Comments Locked

174 Comments

Back to Article

  • ViRGE - Thursday, April 30, 2020 - link

    So if LGA1200 is the same size as LGA115x, does that mean that Intel has made the pins smaller? Or is the 1200 in the socket name a fib?
  • DanNeely - Thursday, April 30, 2020 - link

    At least part of it was by adding pins to previously empty parts of the socket; it might be all of it, but I didn't count the size of full rows/columns to see if they changed. There's a side by side image at the bottom of this page (LGA1200 on the left). You can see more pins on the top outside areas; not enough for the full total but the hole in the center might be a row smaller; which would give plenty of room for the extras.

    https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cpu_mainboard/int...
  • ViRGE - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Ah, that explains it. Thanks!
  • rrinker - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Since PCI lanes and stuff all remain the same, I'm willing to bet those extra pins are all power and ground, to support the TVB.
  • NikosD - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    This is the end of the first era of "Ryzen Effect".

    On January 2017 Intel said to the world that the best desktop processor was Core i7 - 7700K a 4C/8T CPU at 350$

    On March 2017 AMD with Zen architecture and Ryzen implementation destroyed 6 years of Core iX pattern with its multi-core, multi-threaded approach.

    A lot of people thought that Intel could react with a "secret weapon" as we were all thinking that a lot of processing power was left on the table from Intel during all those years 2011 - 2017.

    Comet Lake-S even using 14nm (++...+) is essentially a Skylake architecture of 2015 and it's the end of this particular road for Intel.

    A 10C/20T Intel CPU of ~500$ in 2020 versus a 10C/20T Intel CPU of 1700$ in 2017 is the maximum gain for the user after AMD's Ryzen arrival.

    Now the gap closes in all desktop sections Core i3 vs Ryzen 3, Core i5 vs Ryzen 5, Core i7/i9 vs Ryzen 7/9 besides the top 16C/32T

    But from now on Intel has no other moves, regarding 14nm and Skylake architecture.

    Comet Lake-S is the "all in", last card of Intel.

    Next step is either delivering a real new 10nm architecture for the desktop or having the fate of AMD's rough years 2010 - 2017.

    We' ll see...
  • quorm - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    We've been through this before with Pentium 4. The market is different now because OEM sales of machines to individuals are a smaller part of the market due to the increase in data centers, but there's no reason to think Intel will behave any differently.

    They're going to cut all the deals they can and try to maintain their market share. Some of these deals will be of questionable legality. But, there's basically no antitrust enforcement these days.
  • NikosD - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Intel is already bribing OEMs to ignore Ryzen 4000 in the large laptop segment - it's bigger than desktop actually and exclusively based on OEMs.

    They even have a large amount of money for bribing which they call "marketing budget" which was skyrocketed to a few billion dollars.
  • sonny73n - Sunday, May 3, 2020 - link

    You’re right about Intel bribing OEMs. Last time I went to Best Buy to check out the Dell Ryzen 5 (1st gen) laptop that I was going to purchase. There it was - the newly released Dell Ryzen 5 laptop next to also newly released Intel Core i5 on the display table, but the i5 was in a new chassis which had much slimmer bezels while the Ryzen 5 in a year old chassis with fat bezels. I couldn’t believe the way Dell blatantly exposed their relationship with Intel. Only idiots wouldn’t be able to tell that Intel had bribed Dell. I looked around and found that the only other OEM that had Ryzen in some of their laptops was Lenovo. All other brands like HP, Acer... had only Intel’s.

    Intel, yeah I’m talking to you. I don’t need proof that you’ve been bribing OEMs. What I had seen was enough. Maybe this corrupted government protects you but I had made a promise to myself that I’ll never buy your products again.
  • sonny73n - Sunday, May 3, 2020 - link

    Hey Intel, not just me won’t be buying your products ever again but also my family members, my relatives and my friends too. And I’ll make sure of that.
  • NikosD - Sunday, May 3, 2020 - link

    m.youtube.com/watch?v=H92AgYH3LQI
  • MDD1963 - Tuesday, May 5, 2020 - link

    I've never forgiven Intel for causing the death of boy! Nor should you! :)
  • Deicidium369 - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    AMD are budget parts... always have been always will be. No one bribed anyone - Dell is not seeing a clamoring for AMD systems - so, yes, there will always be more Intel systems than AMD systems - 90%+ of the market vs 10% of the market.
  • close - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    @Deicidium369, indeed they are budget parts, the fact that they are also faster is just a bonus right?

    Budget parts... pff... people really got used to paying $800 for a 5 year old quad-core CPU that's crippled by security fixes.

    I'd love to say people are on Intel's payroll but the truth is that they're just ignorant, uninformed, and generally about as smart as a horse's ass (meaning they can spew manure).
  • Spunjji - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Deicidium showing his whole ass here.

    "Dell is not seeing a clamoring for AMD systems" is broken logic. They see demand for *systems*, it's up to them to decide what they offer the vast majority of their customers who have no instinctive CPU brand preference and shop primarily by design and cost. Dell, for their part, have decided to offer sub-par designs with AMD CPUs and prioritise development of Intel devices. That would have made sense back when AMD were indeed a sub-par budget option, but that time has been passing for the past 3 years and is now very much behind us.

    Dell, HP and others did the same thing back in the Netburst era, and zealots like you were posting the same junk back then, too. "AMD are budget parts... always have been and always will be" - you know, except for when ClawHammer arrived as the first 64bit x86 compatible chip and massively outclassed the Netburst competition, or when the Athlon 64 X2 was the first monolithic dual-core desktop CPU and utterly trounced the Netburst competition, or even that time when Zen 2 released and made utter mincemeat of Intel's multiple-rehashed Skylake line-up... 🤦‍♂️
  • twtech - Monday, May 11, 2020 - link

    If Dell would offer Threadripper workstations, I'd push for getting them for our developers.
  • Lord of the Bored - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    "Sledgehammer"
    "1 GHz"
    Always have, my ass.
  • Korguz - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    hey deicidium, how about for once, you post a source for your bs claims and personal opinions ? you claim others are amd fan boys, but guess what you are clearly and intel shill as you never post any proof at all to back up your bs
  • Spunjji - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Intel's "Marketing Development Funds" go further than just the OEMs - they also pay resellers to prioritise and promote Intel products to their customers.

    I know this because I used to work for a large EU IT reseller and they'd regularly pass on freebies to salespeople - Intel NUCs and suchlike - that Intel would give them as kickbacks for every device (server, notebook, workstation) they sold with an Intel CPU inside. Much like a supermarket rewards scheme, really.

    AMD were, of course, attempting similar things - but obviously working with a far lower budget and thus unable to compete on an equal footing. This was during the 'dozer years when their products were at a disadvantage too, but I have no reason to assume that the situation has altered substantially since then.
  • dromoxen - Sunday, May 3, 2020 - link

    Jo blow cares not a jot whether She gets an intel or Amd .. and corporates are more welded into the intel side . But the rest ... its a lot more open now than in the past, esp seeing that Laptops are being made with Amd Cpu and quality parts. AMD could even start getting a rep for having "good" laptops due to the better gfx .. But all sales will be down for 1-2 years.
  • Deicidium369 - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Intel because Intel has an UNBROKEN history since the beginning of the PC market. So nothing being welded to. AMD is inconsistent - hit or miss products, no viable product for close to a decade.
  • Lord of the Bored - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Pentium 4. How's that for broken?

    I could name more, but why? You don't care.
  • Spunjji - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    "UNBROKEN" - except for FDIV, the defective 1.13Ghz Coppermine PIII, the first Wilamette P4 that required costly RDRAM to provide lower performance at a higher price than the Tualatin PIII, the gloriously overpriced Emergency Editions, the Pentium D "dual-core" CPUs that communicated over an ageing FSB for lower performance at higher power than the Athlon X2, the busted Cougar Point chipset Sandy Bridge shipped with, and the total failure to deliver Cannon Lake on time and in quality with even remotely functional hardware (which they're now pretending never happened). Oh and those little Spectre and Meltdown doodads, but those were NBD right? I know I'm missing a few in there too.

    AMD have had extremely competitive products for *three years* now. You're an idiot.
  • Spunjji - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    *in quantity, not in quality; although technically the quality of the Cannon Lake hardware was shockingly poor too. If your partners have to bring in a bottom-run AMD GPU just to make a functional system out of your latest *dual-core no-turbo* product so that you can pretend to shareholders that you are "definitely shipping" to "select partners", you're just about hitting rock bottom.
  • alufan - Tuesday, May 5, 2020 - link

    explain athlon 64 then please ? or the fact AMD was the first to 1ghz or the fact all modern intel CPUs have massive issues with security because they were designed almost 10 years ago (hence 10th gen name) so yes inlet are consistently bad or poor value AMD just went the wrong way with a chip called Bulldozer but the theory behind it was good as is seen from the modern Ryzen multithreads and the Intel copies released since
  • Korguz - Tuesday, May 5, 2020 - link

    alufan, he cant and wont, and wont post any proof to his BS personal option anti amd claims. when you provide him with any facts and proof, he runs away with his tail between his legs, and either doesnt reply, or resorts to insults, condescending remarks or name calling, the guy cant get his own facts straight, let alone anything else
  • Santoval - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    "But from now on Intel has no other moves, regarding 14nm and Skylake architecture."

    The key word above is "and". Rocket Lake-S will *still* be fabbed at 14nm+++++ but it will (finally) sport a brand new μarch. So it's one out of the two above (an "or"). It is yet unknown how well it will clock though, since this first kind of "backporting" Intel will try. Sunny/Willow Cove are a bit wider designs, so they might not be able to break past 5 GHz. In any case though the power efficiency of Rocket Lake-S is going to be atrocious. Intel cannot beat the laws of physics, and this is why the estimated all-turbo TDPs of their high end parts are more than double than those of AMD.

    Those who want both efficiency and performance (i.e. the sane people), and still want to stick with Intel, might find Tiger Lake more appropriate for them. I hear Intel will release Tiger Lake parts up to the -H series and up to 8 cores (earlier I heard Tiger Lake-H would top at 6 cores, but later on the max cores turned to 8). Tiger Lake will also sport the much faster Xe iGPUs, and the -H series should have decent clocks for both the cores and the iGPU (or not).

    Those who are not satisfied with anything less than -S series for desktop, and still want to stick with Intel, will need to wait for Alder Lake-S. That ... might take a while. I don't think it will be released before 2H 2021, more likely Q4 2021. Therefore it will be targeted against ... Zen 4. You know, the one that will be fabbed at TSMC's 5nm, will have twice the L2 cache (1 MB), even more L3 cache, DDR5, possibly PCIe 5.0 *and* AVX-512 (Intel's last bastion).
  • Santoval - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    p.s. Alder Lake will sport Golden Cove cores and will probably be the last 10nm CPU series of Intel. Its successor is (tentatively) called Meteor Lake and will sport the long awaited Ocean Cove cores Jim Keller and his team have long been working on. This should also be Intel's first 7nm μarch and CPU series, and should also be the first real threat against AMD in terms of both efficiency and performance - unless Intel screw up their 7nm node again. I predict a Q1 2023 (Q4 2022 if all the gods bless Intel with good luck) release, so it should be targeted against Zen 5.
  • Deicidium369 - Saturday, May 2, 2020 - link

    I am expecting Rocket Lake S to be 4-4.5GHz - at least initially.

    Tiger Lake will not be a socketed desktop part - NUC11 will be Tiger Lake

    There will be ZERO desktop parts with PCIe5. None.
  • Kevin G - Sunday, May 3, 2020 - link

    Actually PCIe 5.0 will be wanted for one thing one desktops: single lane controllers for 10 Gbit NICs.

    In a few years it does look like NVMe controllers will begin to saturate a PCIe 4.0 M.2 connector so the move to PCI3 5.0 will happen at the right time.

    It’ll happen, just a matter of when.
  • Deicidium369 - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    No. PCIe3 and 4 are already capable... Yeah maybe 2027 PCIe5 on desktops.
  • Kevin G - Tuesday, May 5, 2020 - link

    Can you point me toward a 10 Gbit NIC than to only uses a single PCIe 3.0 lane? I won’t hold my breath as that doesn’t exist.

    Signs are pointing toward a 2022 release for PCIe 5.0 on the desktop.

    On the server side PCI3e 5.0 was due... this year with the IBM POWER10. That chip has been delayed to 2021 so who knows who will be fired in that segment as it looks like both Intel and AMD are gearing for PCIe 5.0 based servers next year.
  • Bp_968 - Tuesday, May 19, 2020 - link

    This. I notice most people seem to assume the next level of PCIe is only useful for its maximum bandwidth. I feel like they miss the potential cost savings on lane usage. If a CPU maker can halve the number of lanes they have on a CPU that will lower costs. If modern GPUs easily run on 4x PCIe5 lanes then 8 external lanes could end up being plenty for most systems (1 4x a 2x and 2 1x slots) though I expect SSDs to be eating 4 lanes of pcie4 for many systems in the next few years.
  • Quantumz0d - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Yeah

    2017 Ryzen was a boon to the industry, they crushed the X99 HW-E lineup and brought down the prices of the HEDT CPUs. Ryzen performance was crap and had tons of issues with the BIOS and Windows Scheduler on top due to the NUMA design, and the TR was a big disaster which couldn't scale up, Zen+ was a significant upgrade but ended up a minor improvement this is where X470 was also neglected and lost many features vs Intel SKUs for Mobos due to lack of trust on the AMD by OEMs, the CCX design was the Achilles heel along with pathetic memory controller.

    Still the 2700X couldn't beat a 7700K in gaming and also productive loads but due to the Multi core design for cheap it heavily made the PC DIY market flourish that was a great thing which AMD did and still had the memory controller weakness.

    Ryzen perfected the processor design with the Zen2, which is where exactly AMD started exactly to put a dent into Intel, that was the key aspect fro AMD in my opinion and it came in 2019, and the TSMC 7nm which helped them to cram more tech and the biggest improvement was due to the removal of that CCX hops and the weak IMC, it improved on every single flaw and made it big, 3600 finally beat 7700K in gaming and every single workload and made the 8700K almost in reach, but the 3700 and up beat 8700K and yet the HW-E on the other hand scaled pretty well, along with 2600K too while the Ryzen 1000 and Ryzen 2000 are pretty much meh.TR 3000 kicked out X399 (shameless name copy) and made that platform EOL and users got abandoned, look at HW-E still it scales well in games, thanks to Ring Bus. X299 CSL also couldn't do anything to the mainstream SKUs but it could do great OC at the power expense and only for Enthusiasts tbh. While the TRX series was super expensive and very limited core lineup due to their 3950X at 16C (still cannot scale like Intel in gaming but everything else it's a beast) also to note the AM4 life, it's superb to think about the socket compatibility scaling so well but the unfortunate part is due to the VRM cheapness on X470 the Higher SKUs of Ryzen 3000 are crippled by many and eventually a new chipset based one was needed.

    Then now again Intel is adding 2 more cores to the same 2015 uArch and 2014 14nm node vs 2020 TSMC 7nm+ Ryzen 4000 expecting to still have that Gaming Performance crown at the expense of insane power, another final Ring Bus card.

    Next year Rocket Lake S is coming with 14nm++ again, there's no 10nm it's failed completely but it's a new uArch again, which no one knows about the Bus, if it's Mesh or Ring.
  • Kevin G - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    The ring bus on Haswell-E should actually be a limiter to performance vs. Sky Lake’s tile based topology. Simply put you need fewer hops to a cache location in Sky Lake, all other things being equal. The big asterisk for Sky Lake is that each core has less L3 cache that is barely bigger than the L2 cache. The L3 is now a victim cache where as previously the L3 would mirror the contents of the L2 in Haswell. The result is that often both the L2 and L3 caches has to be queried in Sky Lake to get data. This takes power. Had Intel used the same inclusive cache design with respect to L3 at a decent size (4 MB?), the tile based design would be seen in a far greater light as the benefits would be easier to spot.

    The presumption Intel was going to take the tile design was to use smaller tiles (3x3 with lots of cache?) made using 10 nm and just tie them together with EMIB. 14 nm would have still been used for the memory controller, PCIe controllers and UPI but on their own tiles. This is effectively the inside-out version of AMD’s current chiplet strategy. This never materialized on the CPU side but Intel did leverage EMIB like their do some FPGA designs they inherited from the Altera acquisition.
  • Galid - Tuesday, May 5, 2020 - link

    That was a pretty good amount of good info but I have something To add. Intel wins when you put the cpu on gaming workloads AND bound the cpu usage. Example: rtx 2080 ti in 1080p. And even then, lets take a 3600 non-x vs 9900k. You will gain 9% fps in 1080p, 3% fps in 1440p and .6% fps in 4k buying a 9900k instead of a 3600. Now, lets take steam hardware survey and take for a fact that 99% of the gamers dont need those small fps for 2.5x the price of that 3600. I do not consider that a win in my world.

    https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-5-360...

    Or else, we could say: every car in the world loses because there's porsche 918 spyder that exists!! Well man, all I want to do is my everyday life, I do not belong to a race track(e-sports).

    Still I beleive that my honda accord is a winning design that outsells porsche 918 by.... inimaginable amount. And lets me do everything I need.
  • Deicidium369 - Saturday, May 2, 2020 - link

    LMAO... Do you write your own material or do you have a ghost writer - most people cannot be that funny.
  • Lord of the Bored - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Pot, meet kettle.
  • Korguz - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    your one to talk Deicidium369, 90% of whar you type is fiction, personal anti amd bs, and no proof what so ever of that fiction, maybe you should become a writer of fiction books
  • twtech - Monday, May 11, 2020 - link

    The only thing Intel is currently winning at is top-end desktop gaming FPS if you're willing to pay a premium for it, and don't mind the power consumption. So if you want that, the 10900K is on top there.

    At everything else, AMD is winning, because they are ahead in performance per watt, number of cores, price/performance, etc. So laptops, value gaming, high-end productivity and workstations, servers, etc.
  • Middleman - Saturday, May 9, 2020 - link

    Intel Released SkyLake X in 2017, my 7820x 8 core still beats AMD 3700X that was released in 2019. 7820X cost $600 and the 10core was $1000 USD.

    In terms of value I've had a rocking CPU for 2.5 years and will get my money's worth when I upgrade to the next HEDT. AMD is garbage.
  • rocketman122 - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    This os the reason im not buying intel anymore. If it wasnt because of ryzen that syressed them they wouldnt pit any effort to wake up and bring great products for decent prices.everything would be $100 more. Bravo to amd for keeping intel in check.
  • bigboxes - Thursday, April 30, 2020 - link

    Intel seems to be suffering from premature release here. Throw up 10 unexciting CPUs and see if something sticks. It's got i9 in the name. It must be better. Sorry Intel. Johnny, tell Intel what we have for them as a parting gift. It's Z-BRICK!
  • Dug - Thursday, April 30, 2020 - link

    Wow, the amount of comments on a new cpu is amazing!

    They really are throwing spaghetti at the wall with 32 processors.
    Reminds me of HP's strategy with printers. Having 30 different models within $5 increments depending on features. No consumer wants to wade through that crap to just get a printer.
  • Ryan Smith - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    "Wow, the amount of comments on a new cpu is amazing!"

    We have a problem with the spam filter at the moment, which is causing most comments to be rejected. Hoping to get it fixed Friday.
  • boozed - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    The problem I'm seeing is that it doesn't stop "processing" and never posts. I thought it was at my end, though, so at least that's something!
  • Ryan Smith - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Essentially, the server wasn't accepting the post since the spam check couldn't complete. This has now been fixed. So we should be all good. Sorry about the interruption, everyone!
  • shabby - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    When will this archaic comment system be updated to something from this century?
  • Ryan Smith - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Sometime this decade.
  • shabby - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    I don't sense any sarcasm in that reply...
  • Holliday75 - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    LOL
  • just4U - Sunday, May 3, 2020 - link

    lies! that's what you said last decade ;)
  • DanNeely - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Future is slowly migrating all the sites they bought from Purch to their internal shared CMS platform. My guess is we get a better comment system whenever Anandtech gets moved over. I don't recall if an ETA has been given yet, but Ryan's comment makes me think Anandtech hasn't been scheduled for migration yet.
  • Tomatotech - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    That's interesting. From a 2018 article:

    "This week U.K. specialist publisher Future announced the purchase of technology platform and publisher Purch for $132.5 million (£101 million), marking Future’s fifth, and largest, acquisition so far.

    The deal means Future, which publishes titles like TechRadar, PC Gamer and T3, will beef up its consumer tech titles by adding Purch’s sites Tom’s Guide, Tom’s Hardware and Top Ten Reviews. Future makes money through display advertising, e-commerce and affiliate revenue and this added scale aims to curry favor with U.S. advertisers in the consumer tech space."
    https://digiday.com/media/future-buys-purch-boost-...

    I guess that means if any of the sites listed above got a brand new comment system in the last year or so, especially if it was rolled out to two or more sites, that indicates what may be in the future for AnandTech. Comments don't seem a big part of AnandTech moneywise so as Ryan & Dan hint at, it may not be for some time.
  • eastcoast_pete - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Thanks for the update, Ryan!
  • Lord of the Bored - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    I honestly thought it was intentional to keep the stupid flamebait and fanboy wars out.
    In before accusations of bias because you "blocked comments" on the AMD news and not the Intel news!
  • whatthe123 - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    If this didn't need a new socket it would be pretty interesting since it's essentially a price cut for everything to make room for their 10 core. The fact that a new motherboard is required and the 10900K drains even more power than a high end GPU really takes the wind out of it, though. Wonder how far people will have to go with their water cooling just to keep that thing from throttling like mad.
  • Spunjji - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Everyone would need to - depending on your definition of throttling, of course. Intel get around that accusation by only deeming it to be "throttling" when the CPU goes below its base clock - but, of course, they advertise the single-core boost as the headline figure.

    There's no way anything other than the most absurdly massive air-cooler can sustain a CPU pulling 2-300W at below 70 degrees C.
  • quorm - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Yes, something like the Noctua NH-U14S could handle it, but the pricing is comparable to using a closed loop.
  • Qasar - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    with the u14s, you dont need to place a rad. :-)
  • Spunjji - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    True, but you probably shouldn't really use it in a standard tower either... not if you want the board to stay flat! :D
  • Qasar - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    i dont use the u14s, all but 1 or 2 of them, use the NH-D15 :-) even the lga1366 cpu i still have :-)
  • Alistair - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Yes I actually had some trouble with the 9900k and the U12S, but the U14S is a beast.
  • dew111 - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Yeah the power efficiency reminds me of AMD's graphics with the R9 290X/390X days. We know it's slower, so we'll just throw power at it *shrug*
  • ManuelDiego - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Nice naming schemes! It's not like they could remove the last two digits to make it simpler, those 00 at the end really bring valuable details...
  • Alsw - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Thanks for the update was there any mention of the equivalent Xeon, OEMs I've been in contact with have only been talking about up to 8 core xeons which would seem odd unless worried about hurting xeom w range sales (cascade lakex based)

    For these im looking forward to seeing how they actually perform in various states of turbo for real world use how long each turbo can be sustained is the most important factor for us. Most of. Our workloads are bursty of seconds to minutes but some like FEA, CFD require sustained load for much longer sometimes days!
  • wilsonkf - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Not exactly a good time to release a space heater. Sure, Australians will appreciate ...
  • Slash3 - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Minor correction on page 2:
    "It looks very much like an elongated Comet Lake chip, which it is."

    Should be Coffee Lake. :)
  • mode_13h - Saturday, May 2, 2020 - link

    Yeah, that's what I thought.

    A slight point of confusion is that Comet Lake already shipped for mobile. But, I believe they maxed out at 4 cores. So, I wasn't sure if they were implying that there were higher core-count Comet Lake for mobile, but I'm pretty sure not.
  • drothgery - Saturday, May 2, 2020 - link

    Comet Lake H maxed at 8 cores
    Comet Lake U maxed at 6
    Ice Lake U and Y top out at 4
  • WaltC - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Ladies & Gentlemen, step right up and take a gander at Intel's brand new iteration of yesterday's warmed over pea soup! Re-warmed with new herbs and spices to make it more palatable! Pitiful. You know, since the prospective pea-soup buyers have to ditch the old motherboard to get to the new pea soup--it simply makes no sense to do anything but go all AMD instead! Talk about non-competitive and underwhelming--whew!
  • Spunjji - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Yeah, this is the bit that gets me most. Intel fans will justify their purchase into a dead architecture that somehow requires a new motherboard with "I replace the board anyway", not ever seeming to notice how that means they could have just as easily moved to a more cost-effective and future proof platform with AMD.
  • A5 - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    AM4 doesn't have much runway left at this point (probably the same lifespan as LGA1200). Let's not pretend any different.

    AM5 will probably be a better buy if you're one of the like 2% of people who actually replace a CPU instead of doing a system rebuild though.
  • wilsonkf - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    If you buy AM4 now, you can upgrade to 16+ core Ryzen 4 or 5 two to three years later, and the system could last till 2027.

    LGA1200 will not support the next CPU arch. Maybe Intel could push Rocket Lake-S to 5.5Ghz+ to edge out Zen2+, but the heat ... It is like AM3+. Yea you could upgrade to FX9590...
  • alufan - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    aww cmon lets not talk out of our rear to make it look like they are making a decent offer AM4 has been able to take all the Ryzen chips so far and will take the next chip as well, show me where Intel has ever done that and offered the new features and performance with a new chip including this room heater, this is 2014/5 tech stuff with a new motherboard take your blinkers off nothing has changed apart from AMD forcing intels hand
  • WaltC - Sunday, May 3, 2020 - link

    Zen 3 will likely sit on the AM4 bus--enabling users with the ability to upgrade their CPU to Zen 3, should the upgrade in their opinion be warranted. With Intel in this case, what's notable, but not really in a positive way, is that these CPUs are barely a step up from Intel's last gen--more like a sideways step--so who wants to buy into a new mobo just to run yesterday's CPUs? It's not the question of replacing the mobo so much as it is having nothing much to put into the new mobo after you buy it, imo.
  • Spunjji - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    It's how many different things about A5's comment that were just plain daft. They didn't say much, and yet squeezed in so much disinformation...
  • Spunjji - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Who's "pretending any different"? There's at least one more CPU line to come on AM4, which is one more than you get on 90% of Intel platforms.

    In point of fact, Intel hasn't offered a platform with even remotely similar longevity to AM4 since the 440BX, and even then a lot of its useful life was via unsupported mods and certainly wasn't intentional.
  • Spunjji - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Citing stats that are the result of a decision as proof of the worth of the decision is always a dodgy proposition too... I think many more people would upgrade their CPU *if they could*. But they don't expect to, because they can't, so they don't.

    Regardless, this is a site for enthusiasts, after all, not 90% of the market. Dumb argument is dumb.
  • BenSkywalker - Saturday, May 2, 2020 - link

    AMD needs quite a bit more work on their platform to be as smooth as Intel. One downside to all the Ryzen hype is non apologists buying the platform.

    Boot times are comically slow without diving into the UEFI, even with a good NVME drive default boot was *significantly* slower than an ancient Pentium G with SSD and under no circumstances can I get it to boot faster then a very old 4570k system.

    Can't read RAM properly, no matter the setting can't get the RAM to run its rated and supported speed by default. 3200 running at 2133 using every setting except manual which resultsin a 10%-15% performance penalty.... Do we need to bring dip switches back for AMD? Reading RAM and setting it properly too much to ask from a high end chipset in 2020?
  • WaltC - Sunday, May 3, 2020 - link

    Sorry, but not a single thing you've written applies to my AMD systems...;) Your generalizing about all AMD systems is very amusing--considering I haven't had a single problem you relate. I boot to desktop Win10x 64 in ~10 seconds, from a cold boot. You find that comical, I gather. You don't have to "dive into the UEFI" at all...;) You simply do what Win10 has mandated for years and format your drive as GPT/UEFI --which is done automatically by Win10 install--no intervention needed by the user. As for your ram problems--I have no idea what your are talking about--I run XMP effortlessly--always have--since my first Zen1, actually. Right now my DDR4 runs at 3733Mhz with 100% stability on my 3900X system. I was running XMP 2.0 3200MHz with my older Zen1 R5 1600 with perfect reliability.I'm guessing that one of two things, or maybe both, are germane to you: you don't have an AMD system and you are relating info from posts you have read which you believe is true; or you have no clue as to how to setup your AMD system...;)
  • BenSkywalker - Sunday, May 3, 2020 - link

    AMD says my problems are real, guess they are just Intel fanboys according to you?

    https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-cpus-m...

    You clearly need to explain to AMD that this isn't an issue, they are confused and agree with me.

    Asus x570 E/Ryzen 3800x. With all the hype you people have been spewing about, get used to the non apologists.

    10 second boot time....that's very slow, that's closer to what I'd expect from a HDD.

    https://www.tomshardware.com/amp/reviews/fastest-w...
  • Spunjji - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    "All things considered, these changes aren't huge but should fix annoying nuisances for a small group of affected users."

    Assuming you're being honest, you're unfortunately one of a small number of people. Based on the way you frame this, though - something that affects all AMD users - I'd be prepared to stick my neck out and say you're just a liar who dug up a few small bugs and decided to pretend they're universal. It's that or you just don't understand the difference between anecdote and evidence.
  • Spunjji - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    (That was me quoting the source Ben links to, directly invalidating his claim that AMD has widespread platform issues)
  • Spunjji - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    "Boot times are comically slow without diving into the UEFI"

    I have 3 friends with Ryzen systems and not one has had this issue. Some boards have a long POST if they have additional RAID controllers, but if that's what you're referring to it's the same whether AMD or Intel.

    "Can't read RAM properly" sounds like a recycled criticism from the early days of the 1000 series. Seriously, you couldn't sound more like a shill.
  • arashi - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    With 3 billion ++ in the Intel MDF war chest, you should be seeing more of his ilk everywhere.
  • BenSkywalker - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Screenshots provided. More of my ilk, people fooled into buying this garbage platform based on the lies of marketers are going to be more common, and we'll be calling out dishonest shills posting truths about the trash AMD platforms more and more often.
  • Spunjji - Wednesday, May 6, 2020 - link

    "we'll be calling out dishonest shills posting truths about the trash AMD platforms"

    Posting truth makes you a dishonest shill? We truly are in the upside-down.
  • BenSkywalker - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    https://imgur.com/a/bNhYjqI

    https://imgur.com/a/eEolN7L

    Made up problems.......Fanboy....

    WaltC already backed up at least part of what I was saying about boot times, I'm clocking in at about 14 seconds boot, roughly what a proper, Intel, system would get with a HDD, but I'm on a NVME drive.

    This isn't smooth, this doesn't just work out of the box, this isn't like building an Intel system where it *JUST WORKS*. Without going in and manually configuring things like it's 1997 I'm taking about a 10-15% performance hit and boot time clocks in at over 40 seconds. This is just a bad platform IME.
  • BenSkywalker - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Meh, forgot to add that the microcode update actually won't help me, that was for Micron chips and I have Samsung- so looks like I'm waiting even longer.
  • Spunjji - Wednesday, May 6, 2020 - link

    I didn't say your problems were "made up", and if you're going to accuse me of being a fanboy you'd have to explain your way past me not having owned an AMD system since Conroe...

    14 seconds or 40 seconds? Since when has a system with an HDD ever booted to a usable desktop within 40 seconds, let alone 14? You can't keep your own posts straight.

    Honestly, I couldn't give a hoot if you screwed up and bought the wrong RAM for your board, I mostly care that you've made it your mission to pretend this is a much larger problem than it is. *Your own shared posts say it's not a big deal*. Give it up.
  • Korguz - Wednesday, May 6, 2020 - link

    how do you prove that the screen shots he took, are legit ? for all we know, he could of rebooted changed the settings, took the screenshots, rebooted changed them back, then posted them ?
  • BenSkywalker - Wednesday, May 6, 2020 - link

    I did swap settings, I put it to default and get 2133 as I stated. I'm not running like that as I stated explicitly I went in to the BIOS and set it manually.
  • BenSkywalker - Wednesday, May 6, 2020 - link

    40 seconds was the default, the out of the box experience. 14 seconds is the best I can get out of it after playing around in the UEFI.

    Usable desktop with a HDD in 15 seconds is what Toms got in the article I linked. If you truly haven't built a system that can boot to a usable desktop with a HDD in under 40 seconds you need to sit down and let the grown ups talk, you don't have a clue about building a computer, seriously.

    "Bought the wrong RAM"

    AMD platforms summed up right there.
  • Korguz - Wednesday, May 6, 2020 - link

    " bought the wrong cooler, i bought one for a 95 watt cpu, when i should of bought a cooler for 200+ watts, or a water cooler "
    Intel platforms summed up right there
  • BenSkywalker - Wednesday, May 6, 2020 - link

    I bought DDR4 3200, the recommended RAM type and speed for that processor. GSkill Royal, very far removed from budget tier.

    "Bought the wrong RAM"

    That line just so amazingly encapsulates the idiocy of team red. A "supported" Type, speed and brand is "wrong"..... Thinking we have some raging Intel fanboys trying to make AMD fans sound like idiots.
  • Korguz - Wednesday, May 6, 2020 - link

    and you just so amazingly encapsulates the idiocy of team intel, your point ? the ram on my 3900x, is running at ddr4 3200, and its corsair, no problem so must be you. going by your posts, you are in intel shill, and you have sounded the same as you accuse everyone else of sounding like.
    maybe you should just sell that system, and go back to intel so will will stop crying and whining .
  • Korguz - Wednesday, May 6, 2020 - link

    i should mention, thats 4 sticks, 32gigs, carried over from my 5830K that i replaced with the 3900x.
  • BenSkywalker - Thursday, May 7, 2020 - link

    Nobody ever got fired for buying Intel.

    If you people honestly want AMD to get to that level, they need to fix issues with random combinations having problems. They need to get as polished as Intel. Apologizing for them and attacking people who are spending their money the way you want is seriously idiotic. You just prove yourselves to be toxic fanboys.

    Intel is *falling spectacularly* right now and their profits dwarf AMD's revenue. Encourage them to fix the issues they have, stop accepting mediocrity on any level and stop lashing out when people point out they aren't divine.
  • BenSkywalker - Wednesday, May 6, 2020 - link

    Drop a couple grand on an AMD system, get called an Intel shill.... Yep, y'all are a bright bunch.
  • BenSkywalker - Thursday, May 7, 2020 - link

    When have I said what your experience was? That never happened. Did I ever say your system wasn't working fine? Never happened. I explained my experience and was told I'm doing something wrong, made it up, implied I was a paid shill. I explained I got it working at the rated speed and my issue now was long boot times.

    A good community of people may have offered some tips I haven't thought of, idiot fanboys start a FUD campaign. Again, I've never said anything about *your* system, I'm not some idiot pretentious douche know it all.
  • Korguz - Thursday, May 7, 2020 - link

    news flash for you there BenSkywalker, you are an intel shill more then most on here, your previous posts have shown this, i dont think i have ever seen you say anything positive about amd ever yet, you constantly praise intel. intel screwed up, they lied about 10nm being on track/time, stuck mainstream at quad core, lies about how much power its cpu uses, and still rehashing the same base architecture for how long now ?? like Spunjji mentioned, he didnt say your issue was made up, and i dont remember any mechanical hdd getting to a usable desktop in 14 seconds either, one of my comps here still uses such a hdd, and when i turn it on, i forget about for a few mins, as there is no way it would be at the desktop that fast. i just mentioned that i have an amd system as well, with no issues with ram speed. and maybe you were accused of being an intel shill,. because of your previous posts, show you are. good luck with your system, how you get it figured out the way you want it.,
  • BenSkywalker - Thursday, May 7, 2020 - link

    An Intel shill that spends his money on AMD......

    I've posted on two threads involving CPUs that I can recall, one in a gaming build article where I pointed out flat out wrong information and pointed out Intel was faster for gaming and cheaper, all facts, and some raging spaz shill took issue, and this one, and that's all I can think of.

    I don't care enough about the CPU market to shill anything ever, just don't like BS being spread.
  • rabidpeach - Friday, May 8, 2020 - link

    so you bought a shit motherboard and didn't verify it could run the faster rams?
  • Valantar - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    That's an ill-fitting metaphor - soups and stews generally _improve_ in flavor as they sit. Yesterday's soup is likely to taste richer and better than one made today (at least if the soup is made from scratch and not some over-processed crap).

    CPU architectures have no such luck.
  • azfacea - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    i9 is the new i7. i7 is the new i5. interesting that intel now has hyper threading across the board on these *new* i7s. Gee i wondder why
  • Spunjji - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    It's almost like they've been compelled by some invisible force to stop artificially segmenting their products to the Nth degree.
  • Deicidium369 - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Yeah, no other Industry does that - it's not like Toyota sells multiple versions of the same vehicle - no "trim" levels that add additional mechanical and cosmetic changes. Not like Gulfstream sells multiple sizes of jets ... yeah where Intel is getting this crazy idea is unknown.
  • Spunjji - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Did I say no other industry does that? Did I say only Intel do that?
    Or did I perhaps imply that competition from AMD has forced them reduce the extent to which they do it? 🤔

    Intel have always taken the piss with how they go about this practice, seemingly in order to push unsuspecting customers further up the product ladder than they actually need to go. The fact that car manufactures engage in the same predatory practices doesn't magically make it okay for Intel. Talking about Gulfstream jet sizes is even more laughable because they're *literally physically different objects*, as opposed to a CPU where the exact same piece of fully-functioning silicon has features lazered off "because marketing".

    You really are just Gondalf with better Turing Test scores.
  • arashi - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Did gondaft get banned?
  • Spunjji - Wednesday, May 6, 2020 - link

    Didn't even know you could! Perhaps someone tripped over the power cord of the system running the rudimentary AI that fuelled it.
  • TristanSDX - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    die size is 200 sqmm. Assuming that Willow Cove core is 2x larger (more cache, AVX512, wider pipeline etc) it is impossible to Rocket Lake have more than 6 cores
  • PeterCollier - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Wow, can we get an F in the chat for AMD?
  • Spunjji - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Why? 😂
  • twtech - Sunday, May 3, 2020 - link

    This is pretty good for a high-end gaming processor, but hardly an overall threat to AMD, who offers better value across their lineup for all uses, and superior processors for laptops, servers, and workstations.
  • abufrejoval - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    "First up is allowing users to enable/disable hyperthreading on a per-core basis..."

    Perhaps an overclocker can be forgiven to see the world only in overclocking terms, but these very same chips are also Xeon Es and more so, as core counts increase.

    In that context the ability to disable HT on a core-by-core base, ideally even at run-time and in a more fine grained manner might be quite useful for controlling how to deal with VMs running potentially hostile (or sensitve) workloads.

    I'm sure Intel doesn't like throwing away HT resources unless it helps salvaging a chip that otherwise would step outside thermal boundries. Yet the side channel leakages potential with HT seems so large, that you can't really afford to leave it on, when dealing with sensitve workloads.

    Therefore disabling it on a core-by-core base allows you to pin sensitive VMs to cores without HT, while less exposed back-end workloads can profit from the 10-20% throughput HT may be able to deliver.

    Just guessing of course, but generally there has been a trend to expose ever more control about CPU resources (e.g. caches) to hypervisors, to fence anti-social or downright evil workloads.
  • eastcoast_pete - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Wow, all new and improved - packaging! Really?
  • repoman27 - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Going by the ordering and spec information listed on ARK, the entire stack is built from two Comet Lake-S dies: the 10-core stepping Q0 and the 6-core stepping G1. They are not using any previous generation Coffee Lake dies or the recently released CML-H 8+2 R1 stepping at this time.

    Core i5-10600KF and above are Q0 stepping and likely solder TIM.

    Core i5-10600 and below are G1 stepping and probably paste TIM (which is fine seeing as they are all locked SKUs with 6 or fewer cores anyway).

    Core i5-10400 and Core i5-10400F are the only SKUs that currently list spec numbers for both Q0 and G1 steppings.
  • Samus - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    14nm again? I think I just heard Gordon Moore explode.
  • Tchamber - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    "14nm again?"
    I was thinking the same thing. I wonder if it's Intel that labels it 14++ or the media. They should have labeled it 14+++++ if it's the 5th iteration.
  • Fataliity - Saturday, May 2, 2020 - link

    :Each plus is a refinement to the 14nm node. Not every 14nm generation from Intel had an improvement to 14nm (They only started this around when Ryzen came into focus and 10nm failed). That's why there are less ++'s than generations of 14nm.
  • Deicidium369 - Saturday, May 2, 2020 - link

    or used the TSMC method like 16nm, 16nm+ = 14nm, 16nm++ = 12nm

    If you think the latest Intel 14nm is still 14nm you are a bit dense... probably closer to 12 or 11nm
  • Spunjji - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    The latest 14nm variants are *less dense* than the originals in order to reach higher clocks. They're objectively superior in performance to the old versions of the node, but your comparison is asinine from anything other than a cheerleading perspective.
  • Haawser - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Expensive new motherboard + 14nm nuclear reactor ? Meh, no thanks. The advantages over Coffee lake or Ryzen 3000 are minimal at best, and simply not worth the heat, noise, power and cost.
  • Deicidium369 - Saturday, May 2, 2020 - link

    I can see nothing in Comet Lake to abandon core i9 9900K - zero reason to move to CML
  • 137ben - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    I think the article overlooks one key area in which these new Intel processors outdo current Ryzen offerings: more cores with integrated graphics. There are applications that are heavy on CPU/memory usage but don't get much benefit from GPU. For those use cases, having integrated graphics to run the operating system's UI is a cost-saver.

    The current top-of-the-line AMD APUs come with 4 cores/8 threads (AFAIK?). The newly announced i5-1050 0 comes with 6C/12T and for more money you can get an 10C/20T i9-10900 without needing to buy an extra graphics card.

    Of course, if you are doing any graphics-heavy tasks like AAA gaming, then it doesn't matter because you'll have to buy a discrete GPU anyways. But for the niche of CPU-bounded computing paired with integrated graphics, Intel appears to be back on top, at least until AMD starts rolling out Zen 2 APUs.
  • willis936 - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    You can get a cheap dGPU with comparable performance to an iGPU for the cost of a CPU cooler that could keep one of these puppies from throttling.

    What matters is price and performance. They're redlining their engine to keep up with performance (consumer die lapping???) and are having to charge an almost sane price for the first time in a decade. It won't save them if they can't keep up with the process node though.
  • Deicidium369 - Saturday, May 2, 2020 - link

    And OEMs don't want to add yet another product to the BoM - and OEM customers don't want another component to support and deal with - most businesses are perfectly fine with the iGPUs in Intel - no additional component to support.
  • Spunjji - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Which is worse - BoM for a passively-cooled dGPU from a company that actually provides reliable drivers, or BoM for the up-rated CPU cooler, additional system fans and beefier PSU required to support Intel's latest at anything like its rated speeds?

    Of course OEMs will probably make the decision you're suggesting they'll make, because they're incentivized not to switch vendors. They'll more than likely just supply the CPUs in systems that are utterly incapable of reaching their rated boost speeds for longer than a few milliseconds, just like they've been doing in notebooks ever since Kaby Lake R came out.
  • Zizy - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    I don't think that really matters - in the end you want the highest performance for the lowest price. Take i9-10900 with its horrible cooler. On AMD's side you have 3900X which has a working cooler, is likely faster and costs only 30e extra for the 710GT GPU to display screen. Sure, one extra part is annoying but a small price for all the other benefits.

    Also, the only game that works better on i9 than on AMD APUs is a turn based Civ6 because time for turns is more important than framerate.
  • Deicidium369 - Saturday, May 2, 2020 - link

    OK none of these come with a cooler... so what cooler are you talking about? Typically that would be paired with a Noctua NH-D15 SSO...
  • Spunjji - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    So that's an extra $80-90 for the cooler, per system, when the 3900X comes with a solidly performing cooler that properly supports its turbo states. You can get quite a bit of dGPU for that price - and with better drivers than Intel's crap.
  • eek2121 - Saturday, May 2, 2020 - link

    Your argument makes sense for laptops, but I am not sure it applies to much else at this point. Honestly I can’t imagine a use case where I, as a gamer (ignore the fact that gaming is something like 5% of my usage) would ever want a GPU over l, say, 2-4 additional “cores”. Intel is stuck in a bit of a rut. They don’t (arguably) hold the performance crown, they aren’t the budget king, and quite frankly, they don’t lead in a single significant scenario. Despite the fact I am rocking AMD thus far, I would love for Intel to make a comeback. Competition is good and if competition were competitive I would buy Intel again, however, Intel is still in denial and freefall.
  • mrvco - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Looking forward to the cooing over 1080p / 2080 Ti gaming benchmarks!!!
  • Deicidium369 - Saturday, May 2, 2020 - link

    I am ready for the 1080Ti vs 2080Ti vs 3080Ti
  • michaelred - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    "Intel’s cheapest quad-core, the i3-10100, will be on sale for $122. This is still a way away from AMD’s cheapest quadcore, the 3200G, which retails for $99. With AMD also announcing the Ryzen 3 3100 at $99 with Zen 2 cores inside, up to 3.9 GHz, it’s going to be an interesting battle to see if Intel can justify the $23+ cost differential here."
    3200G is 4/4 i3-10100 is 4/8 + it has IGP so you can justify the +23USD.
  • phoenix_rizzen - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    3200G is an API with integrated Vega 8 GPU. It's only Zen+ architecture, though; there's no Zen2 APUs yet.

    So it's 4/4 with better GPU and very close CPU for $23 less than the 4/8 with much worse iGPU.
  • phoenix_rizzen - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    Ugh API --> APU
  • Slash3 - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link

    The 6C/12T Zen+ based 1600AF is also an option at $85, although it forgoes the IGP.
  • Deicidium369 - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    you mean the single most important part to keep OEMs from adding another component to the BoM>?
  • Spunjji - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    1) This appears to be a discussion of retail prices
    2) $85 + $40 = $125. That's a 6/12 CPU with a decent stock cooler and a GPU with decent drivers for the cost of a 4/8 CPU with neither of those things.
  • mode_13h - Saturday, May 2, 2020 - link

    > The new CPUs have the LGA1200 socket, which means that current 300-series motherboards are not sufficient, and users will require new LGA1200 motherboards. This is despite the socket being the same size.

    "despite the socket being the same size"? What an odd point to make. As if to say the new socket would only be justified if it had different physical dimensions.
  • Deicidium369 - Saturday, May 2, 2020 - link

    The socket is only marginally larger - its only 49 additional pins - the holes for the coolers are identical - which is what was meant.
  • Kevin G - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Even the CPU packages are the same. They reduced the size of the center area for small SMD capacitors for additional pads. A few spots on the edges gained some pads too. It just isn’t obvious unless you look closely that they are different.
  • mode_13h - Saturday, May 2, 2020 - link

    > This should have a negligible effect on core-to-core latency which will likely not be noticed by end-users.

    Oh? You mean *you* can't notice an extra 20 nanoseconds between when you click the mouse and the dialog closes?

    Seriously, I get that you guys are under deadline, but that wasn't worded well. You ought to talk about its potential power & performance impact, so people will understand what significance it has. Latency is such a generic concept and covers such a range of issues that just citing latency as a concern doesn't tell someone anything who's not already "in the know".
  • Fataliity - Saturday, May 2, 2020 - link

    You have to wait for a review to actually know how it will be affected.

    That was just an assumption, as you can see they don't have a chip to test yet.
  • Spunjji - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Amusing that this aspect isn't getting much focus. Launch now, allow benchmarks... some other time
  • Peskarik - Saturday, May 2, 2020 - link

    As a new system (MoBo + Proc) is it even worth buying this over 9900K?
  • mode_13h - Saturday, May 2, 2020 - link

    > this is where I think Intel has made its biggest mistake, in having a new socket/chipset combination straddle the generations between PCIe 3.0 and PCIe 4.0.

    It was pretty much the same with Sandybridge and Ivy Bridge. Except, I'm not sure if any of the *original* Sandy mobos would support PCIe 3.0 with an Ivy CPU. However, I have a 2600K in a board that would support PCIe 3.0 if I put an Ivy in it.
  • Deicidium369 - Saturday, May 2, 2020 - link

    Makes no sense for the Z490 to have PCIe4. These are primarily for Comet Lake. Rocket Lake will support PCIe4 on the Z590 - can't imagine someone buying this with a Comet Lake to upgrade 6 months later to Rocket Lake S. Makes no sense - and when I get Rocket Lake I would not put in on the 490 - regardless of whether it supports PCIe4 or not.

    Would have made more sense to have the Z490 be the Z470 - support for CML, no PCIe4 and the Z490 being for Rocket Lake with PCIe4. Not sure it makes much sense for an entirely different chipset generation for Rocket Lake 6 months later.
  • just4U - Sunday, May 3, 2020 - link

    From the article: "The new CPUs have the LGA1200 socket, which means that current 300-series motherboards are not sufficient, and users will require new LGA1200 motherboards.."
    ---

    Oh phew.. for a minute there I thought we were going to need new motherboards!
    (… Yes I am in denial)
  • del42sa - Sunday, May 3, 2020 - link

    65W Intel .... LoL
  • Deicidium369 - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Appropriate that respond to you - you can LOL all you want ..

    AMD 4.6GHz LOL
  • del42sa - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    seems you take it too personally .-)
  • iemdi - Sunday, May 3, 2020 - link

    at least Gondalf will still buy this thing
  • Da W - Sunday, May 3, 2020 - link

    Put me in the "I don't give a fuck" camp.
  • danjw - Sunday, May 3, 2020 - link

    So, this is all vaporware for now. Typical Intel!
  • Deicidium369 - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    shipping to OEMs - will be able to get at newegg within a couple of weeks - unlike AMD, Intel has to fab 10x more CPUs than TSMC fabs for AMD - since the Intel parts will sell 10:1 over AMD
  • Spunjji - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    🤪
  • Korguz - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    source for any of this bs ? yea.. didnt think so, like all of your bs posts Deicidium369
  • evilpaul666 - Sunday, May 3, 2020 - link

    ECC isn't supported on the i3, Pentiums, or Celerons. I'm probably the only person who was interested to know this, but I checked. Is there a low end Xeon 1200 socket?
  • Kevin G - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Not yet as the consumer versions of Xeons tend to lag behind their consumer versions. Question is how long this time.
  • isthisavailable - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Aaaand a new socket...again!
  • watzupken - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    This is likely the last of the CPU with the now aged Skylake architecture. Intel have squeezed both the 14nm along with this old CPU for too many years now. This product range simply just shows how backward Intel is when it comes to power efficiency, as compared to AMD. The desperation from Intel to try to retain their single core performance have drove them to feed a chip that much power just to keep up with competition.
    Unfortunately based on my experience with Ice Lake CPU, I don't think 10nm is going to save Intel as well. Because 14nm is so advance now, it is overshadowing the benefits of 10nm when it comes to clockspeed. From a power standpoint, I feel the 10nm is not ready for a high TDP chip. Even on the i5 Ice Lake U processor, I would have thought the thermals are better. However I was surprised that at idle, the temps are registering between 50 to 60 degs, and 94 degs at load. Granted that this is very subjective to the PC maker's cooling solution, but for a "15W" chip, it is still very toasty. Not to mention the extremely low base clockspeed as compared to even the Whiskey Lake U chips does highlight some teething issues with the 10nm.
  • mat9v - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Since Intel lowered density at 14nm+ step then 14nm+++ is more like 16nm then 14nm anyway.
    It is THE reason that they are able to squeeze so much clock out of it.
  • Spunjji - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    Good luck explaining that to Deicidium 😆
  • Korguz - Monday, May 4, 2020 - link

    even if you did explain it to Deicidium369, with sources for that proof, he would still come up with his personal opinions and bs, while being insulting, condasending, and calling people names, as that is all he has.
  • dwade123 - Tuesday, May 5, 2020 - link

    Higher FPS > higher Cinebench numbers. AMD wins in areas nobody cares about hahahaha
  • Korguz - Tuesday, May 5, 2020 - link

    oh, you mean like how the intel side did the SAME thing when it was winning in cinebench ?
  • Oxford Guy - Tuesday, May 5, 2020 - link

    So, does all this factory overclocking compensate for all of the slowdowns from the security flaw patches?

    Too bad for Intel that it has competition that has made its CPUs obsolete.

    When AMD was stuck on Piledriver for so many years, Intel had no competition. There was no reason to guy an AMD FX except for rare edge cases (if one had access to a Microcenter and picked up an 8320E an a UD3P board for practically no money).

    Now, edge cases are all Intel has in the desktop space. The laptop space is rapidly closing for them, too.
  • 06GTOSC - Wednesday, May 6, 2020 - link

    Please tell me the new Intel slogan is "It's Turbo Time"
  • poohbear - Friday, May 8, 2020 - link

    Your Comparison and conclusion page hit the nail on the head! Thank you for the tables comparing AMD's offerings to Intel...the decision is a no-brainer for me. AMD finally stepped up and they offer the better CPU hands down.
  • Tabaluga - Saturday, May 9, 2020 - link

    I am most interested in voltage\frequency curve, as due to plundervolt Intel is disabling offset traditionally used to undervolt laptop CPU-s. If they unlock this curve for locked CPU-s then it would be awesome! If not - well, all the more reason to go for AMD instead, especially given how efficient they are in laptops nowdays.
  • jauffinz - Tuesday, May 12, 2020 - link

    If 10900F actually pushes 65w (making it have a "lower TDP" than the 3900X), I'll eat my own ass.
  • zeelee - Monday, May 18, 2020 - link

    Thanks for sharing amazing content
    https://speed.ptclbill.info/ptcl-speed-test/

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now