either that amd started. 16c/32t in mainstream is a joke. In fact, I didnt like the 12c/24t part either. 8c/16t is plenty for the next few years.

Looks like your definition of enthusiast means gamer. Should have changed the site name to gamer power up.
16 cores mainstream has helped me save a lot of time. I need to do color grading in Davinci Resolve, run photoshop, capture one, and indesign at the same time, while 16 python bots are crawling the internet for information. That’s enough to eat up 16 cores 32 threads and 64GB of RAM. My 8 core machine was not suitable for this workload.

When we discuss a product price/performance, we have to discuss target market’s salaries because that’s how marketing work. There’s a thing called disposable income and that’s a part of purchasing decision making.

Citation needed.

I could imagine "clowns with agenda decided to count everyone who has ever played a computer game, even if just once in his/her life, a gamer".

Come back and read my post again. The citation is at the bottom.

 

[ARF]

This is an enthusiast site and those who want to game with modern titles will find 4c/8t hold back some games at 1080p and 1440. But we arent talking peoples salaries and 1st/3ed world bullshit... that's just ranting.

That said, I dont like the core/thread war either that amd started. 16c/32t in mainstream is a joke. In fact, I didnt like the 12c/24t part either. 8c/16t is plenty for the next few years.

This is just plain wrong.
We lost several years of development between 2011 and 2017 when Intel had milked the market with quad cores, while AMD discontinued the whole FX line too early.
This is - between Core i7 2600K and Core i7 7700K there was no progress.

Hence, you are confused that a quad core is everything one needs.

It is just the lowest common denominator now.

 

[Shatun_Bear]

Funny how well these "relics" keep up in a core for core, thread for thread situation, isn't it? AMD owns price and has for quite a while. It's nice to see them back with a comparable/better cpu which helps drive intel back down to sane.

Oh please.

yeah.. its funny how you can "compete" when you throw power efficiency out the window..

Perfect response to a desperate Intel defence from him

 

[Braggingrights]

This release is another version of 2015 Skylake. The power draw is going to be ugly.

14nm in 2020 is a sad state of affairs. I would avoid any of these relic Intel CPUs until they can move to 7nm in 2022.

Intel win gaming and nobody cares how many AMD fanboyz jump up and down screaming about power

I say moar power, moar heat... moar speed... how cool does your car engine run? go and put your ear on your big screen TV. if it aint running hot something's wrong Bear

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Intel win gaming and nobody cares how many AMD fanboyz jump up and down screaming about power

I say moar power, moar heat... moar speed... how cool does your car engine run? go and put your ear on your big screen TV. if it aint running hot something's wrong Bear

Except no , if you're big telly is running hot and power hungry get a new one, clearly a five hours a week gamer you, and I don't think you have the whole world aligned behind you or AMD wouldn't be taking 50% of sales would they?.

And what happened to the original, your butchering that statement.

Moar core's, moar power, more heat, tut hmmmn what brought that saying out again AHH yes AMD FX series which this is similar to.

 

[efikkan]

Intel win gaming and nobody cares how many AMD fanboyz jump up and down screaming about power

In the middle of this trench warfare, I'm trying to bring some pragmatism and perspective, because the real world usually needs some nuances and common sense is usually somewhere in the middle.

I certainly expect Comet Lake to be hot, and the extra power draw will certainly be a disadvantage, which the buyer needs to consider along with the other advantages/disadvantages of the product. Still, it's important to remember how much of a difference it is. In stock configuration, the CPUs will draw ~20W more sustained (compared to AMD's counterparts, not counting motherboard etc.). The peak will be a bit more though, but it's important to remember that the peak lasts for a few seconds, and while you have to scale the PSU for peak consumption, your cooling doesn't need to. I'll let each buyer be the judge of whether ~20W extra sustained is enough to be significant for them. If we were talking about 100W extra sustained, I would certainly think it was significant for most buyers.

If you choose to run the CPU without the power limit, then this is on you, not on Intel, as this is technically an overclocked configuration. I would certainly not recommend doing so if you expect a reliable system potentially used for productive use.

