Intel's Apple-exclusive Core i9-10910 Geekbenched

[btarunr]

Intel designed an Apple-exclusive Core i9-10910 10-core processor for its new-generation iMac, with an interesting set of specs. The chip has a base frequency of 3.60 GHz - much higher than the 2.90 GHz of the i9-10900 - but a lower max boost frequency of 5.00 GHz (against 5.20 GHz TVB max of the i9-10900). The TDP of the new chip is rumored to be higher, at 95 W, giving its boosting algorithm more breathing room. Leakbench, a twitter handle that tracks interesting submissions to the Geekbench online database, fished out one of the first Geekbench 5 submissions of the i9-10910.

The i9-10910 serves up 6.9% higher single-threaded performance than the i9-10900. It however, falls behind the i9-10900 in multi-threaded performance by 9.6%. These results as surprising. Normally, we'd expect the i9-10910 to have a lower single-threaded performance and higher multi-threaded performance. As its max boost frequency is lower, and the i9-10900 is able to run single-threaded workloads on its favored cores at frequencies of up to 5.20 GHz (as opposed to 5.00 GHz on the i9-10910). On the other hand, with a higher TDP (higher PL1), the i9-10910 has more power budget for its cores to sustain higher boost states, which should give it a slight edge over the i9-10900 in multi-threaded performance. The raison d'être of the i9-10910 appears to be in giving Apple a variation of the 10-core "Comet Lake" die that macOS can make the most of, as it probably lacks optimization for Turbo Boost Max 3.0 and Thermal Velocity Boost.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[Jism]

Intel should be sued for advertising a 95W TDP while it's easily up to 150 to 250 Watts.

 

[Berfs1]

Intel should be sued for advertising a 95W TDP while it's easily up to 150 to 250 Watts.

Do you know what TDP is? If not, you wouldn't make a good lawyer.

 

[Vya Domus]

Do you know what TDP is?

TDP is closely related to the power consumed because ICs dissipate almost all the power that they use. In fact the reason these ratings are not accurate is not because TDP != power as much as it is because manufactures simply lie.

 

[ZoneDymo]

Do you know what TDP is? If not, you wouldn't make a good lawyer.

TPD is whatever they want it to be

 

[Vayra86]

TDP is closely related to the power consumed because ICs dissipate almost all the power that they use. In fact the reason these ratings are not accurate is not because TDP != power as much as it is because manufactures simply lie.

Its not a term you can work with legally until Intel says to some OEM 'this is a 10W TDP CPU by our metrics' and the chip will burn up every design using 20W constantly and not dialing back.

However... they do dial back. For every other mortal this means you gotta read between the lines, and those lines are that Intel CPUs right now are bursty, hot headed pieces of crap with yesterday's tech.

 

[birdie]

Intel should be sued for advertising a 95W TDP while it's easily up to 150 to 250 Watts.

Intel, unlike AMD, adheres to the advertised TDP figures: https://www.anandtech.com/show/13544/why-intel-processors-draw-more-power-than-expected-tdp-turbo

Meanwhile the 65W 3700X Ryzen CPU has around 91W power consumption under load and the same applies to many other Ryzen 3000/4000 CPUs/APUs.

 

[Vya Domus]

Intel, unlike AMD, adheres to the advertised TDP figures: https://www.anandtech.com/show/13544/why-intel-processors-draw-more-power-than-expected-tdp-turbo

Meanwhile the 65W 3700X Ryzen CPU has around 91W power consumption under load and the same applies to many other Ryzen 3000/4000 CPUs/APUs.

It takes a special kind of "fan" to post a link to an article that concludes Intel is not advertising accurate power and TDP figures and claim that they do.

I'd argue that Intel needs to put two power numbers on the box:

• TDP (Peak) for PL2
• TDP (Sustained) for PL1

This way Intel and other can rationalise a high peak power consumption (mostly), as well as the base frequency response that is guaranteed.

 

[yeeeeman]

Intel should be sued for advertising a 95W TDP while it's easily up to 150 to 250 Watts.

Show me where 10900 which is rated at 65W consumes 250W. Proof.

 

[Steevo]

Show me where 10900 which is rated at 65W consumes 250W. Proof.

Intel Core i9-10900 Review - Fail at Stock, Impressive when Unlocked

In our Core i9-10900 review we're taking a close look at what can be gained from unlocking the power limit of this 65 W processor. Results are impressive: up to 40% faster apps and performance that rivals the Core i9-10900K at much lower pricing, but heat output is increased, too.

www.techpowerup.com

If only there were a website that has reviews of these.....

 

[mahirzukic2]

Intel Core i9-10900 Review - Fail at Stock, Impressive when Unlocked

In our Core i9-10900 review we're taking a close look at what can be gained from unlocking the power limit of this 65 W processor. Results are impressive: up to 40% faster apps and performance that rivals the Core i9-10900K at much lower pricing, but heat output is increased, too.

www.techpowerup.com

If only there were a website that has reviews of these.....

As per that article: (actually 1st page of it)

As we'll confirm throughout our Core i9-10900 review, the CPU has a glaring Achilles heel: its TDP of just 65 W. While low TDP is never a bad thing per se for a 10-core "Skylake" 14 nm chip, this results in a PL1 (power limit 1) of just 65 W to sustain elevated clock speeds, with an increased PL2 of 224 W for tiny bursts of TVB frequency, and the integrated graphics will consume power, too, if used.

PL2 of 224 W, which in real world example uses >240W on the 18th page.

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
Surprised hyper threading isn't disabled.