Support NeoGAF

[Insane Metal]

Intel 10th Generation ‘Comet Lake-S’ Desktop CPUs To Get Support on LGA 1200 Socket – Up To 10 Cores, 125W TDP in 2020

The details are mostly about the platform itself but there are also two desktop roadmaps shown. The first desktop product roadmap shows that the next major updates to expect from Intel will be the Cascade Lake-X processors with up to 18 cores (165W TDP) on the LGA 2066 socket (X299). Intel’s Glacier Falls platform will replace the Basin Falls (Refresh) which was denoted by the X299 codename but we have already confirmed that the new motherboards will retain X299 naming as the chipset differences are not that huge and the platform is pretty much the same. A few board makers did anticipate a chipset change since we saw LGA 2066 socketed boards with X499 marking over them but those were just placeholders as Intel later revealed that they would be sticking with X299 for marketing.


More: https://wccftech.com/intel-10th-gen-comet-lake-s-desktop-cpus-lga-1200-socket-2020-launch/

 

[Leonidas]

10th gen could be really solid choices depending on how the specs/pricing end up.

9700K and 9900K are already the best gaming CPUs so these could be even better in that regard.

 

[Ulysses 31]

Let's see how much it improves over my i7-6950X!

 

[Spukc]

10th gen could be really solid choices depending on how the specs/pricing end up.

9700K and 9900K are already the best gaming CPUs so these could be even better in that regard.

so i still remain team intel it seems in 2020
as always AMD made nothing more then a wet fart

big surprise

 

[wordslaughter]

Intel fanboys make no sense in 2019 and I suspect even less in 2020.

Is there something exciting here? No, it's literally the opposite. In 2020 you're STILL getting another *LAKE. STILL at 14nm+++++++ , no mention of PCIe4.0 .... and you actually want that?! Why? So you can claim that at 720p you're getting 5% more frames? lol

They should just rename it SurrenderLake.

 

[SonGoku]

10 cores

 

[PhoenixTank]

Not seeing much that'd make it more than a refresh, but given that we're dealing with a leak that doesn't mean there won't be anything.
On the plus side, more PCIE lanes.

 

[Ovek]

Intel fanboys make no sense in 2019 and I suspect even less in 2020.

How fucking retarded do you have to be, to be a fanboy of a CPU company?

 

[Agent_4Seven]

 

[cartman414]

Intel fanboys make no sense in 2019 and I suspect even less in 2020.

Is there something exciting here? No, it's literally the opposite. In 2020 you're STILL getting another *LAKE. STILL at 14nm+++++++ , no mention of PCIe4.0 .... and you actually want that?! Why? So you can claim that at 720p you're getting 5% more frames? lol

They should just rename it SurrenderLake.

And how would PCIe 4.0 help that at this point? The boards with it are more expensive and power-hungry.

 

[llien]

10 cores, yet another socket, 165W.
Oh, and in 2020.
"Excitement", chuckle.

10th gen could be really solid choices depending on how the specs/pricing end up.

as always AMD made nothing more then a wet fart

Are you guys sarcastic, or simply on crack or something?

 

[UltimaKilo]

How fucking retarded do you have to be, to be a fanboy of a CPU company?

Yeah, that was a pretty strange rant! What’s next, fabric softener fanboys?

Seriously though, I need to see more before I get excited.

 

[LOLCats]

Fucking Snuggle all the way. You Downy fucks can fuck off.

Also 10 cores @125w tdp lolol.

 

[LOLCats]

10 cores, yet another socket, 165W.
Oh, and in 2020.
"Excitement", chuckle.





Are you guys sarcastic, or simply on crack or something?

Ayyyyyyy? Amirite?

 

[Ar¢tos]

How fucking retarded do you have to be, to be a fanboy of a CPU company?

When life doesn't go your way, the bitterness accumulates and you need something to lash out on. The Intel love might just be a side effect of of the AMD hate, not the other way around.

 

[Kenpachii]

10th gen could be really solid choices depending on how the specs/pricing end up.

9700K and 9900K are already the best gaming CPUs so these could be even better in that regard.

Reason why i got this 2 days ago.

Must say CPU is fast as hell tho. Breaths new life into my aging 970.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Fucking Snuggle all the way. You Downy fucks can fuck off.

Also 10 cores @125w tdp lolol.

Fuck you, Bounce 4lyfe. Imma cut you bitch.

If I were Intel, I would be a little worried that 15-year Intel peeps like me are buying into Ryzen 3000. My last AMD CPU was single-core Athlon 64 back in 2005. Best Buy just notified me that I now have a ship date on my 3900X, on July 22nd. There's a lot of people posting that they are finally upgrading their Nehalem, Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge, and Haswell-era machines to Ryzen 3000 series. I haven't seen anything like this in, well, 15 years.

Here's a blast from the past:

AMD Athlon 64 3700+ - ExtremeTech

Review: With all the attention focused on socket 939, it's easy to overlook the release of AMD's new socket 754 processor. We take the 3700+ for a spin and check out its performance. Does a CPU priced above $700 qualify as "mainstream?"

www.extremetech.com

Today's trivia about CPU designers:
The fabled Jim Keller, most famous for designing DEC's Alpha line of CPU's back in the day and being the father of modern RISC, also designed the Athlon 64 and Zen cores. So you could say I follow Jim Keller wherever he goes. He also designed the Apple A4/A5 SoC's that broke Apple away from dependence on Qualcomm and the neural-net self-driving CPU that's being used going forward on Tesla's self-driving cars. He's back at Intel now and rumored to be working on a skunk works project to leapfrog Intel to 7nm, if Intel regains at least process parity by 2021/2022 we'll have a real fight on our hands!

 

[Kenpachii]

Fuck you, Bounce 4lyfe. Imma cut you bitch.

If I were Intel, I would be a little worried that 15-year Intel peeps like me are buying into Ryzen 3000. My last AMD CPU was single-core Athlon 64 back in 2005. Best Buy just notified me that I now have a ship date on my 3900X, on July 22nd. There's a lot of people posting that they are finally upgrading their Nehalem, Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge, and Haswell-era machines to Ryzen 3000 series. I haven't seen anything like this in, well, 15 years.

Here's a blast from the past:

AMD Athlon 64 3700+ - ExtremeTech

Review: With all the attention focused on socket 939, it's easy to overlook the release of AMD's new socket 754 processor. We take the 3700+ for a spin and check out its performance. Does a CPU priced above $700 qualify as "mainstream?"

www.extremetech.com

This is there main problem right now. People on the fence with upgrading that all sit on intel are probably going to do it now and move to AMD. It's that i needed that 9900k for specific reasons but otherwise i would have gotten probably a 3600 and laugh my way to the bank.

Intel seriously needs to release a new top model and drop the price on the 9900k to 350 or something. But honestly i think this architecture is already on its knees with the 9900k, thing gets hot as hell.

 

[llien]

Ayyyyyyy? Amirite?

Nah. Half full/empty level bias is max I (at least knowingly) let myself have.

 

[Ivellios]

Fuck you, Bounce 4lyfe. Imma cut you bitch.

If I were Intel, I would be a little worried that 15-year Intel peeps like me are buying into Ryzen 3000. My last AMD CPU was single-core Athlon 64 back in 2005. Best Buy just notified me that I now have a ship date on my 3900X, on July 22nd. There's a lot of people posting that they are finally upgrading their Nehalem, Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge, and Haswell-era machines to Ryzen 3000 series. I haven't seen anything like this in, well, 15 years.

Here's a blast from the past:

AMD Athlon 64 3700+ - ExtremeTech

Review: With all the attention focused on socket 939, it's easy to overlook the release of AMD's new socket 754 processor. We take the 3700+ for a spin and check out its performance. Does a CPU priced above $700 qualify as "mainstream?"

www.extremetech.com

Today's trivia about CPU designers:
The fabled Jim Keller, most famous for designing DEC's Alpha line of CPU's back in the day and being the father of modern RISC, also designed the Athlon 64 and Zen cores. So you could say I follow Jim Keller wherever he goes. He also designed the Apple A4/A5 SoC's that broke Apple away from dependence on Qualcomm and the neural-net self-driving CPU that's being used going forward on Tesla's self-driving cars. He's back at Intel now and rumored to be working on a skunk works project to leapfrog Intel to 7nm, if Intel regains at least process parity by 2021/2022 we'll have a real fight on our hands!

Same here, will upgrade my haswell to a Ryzen 3000 CPU.

I honestly dont understand why some people hate AMD so much, when their new CPUs have a vastly superior price/performance according to trusted reviewers.

