• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Intel Comet Lake Thread

Page 11 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
14,607
3,585
136
@uzzi38

Yeah that 5.3 GHz is ST only. I was speculating about whether more than 2 cores could boost to 5.1 GHz or even 5.0 GHz in PL2. Which I'm thinking would be possible with sufficient cooling.
 

uzzi38

Senior member
Oct 16, 2019
532
506
96
@uzzi38

Yeah that 5.3 GHz is ST only. I was speculating about whether more than 2 cores could boost to 5.1 GHz or even 5.0 GHz in PL2. Which I'm thinking would be possible with sufficient cooling.
If I were to bet I'd say:
1 core: 5.1GHz (5.2GHz TB3, 5.3GHz TVB)
2 cores: 5.1GHz (5.2GHz TB3, 5.3GHz TVB)
3 cores: 5.0GHz (5.1GHz TVB)
4 cores: 5.0GHz (5.1GHz TVB)
5 cores: 4.9GHz (5.0GHz TVB)
6 cores: 4.9GHz (5.0GHz TVB)
7-10 cores: 4.8GHz (4.9GHz TVB).

But that's just a guess.
 

phillyman36

Golden Member
Jun 28, 2004
1,612
49
91
As far as the power consumption(excessive) goes that only matters if you overclock correct? If you use stock settings and use something like a Noctua d15 everything should be ok?
 

uzzi38

Senior member
Oct 16, 2019
532
506
96
As far as the power consumption(excessive) goes that only matters if you overclock correct? If you use stock settings and use something like a Noctua d15 everything should be ok?
For Comet Lake? 300+W PL2 is rumoured, and this is stock I'm talking about.

We're yet to see if it'll be OK.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
14,607
3,585
136
The most I ever tried to handle with an NH-D15 was ~210W, and that was with 3000rpm Noctua fans that move enormous amounts of air. I don't think one of those will handle 300W terribly well without some serious throttling.
 

phillyman36

Golden Member
Jun 28, 2004
1,612
49
91
If i have to use a custom water solution to run a 10900k @ stock then I will pass(might as well get a 9900k from Microcenter since I have a z390 mob sitting around and save some money then see what comes out in 2021). I usually upgrade every year or 2.
 

coercitiv

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2014
3,520
2,908
136
There won't be any stock 300W PL2, just like there was no stock 210W PL2 for the 9900K. It was all a gigantic PR and disinformation mess created by Intel marketing which resulted in tech reviewers remaking their 9900K content with properly enforced PL1 and PL2 limits.

This is how Intel's documentation for hardware defaults on 8th and 9th gen CPUs looks like (page 89 and bellow):

Screenshot_2020-02-08 8th and 9th Generation Intel® Core™ Processor Families Datasheet, Volume...png


PL1 also known as "cooling limit" is 95W, and PL2 also known as "sustained power delivery" is 1.25 * PL1, so around 120W.

While PL1 can be sustained forever (as long as cooling is not an issue), the PL2 limit can only be sustained for a finite amount of time in stock configuration, and that time is given by PL1 Tau. The hardware default for PL1 Tau in the table above is 8 seconds. It can be higher than that, like 30 or 60 seconds, but it still needs to be finite and relatively short.

Screenshot_2020-02-08 8th and 9th Generation Intel® Core™ Processor Families Datasheet, Volume...png

OEMs can increase PL2 to higher values if they wish so, but only if PL1 Tau is adjusted down accordingly. Any other combination of numbers such as high PL2 and infinite PL1 Tau as was the case with some 9900K motherboards on launch day will result in the CPU no longer running in stock configuration.

So repeat after me: there is no such thing as stock 300W PL2.
 

moinmoin

Golden Member
Jun 1, 2017
1,402
1,204
106
I have to assume most Z490 boards will be ~250W PL2/Infinite Tau.
I guess it shouldn't be called stock even if it's default on many boards. Some more enforcement by Intel would be nice, but it's not in their interest...
 

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
7,453
949
126
I guess it shouldn't be called stock even if it's default on many boards. Some more enforcement by Intel would be nice, but it's not in their interest...
If you're buying a Z490 board, you're going to be overclocking anyway. H and Q stick to the spec most likely.
 

Ajay

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2001
6,368
1,954
136
Can't wait to see what an unified L3 (for Zen 3 if it's true) does in gaming :)
I think that Zen3 L3$ size will be more important than the unified L3$ (basically, this is extending the 4 core CCX to 8 cores). With the right topology, composite core access latency will decrease, but I wouldn't expect significant changes in FPS.
I would be happy if AMD surprises me.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
14,607
3,585
136
So repeat after me: there is no such thing as stock 300W PL2.
It's stock if the mobo OEM makes it stock. Intel can disagree all it wants.