 

[Braggingrights]

Except no , if you're big telly is running hot and power hungry get a new one, clearly a five hours a week gamer you, and I don't think you have the whole world aligned behind you or AMD wouldn't be taking 50% of sales would they?.

So blah blah blah AMD lose gaming again

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

So blah blah blah AMD lose gaming again

Nice , burned lol bye

Oh do re read it I edited a bit.

 

[Braggingrights]

Nice , burned lol bye

Oh do re read it I edited a bit.

I didn't read it the first time... I like my chips like my women, hot!

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

I didn't read it the first time... I like my chips like my women, hot!

And you will be very happy with your new one then.

Got one quick off the mark though, top end bits in your pc but mid teir CPU, odd.

Not at all like a sh### account.

I'll put you on ignore since your arguments aren't worth sh#t.

 

[IamEzio]

I don't know what dreams people here are living in... the broken record about how Intel DOMINATES in gaming.
If 3900X (zen2) on average of 36 different games is 6% slower, not even a 10%.... than a 9900K..
Consumes less power, and faster on all other tasks, how can you people continue with the broken record of "OMG ONLY INTEL CAN RUN GAMES"
"RYZEN SUCKS AT GAMING", "INTEL SAID RYZEN SUCKz AT REAL WORLD HERE IS A SLIDE THEY DID IN POWERPOINT THAT PROVES IT" "CPUZ THAT CAN'T DO 5GHzzzz ARE BAD" and other crap we saw only it this thread.

Ryzen 9 3900X vs. Core i9-9900K: 36 Game Benchmark

A battle that needs no further introduction, we're pitting the new Ryzen 9 3900X head to head against the Core i9-9900K in 36 games. There's loads of...

www.techspot.com

Now, I don't like to cherry pick, and everyone will find sligthly different benchamrk were the difference might be smaller or bigger.
But it will not change the fact that the differences are minor at best considering the overall picture, even if you people continue to taunt that "Multi-threaded performance are meaningless" while it clear that even your beloved games benefit from it to some degree, an when games become more and more multi-thread aware, and able to utilize it better and better, you should stop pretending that your magical 14nm is anything but what it is. Comet Lake will be great for gaming, that is without a doubt. but Comet-Lake-S is nothing more than an i9-9900KS with 2 more cores, and the gaming performance will be pretty similar. meanwhile Zen 3 is coming sooner than later and should bring another performance improvement. even the gaming gap is closing, even if you don't like it.
Meanwhile Rocket-Lake-S will be lower core count and lower clocks thanks to 10nm. and Tiger-Lake-S ? It's not coming any-time soon..............

Here are some facts.

Top benchmarks recorded for PCMark 10, Firestrike Extreme, and Time Spy Extreme.


View attachment 153521

And now lets play the ignorant game of intel and amd fanboys of cherry picking benchmarks, like this post back that posted PCMark 10 scores showing Intel CPU's filling the top of the chart without Taking into account that its a benchmark that takes into account all aspects of the system, CPU, Storage and GPU. or worse.. 3DMark scores that combines Both the CPU and GPU. Most of the top scores are extreme overclock, You can't prove your point with 3Dmark scores of a W-3175X running at insane Overclock using a chiller or LN2 or whatever. this proves nothing but cherry picking unreasonable scores to prove your bias.

for comparison, Highest 3970X on 3DMark TimeSpy Extreme is probably running on stock clocks and with 2X 2080 Ti on moderate clocks, how can we even compare that to a w-3175X running at 5.8GHz under Extreme cooling and 4X 1080Ti's running 2400MHz (!) ? how is a system running at Extreme OC, under Extreme cooling, Barely stable enough to complete a Benchmark while pulling 2.5kW at the wall (best case probably) is a testament at how Intel is great at gaming? anyway, This totally proves that Intel is the greatest CPU ever. only problem is it needs to pull 1kW from wall alone.. silly me, such a minor problem (proceeds to order 1800$ motherboard, 4000$ cpu and an an industrial a/c unit to play overwatch between overclock crashes)

Anyway. I should probably be ashamed that I bought a R9 3900X that can barely even run Tetris at 24 Cinematic FPS. I Definitely feel ripped of by AMD. Should return it for a REAL MANS GAMING CPU for that 6GHZzzzzzz CPU /s

 

[Shatun_Bear]

I say moar power, moar heat... moar speed... how cool does your car engine run? go and put your ear on your big screen TV. if it aint running hot something's wrong Bear

I'm sorry to hear you've got one of those janky old plasma TVs in your living room that heat the room as well as offer a blurry picture, but everyone else has moved on from 2010 tech to cooler, more efficient LCDs. So no, my TV is not running hot.

