Intel to launch 10th generation Core processors between April and June

Mundosold

2020-03-09 19:32

metagamer:

Gaming performance. AMD still doesn't anything worthwhile for those on intels that are 6700k or better. Many are waiting for these and possibly to see what 4xxx Ryzen will bring. I am, at least.

More nonsense. The money saved going AMD and losing some frames at 640x480 quake 3, can instead be used to buy a better GPU for higher frames at the resolutions you actually play at. Or maybe a new monitor if you are still playing at 1080P in 2020 with a 2080Ti. Which would you rather have: 9900K + 2060S for $950, and still need a CPU cooler or 3700X + 2070S for $800, with $150 leftover for faster RAM or better cooling etc. Which setup outperforms the other at 1440P??? "But I am getting a 2080Ti I want the best" - well why aren't you getting a Titan RTX? That is 10% faster than the 2080Ti... oh the 10% GPU performance isn't worth paying double for? Imagine that! AMD is EQUAL to Intel in real-world gaming performance (1440P+) AMD is SUPERIOR to Intel in practical gaming performance (money saved that can go toward better GPU), because PC parts don't exist in a vacuum

#5767535

Reddoguk

2020-03-09 20:01

It'll just be a 9900K but with 2 extra cores. So basically 10/20 cores/threads vs 8/16. It'll still be 125w chip. I'm hoping for a 4900X that's 65w or 4800X even with much lower power draw.

#5767537

nizzen

2020-03-09 20:03

mrvco:

Certainly anyone with an RTX 2080 Ti running benchmarks at 1080p.

1440p is the new 1080p with 2080ti and next gen gpu 😉

#5767539

JamesSneed

2020-03-09 20:07

metagamer:

Gaming performance. AMD still doesn't anything worthwhile for those on intels that are 6700k or better. Many are waiting for these and possibly to see what 4xxx Ryzen will bring. I am, at least.

Still though wouldn't you pick up a 9900K at a discount? I believe everyone that knows is expecting this gen to have very marginal performance gains. I asked this because a few posts were saying finally its out and I'm not seeing what is exciting people on this launch.

#5767540

nizzen

2020-03-09 20:08

Mundosold:

More nonsense. The money saved going AMD and losing some frames at 640x480 quake 3, can instead be used to buy a better GPU for higher frames at the resolutions you actually play at. Or maybe a new monitor if you are still playing at 1080P in 2020 with a 2080Ti. Which would you rather have: 9900K + 2060S for $950, and still need a CPU cooler or 3700X + 2070S for $800, with $150 leftover for faster RAM or better cooling etc. Which setup outperforms the other at 1440P??? "But I am getting a 2080Ti I want the best" - well why aren't you getting a Titan RTX? That is 10% faster than the 2080Ti... oh the 10% GPU performance isn't worth paying double for? Imagine that! AMD is EQUAL to Intel in real-world gaming performance (1440P+) AMD is SUPERIOR to Intel in practical gaming performance (money saved that can go toward better GPU), because PC parts don't exist in a vacuum

4770k is EQUAL to AMD Ryzen 3000 series in gaming, så why bother use money on a new cpu? Buy better GPU for the money you save from not buying a new Ryzen cpu. True story 😉 Allways play in gpubound scenarios, then you can use a "free" 7 years old cpu for years to come 😛

#5767541

metagamer

2020-03-09 20:11

Aura89:

I think the point of the question is, why for gaming performance? The 9900k/9900ks already exist and the 10 series isn't going to be much better then them for gaming performance, marginal at best, so why look forward to the 10 series, for that purpose? It seems people are expecting the 10-series to be some new architecture or something. It isn't, it's the same general performance per mhz with maybe slight changes, if you can get 100mhz or 200mhz more out of the 10 series reliably, that's a 3-5% performance increase, why is that something to look forward to? Or is what is being looked forward to is the decrease in price(hopefully)?

You're right, let me try again. 10 series is going to be a marginal increase, if at all. Best thing to do for those on decent CPUs is to sit out 10 series and see what 4xxx Ryzens will do, and perhaps even see how Intel counter those. That's when I'll upgrade, most likely. I'm actually glad I've "resisted" for the last 2 years, it would be money down the toilet for me if I went AMD. Let AMD and Intel battle it out and reap the benefits of that.

#5767543

vbetts

Moderator

2020-03-09 20:16

nizzen:

4770k is EQUAL to AMD Ryzen 3000 series in gaming, så why bother use money on a new cpu? Buy better GPU for the money you save from not buying a new Ryzen cpu. True story 😉 Allways play in gpubound scenarios, then you can use a "free" 7 years old cpu for years to come 😛

https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2519?vs=2462 While there are a number of titles pretty equal, in most cases we see the Zen 2 based cpus give better performance. Definitely impressive for the 4770k and shows it aged well though. That being said, 1440p and 4k results most likely are going to be even more similar. Also remember that say a 9700k will give very similar performance to both in these scenarios. So it's not just an Intel VS AMD performance thing, it's a generation VS generation thing.

#5767545

JamesSneed

2020-03-09 20:18

nizzen:

4770k is EQUAL to AMD Ryzen 3000 series in gaming, så why bother use money on a new cpu? Buy better GPU for the money you save from not buying a new Ryzen cpu. True story 😉 Allways play in gpubound scenarios, then you can use a "free" 7 years old cpu for years to come 😛

Not true AMD is considerably faster than a 4770K: :https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2519?vs=2421 Also its not really GPU bound scenarios if you look at the data. AMD losses when its high FPS in a mostly single threaded games. AMDs chiplet design is more latent and thus is slower with the back and forth traffic from the GPU when you are talking high FPS situations. Not that I'm against the advice of buying a better GPU just lets do it with facts. 🙂

#5767546

rm082e

2020-03-09 20:21

Aura89:

Or is what is being looked forward to is the decrease in price(hopefully)?

That's what I'm waiting on. I'm still running a 3770k and ready to upgrade, but only for gaming. I would like a solid 8/16 chip for gaming, but at $350, not $500. I could have picked up a 3800x recently for $340, but if the 10700k will outperform it, I might as well wait another couple of months to see how that turns out. Even if it's nothing special, it might drive down the price a little more on the 3800x.

#5767547

Mufflore

2020-03-09 20:22

I'm on a clocked 6700K and havent found a reason to change it yet, gaming on a QLED TV at 1440p120 and UHD60. Perhaps the next gen GPUs will give me reason but I think its more likely to be games needing more CPU that will push me. The only games I care about high framerate currently are racing, 60Hz does me fine everywhere else.

#5767551

nizzen

2020-03-09 20:31

JamesSneed:

Not true AMD is considerably faster than a 4770K: :https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2519?vs=2421 Also its not really GPU bound scenarios if you look at the data. AMD losses when its high FPS in a mostly single threaded games. AMDs chiplet design is more latent and thus is slower with the back and forth traffic from the GPU when you are talking high FPS situations. Not that I'm against the advice of buying a better GPU just lets do it with facts. 🙂

Hehe... He said Ryzen is EQUAL to Intel, then 4770k must be equal to Ryzen. "EQUAL" PS: Ryzen is not EQUAL to Intel in gaming. That is my point 😉 I have both 9900k and 3900x with 2080ti. I'm not running them stock. 9900k 38ns and 3900x 64ns memorylatency. Are they EQUAL in performance? Not even in most 1440p games 🙂 In BF V multiplayer my 9900k is 20%+ faster in 1440p. Min fps (1%) is far from EQUAL. If I play on GPU bound scenarios, the fps is equal. (Sherlock Holmes) I love both 3900x and 9900k. Using them for different tasks.

#5767561

squalles

2020-03-09 21:03

Mundosold:

No it can't. What's with you Intel people who just make up stuff? 4770K is stuck on Ddr3. That alone means it will never touch modern CPUs in gaming especially in minimum framerates. And quad core vs 8core.. One means you have to shut down programs like Chrome from running in background before gaming, vs just keeping everything up.

dont matter, 4770k on 4.7ghz still are better than ryzen 3800x Nobody will gaming and acess internet sites or see videos on same time kkkkk

#5767565

squalles

2020-03-09 21:06

Kool64:

everyone knows Intel's 14nm+++++++++++++++++++++ is actually 7nm in disguise. Hence why they can't break into their 10nm chips at a profit. So they'll just keep stacking plus signs to make it look good.

and? you can say ++++++++++****::::: or more signs, he are still better

#5767573

Kool64

2020-03-09 21:51

squalles:

and? you can say ++++++++++****::::: or more signs, he are still better

ok here's more ++++++++++

#5767580

Fediuld

2020-03-09 22:24

nizzen:

Ryzen 4k for desktop in ~Mars 2021?

Ryzen 4000 this year, Ryzen 5000 next year

#5767584

nizzen

2020-03-09 22:35

Fediuld:

Ryzen 4000 this year, Ryzen 5000 next year

Not according to: Desktop Ryzen 4000 March 2021. https://www.tweaktown.com/news/71043/amd-says-it-will-have-zen-3-processors-by-march-2021-4-in-2022/index.html https://www.techradar.com/news/amd-zen-3-processors-will-arrive-by-march-2021-at-the-latest So you just guessed? Release of tech and cpu's in stock/shops is a different thing 🙂

#5767585

nizzen

2020-03-09 22:49

Mundosold:

No it can't. What's with you Intel people who just make up stuff? 4770K is stuck on Ddr3. That alone means it will never touch modern CPUs in gaming especially in minimum framerates. And quad core vs 8core.. One means you have to shut down programs like Chrome from running in background before gaming, vs just keeping everything up.

4770k @ 4800mhz with 2800c12 avexir ddr3 memory is pretty fast.. Compare to this, not stock clock and 1333mhz ddr3 cl 20 LOL

#5767593

jbscotchman

2020-03-09 23:39

rm082e:

That's what I'm waiting on. I'm still running a 3770k and ready to upgrade, but only for gaming. I would like a solid 8/16 chip for gaming, but at $350, not $500. I could have picked up a 3800x recently for $340, but if the 10700k will outperform it, I might as well wait another couple of months to see how that turns out. Even if it's nothing special, it might drive down the price a little more on the 3800x.

You should have bought that 3800x when you had the chance. 😉 I guarantee the 10700k will be much more expensive.

#5767607

Ricepudding

2020-03-10 00:48

metagamer:

Gaming performance. AMD still doesn't anything worthwhile for those on intels that are 6700k or better. Many are waiting for these and possibly to see what 4xxx Ryzen will bring. I am, at least.

I mean yeah at 1080p you'd lose a few frames, but soon as you go above that 1440p or specially 2160p then there is basically no difference. But i think if you are updating to these top of the line processors then i kind of question why anyone would be on 1080p, since even mid range cards can handle 1440p easily now with high frames.

#5767611

metagamer

2020-03-10 00:54

Ricepudding:

I mean yeah at 1080p you'd lose a few frames, but soon as you go above that 1440p or specially 2160p then there is basically no difference. But i think if you are updating to these top of the line processors then i kind of question why anyone would be on 1080p, since even mid range cards can handle 1440p easily now with high frames.

There's is some difference in some games having a 9900k at 5ghz gives a nice boost over AMD, for example, even at 1440p. And a 7700k at 5ghz easily matches and even beats a 3900x in games too at that resolution, this is what I've been saying all along, for someone like me, and there's a lot of people on highly clocked 6700k and 7700k, for gaming, there's no point in spending £500 on a AMD rig that will perform the same. I think it's clear that if anyone is building from scratch, AMD is a really viable option. If you have a decent Intel based rig already, the step up is just a waste of money, from a gaming performance perspective.