Fact is that if you bought a 9900k on launch day and ran it in early Z390 boards or in Z370 boards that had the chops to support one of those things, you could easily hit 210W operation without changing anything in the UEFI. Today, if you use MCE (which is often on by default), your typical mid-to-high-end Z390 board will let you hit power draw in the ballpark of 160-165W . . . again, without changing anything in the UEFI. If you want to stick to a TDP of 95W, you have to either hard-limit the CPU to 95W or meddle with Tau values to get the behavior described in Intel documentation. Or you can under-spec cooling and make the CPU bounce off its temp limits.

The only "stock" that really matters for end-users is whatever they get when they buy the product, install it, and operate it according to normal procedures (read: by not changing anything in the UEFI, or at least nothing related to CPU operation). And what it's looking like is that, if we have a repeat of the 9900k launch, that some early reviews may show power draw of 300W for the 10900k just because Asus/Gigabyte/MSI/whoever wants to win some launch-day benchmarks with their board. I would expect "real" power draw for these CPUs to fall somewhere in the ballpark of 210-250W for consumers. It was pretty rare to find anyone who actually bought and ran a 9900k to get stock power draw over 200W, and I would consider it equally-rare for a 10900k to hit 300W in the same scenario. Until they overclock it. ~5GHz 10900k will probably get close to 300W.
 

arandomguy

Senior member
Sep 3, 2013
512
131
116
As far as the power consumption(excessive) goes that only matters if you overclock correct? If you use stock settings and use something like a Noctua d15 everything should be ok?
The main factor is really your workload in whether or not you'll actually ever hit the numbers being mentioned. I remember getting into this argument when the 9900k itself was released. There is a combination of issues with what Intel's design (or marketing goals are), the limitations of it's (at this point nearly 6 year) old power/clock management system due to the urarchs age, the very high potential clock limits, mobo makers, how reviewers predominately test "power consumption," and how "enthusiasts" view and are influenced by the previous.

It's only in workloads where you can completely saturate the throughput of the CPU for sustained periods of time in that it'll become an issue, and really it would also need to heavily leverage AVX2 to hit the absolute worst case. However with those workloads Zen 3 will still have both the performance and performance/& advantage (well assuming so) even over Comet Lake due to how those workloads can scale in terms of core count and don't benefit as much from the latency difference (not mention how GPUs might be better than both at some as well) and therefore there is more favorable purchasing alternatives regardless of the power consumption issue.

If you're just gaming (or other very burst/latency demanding workloads), which let's face it is really the main if not only reason anyways you'd be buying Comet Lake over Zen 3, the sustained power consumption will not come anywhere close to the limits being mentioned and usage (and therefore heat generation) will more be along the lines of -



or (this is whole system, so it's relative)
 
  • Like
Reactions: krumme and TheGiant

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
14,607
3,585
136
which let's face it is really the main if not only reason anyways you'd be buying Comet Lake over Zen 3
I am not confident that Comet Lake-S will be a faster gaming processor than the 9900k or 9900ks. As such, I do not think it will be faster than Zen3 either.
 

coercitiv

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2014
3,520
2,908
136
It's stock if the mobo OEM makes it stock. Intel can disagree all it wants.
No, it's not stock, and you're passing a very dangerous threshold. Remember the blade always cuts both ways: just because a couple of X470 motherboards were loose cannons by default in terms of boost limits does it mean that stock TDP for 2700X was 150W?! Yeah, I didn't think so either. According to your statement the stock Intel and AMD settings are dictated by the maximum value that any of the OEMs is willing to put on their high-end motherbaords. So stock value may be limited to 1 product only, and it may also change in time should some hot-shot motherboard launch later.

At this point it's downright demeaning to let people believe they won't be able to cool 10900K on air, no matter how you (or me) feel about Intel's broken cloning machine and their embarrassing marketing decisions.
 

arandomguy

Senior member
Sep 3, 2013
512
131
116
I am not confident that Comet Lake-S will be a faster gaming processor than the 9900k or 9900ks. As such, I do not think it will be faster than Zen3 either.
I made a mistake in that post. All Zen 3 references should be Zen 2 or Ryzen 3000. When you're thinking Ryzen 3000 but type Zen 3 because its shorter.

I don't think Comet Lake will be significantly faster than current Intel's for current gaming either on a thread to thread level. Where the advantage will be (although this has some assumptions on pricing) is it will close the gap in thread counts per segment. There is already rather adoption and pressure on 6 thread CPUs especially with respect to frametime consistency/99% percentile numbers for an increasing number of games, so HT adoption will help i5s and lower currently. While for i7s HT will help with respect to potential longer term future proofing and parity due to upcoming consoles without needing to move up to the i9 segment (current situation).

