MSI MAG B650M Mortar WIFI review
AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT and XTX unboxing
Fractal Design North chassis review
Beelink GTR6 (Ryzen 9 6900HX) mini PC review
ASRock X670E Steel Legend review
Solidigm P44 Pro (1TB/2TB) M.2 NVMe SSD Review
EnGenius ECW336 WIFI6E Access Point review
MSI MEG Z790 ACE review
Deepcool LT720 LCS Cooler Review
Arctic A35/I35 A-RGB air coolers review
Intel Core i9-10900 10-core Processor Poses for Camera
There are signs everywhere, and almost on a daily basis that the new Comet Lake-S Core series processors from Intel are inbound. We've seen many leaks, today photos of a potential Core i9-10900 10-core Processor and LGA1200 motherboard have surfaced.
The most high-end Core i9 processors based on Comet Lake-S will get 10 cores and 20 threads. This round Asia based Xfastest, snagged what seems to be an engineering sample (ES) of the upcoming Core i9-10900 processor.
The Comet Lake-S ES processor displayed on the photos is an i9-10900 that adopts the new LGA 1200 pin socket for Z490 and Intel series 400 motherboards, which means just that, yes you need a new motherboard if you make the move to Comet Lake-S. This non-K model processor would get a 65 Watt TDP rating, which is interesting for something with 10-cores. According to the Comet Lake-S architecture block diagram that was exposed on the internet earlier, Comet Lake-S shares many features of previous generation processors and basically is an expeanded version of the current generation Coffee lake. The PCIe specification also sticks to revision 3.0, 16 PCIe lanes are provided on the processor.
The larger improvement is that this time the Comet Lake S CPU has a maximum of 10 cores, which is more than the 8 cores of the previous top i9-9900KS. In addition, the CNVi interface also supports a new generation of WiFi 6 wireless technology. Fabbed on a 14nm++ process Comet Lake-S could be 18% faster in multi-threaded application scenarios, general Windows applications would see an 8% improvement. All photos are courtesy to these young rascals in Hong Kong.
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....
Intel Core i9 10900K with 5.1 GHz boost appears in 3DMark specifications - 02/02/2020 10:53 PM
We've seen many signs that Intel is getting closer to release the desktop 10000 series of Core processors. Z490 motherboards for the new generation procs keep popping up, plus weeks ago the entire li...
Intel Core i5-L16G7 Lakefield Spotted in benchmark - 01/31/2020 05:26 PM
Does anyone remember Lakefield? You know, not regular desktop processors, but more of a hybrid one based on Foveros technology? Well, as it seems the Intel Core i5-L16G7 has surfaced in a benchmark.
Intel Comet Lake-S CPUs and Z490 boards support PCI-E 4.0 (but it's not active) - 01/22/2020 01:21 PM
A new report on the web indicates that the upcoming Comet Lake-S processors (tenth generation of Intel Core for desktop) actually do support PCI Express 4.0, some Z490 motherboards are designed for it...
Intel Comet Lake i5 and i3 spotted, both get HyperThreading but lower clock speeds - 12/28/2019 10:11 AM
Some info on Intels' pending Comet Lake processors has surfaced. The 14nm node fabricated processors are assumed to launch in April. Earlier on it was kind of confirmed that the lower positioned pro...
D1stRU3T0R
Senior Member
Posts: 628
Joined: 2017-08-16
Senior Member
Posts: 628
Joined: 2017-08-16
#5760315 Posted on: 02/14/2020 05:23 PM
AMD is 2x ing the cores, Intel add +2. They misread what AMD wants to do, but it was too late :p
AMD has 65W 12/24 already, with PCIe 4, not the old 3.0 and much more features. Stop praising intel, they seem that they don't have anything new to offer. They barely doubled the cores to 8, and now they struggle with everything. They can't really add single threaded performance, so they try to fix vulnerabilities by hardware so they don't take the penalty by software. Adding 2 cores is literally nothing these days. They are doing exactly what AMD did back with the FX 9 series. They just didn't added 2 more cores. (imagine FX 9590 on Excavator having 10 core...)
So 8% more for single core performance. When you think about it that's all Intel needs to do, just keep adding cores to it. If the CPU was on 7nm, same architecture...Intel would have eliminate high core count problem. Again 10/20 for 65W on 14nm is quite achievement if you ask me, I bet you that it won't go over 95W for any game or software you use. My 9900K never goes over 105W playing games and using software. Just because Prime 95 can push it too high, guess what...like I f. care. I don't play Prime95 nor I use it in production. It is just torture nonsense.
AMD is 2x ing the cores, Intel add +2. They misread what AMD wants to do, but it was too late :p
AMD has 65W 12/24 already, with PCIe 4, not the old 3.0 and much more features. Stop praising intel, they seem that they don't have anything new to offer. They barely doubled the cores to 8, and now they struggle with everything. They can't really add single threaded performance, so they try to fix vulnerabilities by hardware so they don't take the penalty by software. Adding 2 cores is literally nothing these days. They are doing exactly what AMD did back with the FX 9 series. They just didn't added 2 more cores. (imagine FX 9590 on Excavator having 10 core...)
D3M1G0D
Senior Member
Posts: 2068
Joined: 2017-03-10
Senior Member
Posts: 2068
Joined: 2017-03-10
#5760316 Posted on: 02/14/2020 05:24 PM
Yup. I can't imagine anyone being excited for this processor. AMD doubles the core count on AM4 while Intel adds two more cores with a new socket, LMAO.
9900 with 2 more cores. A new motherboard required.
Yup. I can't imagine anyone being excited for this processor. AMD doubles the core count on AM4 while Intel adds two more cores with a new socket, LMAO.
Mundosold
Senior Member
Posts: 243
Joined: 2012-10-04
Senior Member
Posts: 243
Joined: 2012-10-04
#5760323 Posted on: 02/14/2020 05:42 PM
lol at the fine print. "performance numbers may not reflect all security updates. No product can be absolutely secure"
Thanks for clearing that up, intel.
Also like "workloads used may have been optimized for performance only on Intel processors"
lol at the fine print. "performance numbers may not reflect all security updates. No product can be absolutely secure"
Thanks for clearing that up, intel.
Also like "workloads used may have been optimized for performance only on Intel processors"
Stairmand
Senior Member
Posts: 338
Joined: 2007-07-25
Senior Member
Posts: 338
Joined: 2007-07-25
#5760330 Posted on: 02/14/2020 05:58 PM
It's not a bad platform, but lacking PCIe 4 seems a pretty big miss. What exactly are all those extra pins required for?
It's not a bad platform, but lacking PCIe 4 seems a pretty big miss. What exactly are all those extra pins required for?
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 20392
Joined: 2008-08-28
9900 with 2 more cores. A new motherboard required.