I don't know what dreams people here are living in... the broken record about how Intel DOMINATES in gaming.
If 3900X (zen2) on average of 36 different games is 6% slower, not even a 10%.... than a 9900K..
Consumes less power, and faster on all other tasks, how can you people continue with the broken record of "OMG ONLY INTEL CAN RUN GAMES"
"RYZEN SUCKS AT GAMING", "INTEL SAID RYZEN SUCKz AT REAL WORLD HERE IS A SLIDE THEY DID IN POWERPOINT THAT PROVES IT" "CPUZ THAT CAN'T DO 5GHzzzz ARE BAD" and other crap we saw only it this thread.

Ryzen 9 3900X vs. Core i9-9900K: 36 Game Benchmark

A battle that needs no further introduction, we're pitting the new Ryzen 9 3900X head to head against the Core i9-9900K in 36 games. There's loads of...

www.techspot.com

Now, I don't like to cherry pick, and everyone will find sligthly different benchamrk were the difference might be smaller or bigger.
But it will not change the fact that the differences are minor at best considering the overall picture, even if you people continue to taunt that "Multi-threaded performance are meaningless" while it clear that even your beloved games benefit from it to some degree, an when games become more and more multi-thread aware, and able to utilize it better and better, you should stop pretending that your magical 14nm is anything but what it is. Comet Lake will be great for gaming, that is without a doubt. but Comet-Lake-S is nothing more than an i9-9900KS with 2 more cores, and the gaming performance will be pretty similar. meanwhile Zen 3 is coming sooner than later and should bring another performance improvement. even the gaming gap is closing, even if you don't like it.
Meanwhile Rocket-Lake-S will be lower core count and lower clocks thanks to 10nm. and Tiger-Lake-S ? It's not coming any-time soon..............




And now lets play the ignorant game of intel and amd fanboys of cherry picking benchmarks, like this post back that posted PCMark 10 scores showing Intel CPU's filling the top of the chart without Taking into account that its a benchmark that takes into account all aspects of the system, CPU, Storage and GPU. or worse.. 3DMark scores that combines Both the CPU and GPU. Most of the top scores are extreme overclock, You can't prove your point with 3Dmark scores of a W-3175X running at insane Overclock using a chiller or LN2 or whatever. this proves nothing but cherry picking unreasonable scores to prove your bias.

for comparison, Highest 3970X on 3DMark TimeSpy Extreme is probably running on stock clocks and with 2X 2080 Ti on moderate clocks, how can we even compare that to a w-3175X running at 5.8GHz under Extreme cooling and 4X 1080Ti's running 2400MHz (!) ? how is a system running at Extreme OC, under Extreme cooling, Barely stable enough to complete a Benchmark while pulling 2.5kW at the wall (best case probably) is a testament at how Intel is great at gaming? anyway, This totally proves that Intel is the greeting CPU ever. only problem is it needs to pull 1kW from wall alone.. silly me, such a minor problem.

Any way. I should probably be ashamed that I bought a R9 3900X that can barely even run Tetris at 24 Cinematic FPS. I Deferentially feel ripped of by AMD. Should return it for a REAL MANS GAMING CPU for that 6GHZzzzzzz CPU /s

You're right. Last time I checked the gap was 3.8% according to TPU. Three percent! This was after a chipset driver update last year (3900X vs 9900K).

 

[IamEzio]

I'm sorry to hear you've got one of those janky old plasma TVs in your living room that heat the room as well as offer a blurry picture, but everyone else has moved on from 2010 tech to cooler, more efficient LCDs. So no, my TV is not running hot.



You're right. Last time I checked the gap was 3.8% according to TPU. Three percent! This was after a chipset driver update last year (3900X vs 9900K).

The thing is even if its 10%, whatever.
People exaggerate it so much. so many are stuck at 1080p because of "high refresh rate" and "competitive gaming", maybe every GAMER on TPU is a twitch celebrity, streaming sensation. they must use the 1080p GHz.

The reality is that these potato games run just fine on lower end hardware. Even my GTX970 could play the "esports" titles like Overwatch at 120FPS+ on 1440p (with my older E3-1270v2).
This are the same PCMR people that make fun of the Xbox one X and PS4 Pro running games at sub 4K resolution, while they base their whole world view on 1080p gaming.
I don't even get how people can stand 1080p monitors today. I daily a 1440p 27" for last several years. even that is not sharp enough in my opinion. I would like to upgrade to a 32" 4K monitor but prices on monitors are absurd (like more than 1000$ for the U3219Q, the logical upgrade from my U2715h, its a joke when an LG 55" OLED is 1499$). besides that, I also have cheap 27" 1080p monitor that I got for my PS4 Pro as it can't output (thanks Sony very much) 1440p and any half decent 4k display was twice the price. the resolution on this size is a joke.
So my question is - do this people have the most blurry vision or do they stuck on 24" monitors like its 2010??

 

[Caring1]

I like my chips like my women, hot!

You left off, Huge, you've already made it clear you love the big ones.

 

[RandallFlagg]

...
And everyone will still buy Ryzen, because of the lower power draw, much cheaper prices and superior multi-threaded performance.

Just look at Amazon.com best selling processors. 9 of the top 10 is Ryzen I'm afraid.

Not that what you are pointing at means anything at all, as it changes from one hour to the next.

Nor does it have anything to do with the question of performance.

But since you brought it up, lets use those kind of metrics.

All but one of the 12 top selling PCs on Amazon use Intel - and the one AMD is selling down there with recycled business desktops :

All but two of the top 12 selling laptops on Amazon use Intel, and only one of those two uses AMD:

-Three of the four best selling CPUs at Newegg are Intel :

 

[Braggingrights]

And you will be very happy with your new one then.

Got one quick off the mark though, top end bits in your pc but mid teir CPU, odd.

Not at all like a sh### account.

I'll put you on ignore since your arguments aren't worth sh#t.

I have very specific needs, and that's not how you spell tier

As for your other tears, I would suggest a tissue

 

[Caring1]

Not that what you are pointing at means anything at all, as it changes from one hour to the next.

Nor does it have anything to do with the question of performance.

But since you brought it up, lets use those kind of metrics.

All but one of the 12 top selling PCs on Amazon use Intel - and the one AMD is selling down there with recycled business desktops :

Different metric altogether as Prebuilt systems tend to use what they are told they can.
Consumer built systems use parts they want.

 

[EarthDog]

Different metric altogether as Prebuilt systems tend to use what they are told they can.
Consumer built systems use parts they want.

They can do whatever they want. However...intel likes to pay off OEM's, so that likely skews things.

Currently, anything Intel has out to date is pretty much DOA, they will receive the same scrutiny as AMD once did with its Bulldozer release.

DOA? Lol...

The same scrutiny as bulldozer? Wow, no. The difference is bulldozer was a slug compared to cpus 2/3 generations older, nonetheless the same gen. New intel chips are just as fast or faster in single/lightly threaded apps and some games. Its only in heavily multi threaded loads where SMT shows its mettle. These cpus will be competative, for sure...maybe cheaper for more cores. Bulldozer never was competative and only had price going for it. It was ridiculed for good reason.

 

[ARF]

Leaked benchmarks of Core i5-10400 6C/12T:

Intel Core i5-10400 6 Core, $180 CPU Benchmarks Leak Out, Faster Than Its Predecessor With Slightly Higher Power Consumption & Temps

The first review of the Intel Core i5-10400 6 Core Desktop CPU has leaked out, showcasing a good performance jump over 9th Gen CPUs.

wccftech.com