But regardless gaming (which let's face is the bulk of DIY enthusiast sales) and other burst and latency type workloads are areas where Intel has a competitive advantage and why people would buy them. For the sustained workloads that completely saturate the CPU AMD with Zen 2 now has the advantage regardless of power consumption. This is why I feel it's misleading to discuss stress test type power consumption numbers and extrapolating that as being problematic for the former group buying those CPUs for gaming.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ondma

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
14,607
3,585
136
No, it's not stock, and you're passing a very dangerous threshold. Remember the blade always cuts both ways: just because a couple of X470 motherboards were loose cannons by default in terms of boost limits does it mean that stock TDP for 2700X was 150W?! Yeah, I didn't think so either.
Note that the TDP of the 9900k is listed as 95W, while the majority of Z390 boards cause it to operate as a ~160W CPU. It wasn't just a few loose cannons. The "loose cannons" had it operating as a 210W CPU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RetroZombie

Thala

Senior member
Nov 12, 2014
904
255
116
While PL1 can be sustained forever (as long as cooling is not an issue), the PL2 limit can only be sustained for a finite amount of time in stock configuration, and that time is given by PL1 Tau. The hardware default for PL1 Tau in the table above is 8 seconds. It can be higher than that, like 30 or 60 seconds, but it still needs to be finite and relatively short.
I do read a hardware default of 1s and a maximum of 8s in the table for PL1 Tau. Where did you get your numbers from?
 

coercitiv

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2014
3,520
2,908
136
I do read a hardware default of 1s and a maximum of 8s in the table for PL1 Tau. Where did you get your numbers from?
The 30-60s were example values. (as opposed to the "infinite" value some mobo manufacturers are keen to set on their Z boards to "help" consumers)

A token real-life figure is the 28s value used for many of their mobile SKU implementations.
 
Last edited:

Dave2150

Senior member
Jan 20, 2015
574
99
91
I am not confident that Comet Lake-S will be a faster gaming processor than the 9900k or 9900ks. As such, I do not think it will be faster than Zen3 either.
? 9900k is already faster than Zen 3 (by a very small margin) in games. AMD still haven't beaten Intel's 14nm when it comes to pure gaming yet. Of course the Intel part uses more power, which many are okay with.
 

Ajay

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2001
6,368
1,954
136
The 30-60s were example values. (as opposed to the "infinite" value some mobo manufacturers are keen to set on their Z boards to "help" consumers)

A token real-life figure is the 28s value used for many of their mobile SKU implementations.
Well, that makes total sense for an OEM system - especially power limited systems like mobile. It’s a different situation with enthusiast class systems - where grabbing the top slots in performance reviews drives excitement and thus sales. So things like default enabled MCE became a thing. Review sites also run demands use case scenarios like fully threaded and saturated AVX workloads - an those produce those extreme power loads; something a gamer is never going to see.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spursindonesia

uzzi38

Senior member
Oct 16, 2019
532
506
96
? 9900k is already faster than Zen 3 (by a very small margin) in games. AMD still haven't beaten Intel's 14nm when it comes to pure gaming yet. Of course the Intel part uses more power, which many are okay with.
Ryzen 3000 series is Zen 2.
 

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
7,453
949
126
Well, that makes total sense for an OEM system - especially power limited systems like mobile. It’s a different situation with enthusiast class systems - where grabbing the top slots in performance reviews drives excitement and thus sales. So things like default enabled MCE became a thing.
I don't think most boards enable MCE by default, that causes overvolting. This is just power draw being allowed to go to as high as it needs to without breaking the stock multiplier limits. I could see MCE being enabled would cause the 10900K to draw 300 W.

You will for sure want a 200+ W rated cooler for the 10900K.
 

Ajay

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2001
6,368
1,954
136
I don't think most boards enable MCE by default, that causes overvolting. This is just power draw being allowed to go to as high as it needs to without breaking the stock multiplier limits. I could see MCE being enabled would cause the 10900K to draw 300 W.

You will for sure want a 200+ W rated cooler for the 10900K.
I should have pointed to the problem of motherboard 'review samples' having had MCE enabled by default from some suppliers (like ASUS). IIRC, this was with early 9900k reviews, but I’m not sure. Reviewer, obviously, caught on - so I wouldn't expect it to be an issue with comet lake. The problem is that Comet Lake will be branded as a 250W CPU (or whatever) based solely on max power usage with an all core AVX workload. That’s just the way the tech media, and these forums work. Obviously, anyone wanting to overclock the 10900k will need custom water (the best AIOs are only marginally better than a D15).
 

Dave2150

Senior member
Jan 20, 2015
574
99
91
Ryzen 3000 series is Zen 2.
I meant the 3000 series, though the point remains valid The 9900k, overclocked, is faster than any Ryzen CPU released to date in games. This includes the 16 core model.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY