Sabrent Rocket 1TB NVMe SSD review
Resident Evil 3: PC graphics performance benchmark review
Palit GeForce GTX 1650 KalmX review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - March 2020
Deepcool Gamer Storm Macube 310P review
NVIDIA Shield Android TV 2019 review
Fractal Design ERA ITX chassis review
Gigabyte TRX40 Aorus Master review
XFX Radeon RX 5600 XT THICC 2 review
Cougar Blazer review
Core i7-10700F CineBench Scores spotted: lets chart that up
Intel's Core i7-10700F has been spotted, the 8-core/16-thread processor that is multiplier locked. It has a base clock of 2.90 GHz, and lacks integrated graphics "F" extension.
The turbo is expected to run to 4.7/4.8 GHz. The Korean based community from QuasarZone now has shared a screenshot of what is allegedly an i7-10700F run with Cinebench R20. The chip scores 4781 points in the multi-threaded test, and 492 points single-threaded. The scores position the processor at Ryzen 7 3700X processor level performance. When we chart that up with our results sets, this is where the processors end in the score:
|
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CPU | Cores/threads | Baseklok | Turbo 1T | Max Turbo 3.0 | All-core turbo | TDP |
| i9 10900K | 10C/20T | 3.7 GHz | 5.1 GHz | 5.3 GHz* | 4.8 GHz | 125W |
| i9 10900 | 10C/20T | 2.8 GHz | 5.0 GHz | 5.1 GHz* | 4.5 GHz | 65W |
| i7 10700K | 8C/16T | 3.8 GHz | 5.0 GHz | 5.3?? GHz | 4.7 GHz | 125W |
| i7 10700 | 8C/16T | 2.9 GHz | 4.7 GHz | 4.8 GHz | 4.6 GHz | 65W |
| i5 10600K | 6C/12T | 4.1 GHz | 4.8 GHz | - | 4.5 GHz | 125W |
| i5 10600 | 6C/12T | 3.3 GHz | 4.8 GHz | - | 4.4 GHz | 65W |
| i5 10500 | 6C/12T | 3.1 GHz | 4.5 GHz | - | 4.2 GHz | 65W |
| i5 10400 | 6C/12T | 2.9 GHz | 4.3 GHz | - | 4.0 GHz | 65W |
| i3 10320 | 4C/8T | 3.8 GHz | 4.6 GHz | - | 4.4 GHz | 65W |
| i3 10300 | 4C/8T | 3.7 GHz | 4.4 GHz | - | 4.2 GHz | 65W |
| i3 10100 | 4C/8T | 3.6 GHz | 4.3 GHz | - | 4.1 GHz | 65W |
| * Intel Thermal Velocity Boost (single-core / all core): 10900K: 5.3/4.9 GHz; 10900: 5.1/4.6 GHz | ||||||
Intel Core i7-10700K Spotted in UL 3DMark listing at 5.30 GHz Turbo Boost - 02/12/2020 03:33 PM
It seems the specs of Intel's upcoming processors might change a bit. A 3DMark benchmark was spotted, indicating a slightly higher Turbo clock at 5300 MHz....
First Benchmarks show AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS to be faster than Ryzen 7 2700X and Core i7-9700K - 02/12/2020 09:28 AM
A set of early benchmarks of the AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS have appeared on the web, and as it seems the mobile CPU is faster than a Ryzen 7 2700X or a Core i7-9700K....
Intel Core i7-9750H and GeForce GTX 1650 Perfs leaks though marketing material - 04/08/2019 12:56 PM
In the Asia region, a number of presentation slides have leaked, they originate from MSI and shows some numbers based on a laptop with the pending Core i7-9750H and GeForce GTX 1650....
Intel Core i7-9750H and GeForce GTX 1650 say hi in 3DMark database - 03/05/2019 10:18 AM
Twitter user TUM_APISAK has once again spotted something in the 3DMark database. Two things actually as there is a still unannounced laptop which would come be released with the unannounced GeForce GT...
Spanish website posts Core i7-9700K Benchmarks - 09/10/2018 06:01 PM
A Spanish website just posted a near full review of the Intel Core i7-9700K processor, the review includes a wide selection of benchmarks....
Caesar
Senior Member
Posts: 1015
Joined: 2015-06-18
Senior Member
Posts: 1015
Joined: 2015-06-18
#5761837 Posted on: 02/19/2020 06:02 PM
Where does my i7 - 9700K stands in the benchmarks?
Where does my i7 - 9700K stands in the benchmarks?
JamesSneed
Senior Member
Posts: 723
Joined: 2017-02-14
Senior Member
Posts: 723
Joined: 2017-02-14
#5761870 Posted on: 02/19/2020 08:34 PM
9700K
Single: 466
Multi: 3656 (Just below the Ryzen 3600X)
Where does my i7 - 9700K stands in the benchmarks?
9700K
Single: 466
Multi: 3656 (Just below the Ryzen 3600X)
karma777police
Senior Member
Posts: 144
Joined: 2018-08-17
Senior Member
Posts: 144
Joined: 2018-08-17
#5761878 Posted on: 02/19/2020 09:57 PM
This is not bad at all. This is 65W CPU and I believe it will cost $300. $399 is for 10700X and 10900X will be $499. 10900 non X will be $429.
I bet you AMD will lower the price of Ryzen of 3900x to $429, being more appealing product. 3800x is already reaching low $329 and 3700x <$300.
I hope Intel sells this even cheaper than what I said which is more likely to be, 95%.
Let's see how 10900X with its agressive turbo performs against 3900x, I am sure they will trade punches with Intel edging 3900x in gaming by a bigger margin than 9900k.
This is not bad at all. This is 65W CPU and I believe it will cost $300. $399 is for 10700X and 10900X will be $499. 10900 non X will be $429.
I bet you AMD will lower the price of Ryzen of 3900x to $429, being more appealing product. 3800x is already reaching low $329 and 3700x <$300.
I hope Intel sells this even cheaper than what I said which is more likely to be, 95%.
Let's see how 10900X with its agressive turbo performs against 3900x, I am sure they will trade punches with Intel edging 3900x in gaming by a bigger margin than 9900k.
Aura89
Senior Member
Posts: 7809
Joined: 2008-07-31
Senior Member
Posts: 7809
Joined: 2008-07-31
#5761913 Posted on: 02/20/2020 02:27 AM
This is not bad at all. This is 65W CPU and I believe it will cost $300. $399 is for 10700X and 10900X will be $499. 10900 non X will be $429.
It's amazing that you choose to put your foot in your mouth time and time again.
This is not bad at all. This is 65W CPU and I believe it will cost $300. $399 is for 10700X and 10900X will be $499. 10900 non X will be $429.
It's amazing that you choose to put your foot in your mouth time and time again.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 723
Joined: 2017-02-14
Not bad for a more budget friendly CPU. I suppose if its priced right around a 3700x it should be a good seller. Im a bit turned off by Intel lately so I'm more interested to see what Zen3 looks like.