Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 20

Thread: Intel Core i9-10900K is up to 1.3x faster than the i9-9900K

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    29,398
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1,924 times in 668 posts

    Intel Core i9-10900K is up to 1.3x faster than the i9-9900K

    Purported official presentation slide shares nine benchmark comparisons.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    14
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post

    Re: Intel Core i9-10900K is up to 1.3x faster than the i9-9900K

    The best news of 10th Gen iCore is going to be lower prices for the equivalent hardware.

    The bad news will (likely) be that only top-end chipsets/motherboards will be available on release, undoing those savings until the summer (I hope).

    What I'm looking forward to Intel's moving off of 14nm, at which point Intel and AMD will both be able to really push and compete with ech other. Will be very good times for performance increases and price competition. Hopefully that'll happen before I die...

  3. #3
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    16
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post

    Re: Intel Core i9-10900K is up to 1.3x faster than the i9-9900K

    so bit of mis-advertising per usual of not a like for like :-( so 25% gain attributed to 2 extra cores and 5% from elsewhere IPC/architecture gains but only upto.

  4. #4
    Hooning about Hoonigan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,122
    Thanks
    145
    Thanked
    399 times in 282 posts
    • Hoonigan's system
      • Motherboard:
      • GIGABYTE X570 AORUS MASTER
      • CPU:
      • AMD Ryzen 7 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 32GB Corsair Dominator Platinum RGB
      • Storage:
      • 2x 2TB Gigabyte NVMe 4.0
      • Graphics card(s):
      • MSI NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080Ti VENTUS OC
      • PSU:
      • be quiet! Straight Power 11 650W
      • Case:
      • be quiet! Dark Base Pro 900
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Acer Predator Z35P + ASUS ROG PG279Q
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media Vivid 350

    Re: Intel Core i9-10900K is up to 1.3x faster than the i9-9900K

    25% gain attributed to 2 extra cores and 5% from elsewhere IPC/architecture gains but only upto.
    Not the catchiest of headlines.

  5. Received thanks from:

    cptwhite_uk (02-01-2020),DanceswithUnix (02-01-2020),Tabbykatze (02-01-2020)

  6. #5
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    10,400
    Thanks
    535
    Thanked
    1,093 times in 930 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 16GB 3200MHz
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 1TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 30 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Intel Core i9-10900K is up to 1.3x faster than the i9-9900K

    Quote Originally Posted by PMMEASURES View Post
    so bit of mis-advertising per usual of not a like for like :-( so 25% gain attributed to 2 extra cores and 5% from elsewhere IPC/architecture gains but only upto.
    I think the 5% is from better factory overclocking given the increased TDP.

    Probably makes for an even less catchy headline though

    until it can deliver a 10nm successor for enthusiast desktop users.
    Are we really expecting any meaningful volumes of 10nm on the desktop? I'm pretty sure we're waiting on Intel's 7nm for that, with 10nm still not clocking high enough for desktop use.

  7. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    London town
    Posts
    286
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked
    16 times in 12 posts

    Re: Intel Core i9-10900K is up to 1.3x faster than the i9-9900K

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by PMMEASURES View Post
    so bit of mis-advertising per usual of not a like for like :-( so 25% gain attributed to 2 extra cores and 5% from elsewhere IPC/architecture gains but only upto.
    I think the 5% is from better factory overclocking given the increased TDP.

    Probably makes for an even less catchy headline though

    until it can deliver a 10nm successor for enthusiast desktop users.
    Are we really expecting any meaningful volumes of 10nm on the desktop? I'm pretty sure we're waiting on Intel's 7nm for that, with 10nm still not clocking high enough for desktop use.
    Remember when Intel bragged about how much more efficient their latest chip was? That's all our of the window now.

  8. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Kingdom O Fife
    Posts
    270
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    14 times in 12 posts
    • zaph0d's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Rampage II Extreme
      • CPU:
      • Socket 1366 2.66GHz Xeon 5650 Hex-Core @ 4 GHz - Speedstep Enabled - Custom Liquid Cooled
      • Memory:
      • 48GB - 6x 8GB @ 1600MHz
      • Storage:
      • 2x240 GB SSD's inmRaid 0
      • Graphics card(s):
      • AMD R9 380 2Gb
      • PSU:
      • 1000W Coolermaster
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC-343B (Original Model)
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Toshiba 49" 4K tv
      • Internet:
      • 76MBit TalkTalk Fibre - Actually get the full 76MBit too :P

    Re: Intel Core i9-10900K is up to 1.3x faster than the i9-9900K

    Quote Originally Posted by gagaga View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by PMMEASURES View Post
    so bit of mis-advertising per usual of not a like for like :-( so 25% gain attributed to 2 extra cores and 5% from elsewhere IPC/architecture gains but only upto.
    I think the 5% is from better factory overclocking given the increased TDP.

    Probably makes for an even less catchy headline though

    until it can deliver a 10nm successor for enthusiast desktop users.
    Are we really expecting any meaningful volumes of 10nm on the desktop? I'm pretty sure we're waiting on Intel's 7nm for that, with 10nm still not clocking high enough for desktop use.
    Remember when Intel bragged about how much more efficient their latest chip was? That's all our of the window now.
    Yeah - this is back to the days of Pentium IV levels of garbage, "Look how fast we are" while the chip is generating enough heat to melt it's own heatsink lol

  9. #8
    Senior Member watercooled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    10,928
    Thanks
    1,508
    Thanked
    946 times in 811 posts

    Re: Intel Core i9-10900K is up to 1.3x faster than the i9-9900K

    Quote Originally Posted by PMMEASURES View Post
    so bit of mis-advertising per usual of not a like for like :-( so 25% gain attributed to 2 extra cores and 5% from elsewhere IPC/architecture gains but only upto.
    Nope, this is still Skylake don't forget. Most of the gains from extra cores, the majority of the rest I suspect would be from clock speeds. Perhaps they've included performance improvements for hardware vs software security exploit fixes too?