 

[Great Hair]

Personally im a Adobe/Movavi Editor, Handbrake user and these are three apps that i use quite frequently. These are so fast at exporting, it takes like 30min for a 120min FHD movie at great quality. Hard drive space is cheap nowdays, i don´t care if the file is 3gb or 8gb heavy. If you use apps that favor AMD, get the 3900X if they favor Intel get an Intel, taht simple. It really depends what type of software one uses.

 

[Chiggs]

I honestly dont understand why some people hate AMD so much, when their new CPUs have a vastly superior price/performance according to trusted reviewers.

Well, some people have very little going for them in life, save for their bizarre allegiance to a corporate entity that only knows of their existence because of warranty obligations.

 

[Spukc]

Well, some people have very little going for them in life, save for their bizarre allegiance to a corporate entity that only knows of their existence because of warranty obligations.

or some just want the best for gaming as this being a gaming forum

 

[Chiggs]

or some just want the best for gaming as this being a gaming forum

Case in point.

 

[Ivellios]

or some just want the best for gaming as this being a gaming forum

Fair enough, if you want to spend $150 more for 2% more performance its your money.

But calling the new Ryzen products "wet farts" is just a Intel fanboy comment that wants to hate AMD just for the saking of hating.

 

[Spukc]

Fair enough, if you want to spend $150 more for 2% more performance its your money.

But calling the new Ryzen products "wet farts" is just a Intel fanboy comment that wants to hate AMD just for the saking of hating.

nope i want amd to best intel not approach it.
same as their gpu line. it's just EH.

 

[truth411]

Fair enough, if you want to spend $150 more for 2% more performance its your money.

But calling the new Ryzen products "wet farts" is just a Intel fanboy comment that wants to hate AMD just for the saking of hating.

Yup, and at what resolution 720p? Who actually does that in the real world? Sigh...
AMD is the best for gaming right now.

 

[Ivellios]

nope i want amd to best intel not approach it.
same as their gpu line. it's just EH.

From my point of view and from what i read from reviews, AMD just beat Intel in price/performance.

As for the GPUs the new Navi cards are better than Nvidia in price/ performance if you dont care about Ray Tracing.

Though i give it to you Nvidia Turing features, like Ray Tracing, are better and more future proof than Navi.

 

[Spartancarver 117]

or some just want the best for gaming as this being a gaming forum

Sounds like you need to get a Ryzen so you can put the money you saved towards a monitor that goes higher than 720p

 

[sonomamashine]

nope i want amd to best intel not approach it.
same as their gpu line. it's just EH.

and it does beat intel in value, you don't even need to change the motherboard every Gen upgrade .
the only explanation is that you got SCREWD so bad by Intel that you have to defend it .

 

[LordOfChaos]

Man, 10nm was a colossal flub up.

 

[Aretak]

Intel fanboys really are some of the most bizarre people on the entire internet. I have to believe that they're paid shills for the sake of my own sanity.

 

[Spartancarver 117]

Intel's great if you can't afford heating in your PC's room too tbh

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

nope i want amd to best intel not approach it.
same as their gpu line. it's just EH.

Yeah the best for gaming is the 9900K and 2080 Ti paired with the best native 720p or 1080p monitor you can find. If you set this up right you'll enjoy a massive 5% performance advantage (210 fps vs 200 fps) in titles like DOTA or Rocket League with high graphics settings and lose 45% performance in productivity tasks that you probably use for yer PC everyday.

Oh and you'll lose a few quid extra each month as the 9900K draws so much power. I think you are making a really smart choice.

 

[Spukc]

and it does beat intel in value, you don't even need to change the motherboard every Gen upgrade .
the only explanation is that you got SCREWD so bad by Intel that you have to defend it .

not really i am shopping for a new pc.
and i delayed my build to wait for AMD news.
and it turned out to be nothing more then a wet fart,

now i am waiting again for the newest intel line up.
also i don't trust nvidea with their 2080ti so i might as well wait for the super.

i just want to build a sick pc not cutting back on tech,

lol @ people mentioning the power usage.
if i wanted to make a best bang for bucks build i might pick amd but i am not.
buying cutting edge tech is never smart,

i don't care.

 

[llien]

or some just want the best for gaming as this being a gaming forum

Right:

But, hold on, in Wolfenstein Intel could add a couple of frames on top of 300 (why would anyone settle at 300fps these days, right? Why else would you pay $1300 for a 2080Ti and run it at 1080p, right?):

 

[Spukc]

Right:

But, hold on, in Wolfenstein Intel could add a couple of frames on top of 300 (why would anyone settle at 300fps these days, right?):

i am not starting this dumb ass list wars with you plenty of info to find online why the 9900k is still king in gaming.

 

[llien]

i am not starting this...

There is nothing to start.
You have faced how "king in gaming" loses at... wait for it, gaming.
Without even complete set of Spectre/Metldown/Zombieland/Yetanotherfuckupatintel patches applied.

A gaming king losing at... gaming.
To a CPU, that costs good $200 less and comes with a cooler.
Oh, and also consumes good 70w less.


Want to see more games? Say, Civilization:

 

[TyphoonStruggle]

Yup, and at what resolution 720p? Who actually does that in the real world? Sigh...
AMD is the best for gaming right now.

Sounds like you need to get a Ryzen so you can put the money you saved towards a monitor that goes higher than 720p

Will people stop talking out of their asses about this?

I didn’t post in that thread regarding this. But here I am going to respond to this idiocy. God help me.

I can think of one plausible reason why reviewers benched at 720p. NOT because they expect people to game at 720p (that’s a strawman). But because it provides an upper bound to the performance you can expect out of the game. How is this unreasonable?

You’re literally arguing for reviewers to give LESS information about the tech they’re benching. You guys are just as bad as the Intel fanboys.

 

[Leonidas]

Fair enough, if you want to spend $150 more for 2% more performance its your money.

The only Ryzen CPU that sorta does what you describe is the Ryzen 3600, but that's only 6 Cores and I'm not sure how that's going to hold up next gen where consoles have 8 Cores.
i7/i9 vs. R7/R9 there is not a $150 price difference. 9900KF is sometimes 10% cheaper than 3900X and 10% faster in gaming...

This is the main reason I couldn't get excited for Zen 2, after their E3 conference I knew they wouldn't bring a new level of gaming performance to PC.

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

Will people stop talking out of their asses about this?

I didn’t post in that thread regarding this. But here I am going to respond to this idiocy. God help me.

I can think of one plausible reason why reviewers benched at 720p. NOT because they expect people to game at 720p (that’s a strawman). But because it provides an upper bound to the performance you can expect out of the game. How is this unreasonable?

You’re literally arguing for reviewers to give LESS information about the tech they’re benching. You guys are just as bad as the Intel fanboys.

No offence but I've heard your bullshit defence time and again. No-one is saying for reviewers not to bench at 1080p (or even 720p) with the fastest (ridiculously expensive) graphics card. The findings are interesting. The point of contention is with idiots like the Intel shills above saying definitively 'I'm not buying AMD as Intel is still king of gaming' because of them, as if a 5% gap averaged out is either significant or outweighs how the new Ryzens are actually tangibly superior in many ways over miniscule differences in synthetic test conditions that less than 1% of gamers will experience because they own cards slower than a 2080 Ti, or they game at 1440p, or 4k etc etc. Do you understand?

When I say other tangible ways the Ryzen 3000 is superior I'm talking actual real-world performance gaps like 30-45% faster (SKU dependent) in productivity (rendering, video editing, streaming) or much lower power draw or coming with a decent cooler in the box or not requiring several security patches or totally disabling hyper threading that lowers performance.

I mean I could go on. More modern platform features (PCIE4), better longevity on the socket (AM4 is gonna see Ryzen 4000 apparently).

I mean there's being biased and then there's being utterly fucking stupid.

 

[Spartancarver 117]

Will people stop talking out of their asses about this?

I didn’t post in that thread regarding this. But here I am going to respond to this idiocy. God help me.

I can think of one plausible reason why reviewers benched at 720p. NOT because they expect people to game at 720p (that’s a strawman). But because it provides an upper bound to the performance you can expect out of the game. How is this unreasonable?

You’re literally arguing for reviewers to give LESS information about the tech they’re benching. You guys are just as bad as the Intel fanboys.

Yes, I understand the concept of testing CPUs in CPU-bound scenarios.

If you were less pissy and actually took the time to read, you'd understand that our posts are saying that the i7/i9 performance advantage evaporates as soon as you leave those CPU-bound scenarios and actually use real-world settings.

More reading comprehension, less Intel fanboyism plz

 

[Insane Metal]

10 cores, yet another socket, 165W.
Oh, and in 2020.
"Excitement", chuckle.





Are you guys sarcastic, or simply on crack or something?

Exclusive picture of the new line of PSUs for these new Intel processors!

 

[Ivellios]

The only Ryzen CPU that sorta does what you describe is the Ryzen 3600, but that's only 6 Cores and I'm not sure how that's going to hold up next gen where consoles have 8 Cores.
i7/i9 vs. R7/R9 there is not a $150 price difference. 9900KF is sometimes 10% cheaper than 3900X and 10% faster in gaming...

This is the main reason I couldn't get excited for Zen 2, after their E3 conference I knew they wouldn't bring a new level of gaming performance to PC.

Ryzen 3700x has a very similar perfomance with the i9 9900k for $150 less.

 

[llien]

I can think of one plausible reason why reviewers benched at 720p. NOT because they expect people to game at 720p (that’s a strawman). But because it provides an upper bound to the performance you can expect out of the game. How is this unreasonable?

It is unreasonable AT THIS POINT as we have seen that the concept doesn't work: 720p results did not predict how AMD CPUs will fare in the newer games.
And for very apparent reasons: games went multi-threading, game devs started optimizing for Ryzens, bottleneck in the newest games is practically always GPU not CPU.

 

[Insane Metal]

It is unreasonable AT THIS POINT as we have seen that the concept doesn't work: 720p results did not predict how AMD CPUs will fare in the newer games.
And for very apparent reasons: games went multi-threading, game devs started optimizing for Ryzens, bottleneck in the newest games is practically always GPU not CPU.

Now that I've seen why those benches happen I understand better this concept, but in my opinion it doesn't make sense. "Hey let's bench these cpus at 480p to see which one is better, of course, this way games won't be GPU bound". Right. Done! Now let's play these games at 4K!

 

[Leonidas]

Ryzen 3700x has a very similar perfomance with the i9 9900k for $150 less.

If you're going there 3600 has very similar gaming performance with 3700x and costs $120 less.
Or 9900K will have higher performance than 3950x at $250 less.

Why not just stick to CPUs which were already similar prices. 3600 vs 9600k, 3700 vs 9700k, 3900 vs 9900k? In those matchups, where AMD suggested they matched Intel, Intel is faster in gaming and the same price.

 

[llien]

If you're going there 3600 has very similar gaming performance with 3700x and costs $120 less.
Or 9900K will have higher performance than 3950x at $250 less.

Wouldn't it make sense to compare to Intel's 16 core instead? I mean, "$$$ less" would be bigger, right

?

 

[Chozofication_]

I would have a stroke laughing if intel just says fuck 10nm and moves on to another process

Something is VERY wrong with their production plants.

 

[Ivellios]

If you're going there 3600 has very similar gaming performance with 3700x and costs $120 less.
Or 9900K will have higher performance than 3950x at $250 less.

Why not just stick to CPUs which were already similar prices. 3600 vs 9600k, 3700 vs 9700k, 3900 vs 9900k? In those matchups, where AMD suggested they matched Intel, Intel is faster in gaming and the same price.

How do you know the I9 9900k will beat the 3950x?

Ryzen 3600, 6 cores/ 12 threads: $200, comes with cooler and trade blows with the i5 9600k.
I5 9600k: 6 cores/6 threads, costs $249, dont come with cooler.

Ryzen 3700x: 8 cores/16 threads: $329, comes with cooler
i7 9700k: 8 cores/8 threads: $379, dont come with cooler. actually beats the ryzen 3700x by a small margin, but are way more expensive, when you consider they dont come with the cooler

Similar situation with the 3900 vs 9900k.

Source prices: https://www.newegg.com/
Source review (I only read one for this comparison, which the benchmark actually were more in intel favor than most reviewers): https://www.techspot.com/review/1869-amd-ryzen-3900x-ryzen-3700x/

Keep in mind that the Ryzen CPUs can improve by a considerable margin with future BIOS updates, and you dont need to trade your motherboard if you want to upgrade. Plus they are way better at multitasking, consume less energy and are way more cooler than Intel chips, which are really hot.

Intel meanwhile you will need to upgrade your motherboard as well if you want anything after the i9 9900k.

Bottom line while Intel may provide a small margin in gaming perfomance, they have far less price/performance and are worse than everything besides gaming than Ryzen chips.

And this is not only my opnion, most reviewers are saying this.