  10. #9
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    16
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post

    Re: Intel Core i9-10900K is up to 1.3x faster than the i9-9900K

    Quote Originally Posted by gagaga View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by PMMEASURES View Post
    so bit of mis-advertising per usual of not a like for like :-( so 25% gain attributed to 2 extra cores and 5% from elsewhere IPC/architecture gains but only upto.
    I think the 5% is from better factory overclocking given the increased TDP.

    Probably makes for an even less catchy headline though

    until it can deliver a 10nm successor for enthusiast desktop users.
    Are we really expecting any meaningful volumes of 10nm on the desktop? I'm pretty sure we're waiting on Intel's 7nm for that, with 10nm still not clocking high enough for desktop use.
    Remember when Intel bragged about how much more efficient their latest chip was? That's all our of the window now.
    Hmm true, that said it dawned on me though we talking 5% over 10 Core's so 5%/10 = 0.5% per core ouch sounds worse and if there is a Mhz up lift then ouch that might be a negative % on IPC per core. just all the gain from clocking and increased cores. :-/

  11. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,467
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked
    70 times in 62 posts

    Re: Intel Core i9-10900K is up to 1.3x faster than the i9-9900K

    [QUOTE=watercooled;47129]
    Quote Originally Posted by PMMEASURES View Post
    software security exploit fixes too?
    This is what I was wondering, are those improvements compared with the older chips when they were first released or after they've been nerfed to fix the security exploits...

    It's also comical how they've stuck cinebench in there, that 0.25 uptick is primarily down to having 2 more cores....

    Still doesn't change my view that I'm better off going AMD anyway but I doubt intel will have much to worry about financially, non tech savvy users will 'know' the intel name more often than the amd one sadly.

  12. #11
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    78
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked
    2 times in 2 posts

    Re: Intel Core i9-10900K is up to 1.3x faster than the i9-9900K

    Headline's wrong. Slide says 'projections' and 'expected', these aren't actual results. Intel must love how tech reporting works; toss this out, call it a leak, watch everyone report it as fact.

    Besides that: 125w 'TDP' and 250w boost? Goodness.

  13. #12
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    26
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts

    Re: Intel Core i9-10900K is up to 1.3x faster than the i9-9900K

    Ridiculously poor power/heat efficiency. More Intel re-heated 14nm crap

  14. #13
    Long member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,568
    Thanks
    59
    Thanked
    278 times in 195 posts
    • philehidiot's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Father's bored
      • CPU:
      • Cockroach brain V0.1
      • Memory:
      • Innebriated, unwritten
      • Storage:
      • Big Yellow Self Storage
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Semi chewed Crayola Mega Pack
      • PSU:
      • 20KW single phase direct grid supply
      • Case:
      • Closed, Open, Cold
      • Operating System:
      • Cockroach
      • Monitor(s):
      • The mental health nurses
      • Internet:
      • Please.

    Re: Intel Core i9-10900K is up to 1.3x faster than the i9-9900K

    Bear in mind that the courts made Intel put their fiddles at the bottom of the slides.

    So they ran one with all the security updates and one without for starters....

    And as for P4 knocking.... I still have a P4 laptop. A desktop P4 in a laptop. I think I'm going to take it apart and use the heatsink as an anti tank slug.

  15. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Where you are not
    Posts
    683
    Thanks
    270
    Thanked
    54 times in 43 posts
    • Iota's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Maximus Hero XI
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core i7 9700K
      • Memory:
      • CMD32GX4M2C3200C16
      • Storage:
      • 1 x 250GB / 1 x 1TB Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Nvidia RTX 2080 FE
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HXi 850
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC-X500B
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2716DG
      • Internet:
      • 40Mbps SKY Fibre

    Re: Intel Core i9-10900K is up to 1.3x faster than the i9-9900K

    That TDP.... Sheesh I'd rather get a Threadripper if I wanted to consume that amount of power.

  16. #15
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    10,400
    Thanks
    535
    Thanked
    1,093 times in 930 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 16GB 3200MHz
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 1TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 30 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Intel Core i9-10900K is up to 1.3x faster than the i9-9900K

    Quote Originally Posted by philehidiot View Post
    And as for P4 knocking.... I still have a P4 laptop. A desktop P4 in a laptop.
    I am actually stunned, I thought those all melted themselves by now. The only other person I know who was unfortunate enough to get a laptop like that had it replaced under warranty multiple times.

  17. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Kingdom O Fife
    Posts
    270
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    14 times in 12 posts
    • zaph0d's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Rampage II Extreme
      • CPU:
      • Socket 1366 2.66GHz Xeon 5650 Hex-Core @ 4 GHz - Speedstep Enabled - Custom Liquid Cooled
      • Memory:
      • 48GB - 6x 8GB @ 1600MHz
      • Storage:
      • 2x240 GB SSD's inmRaid 0
      • Graphics card(s):
      • AMD R9 380 2Gb
      • PSU:
      • 1000W Coolermaster
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC-343B (Original Model)
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Toshiba 49" 4K tv
      • Internet:
      • 76MBit TalkTalk Fibre - Actually get the full 76MBit too :P

    Re: Intel Core i9-10900K is up to 1.3x faster than the i9-9900K

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by philehidiot View Post
    And as for P4 knocking.... I still have a P4 laptop. A desktop P4 in a laptop.
    I am actually stunned, I thought those all melted themselves by now. The only other person I know who was unfortunate enough to get a laptop like that had it replaced under warranty multiple times.
    lol I've got an old toshiba sat p30 with a 3.3ghz p4 under the hood too

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •