• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Intel Comet Lake Thread

Page 19 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
mopardude87 said:
I am even sorta tempted to wait but idk for less currently i could jump onto a mature platform with a cheaper 12 threaded 3900x. Now about all that heat, did they get it under control or will the 10 core demand water? I am all about air cooling that is why as much as the 10 core Intel may appeal to me a slightly cheaper currently 3900x is more appealing. Your golden with a NH-D15 with that.
Click to expand...
It is rumoured that PL2 for 10 core CL is 250w.So get 5lb monster cooler if you wanna aircool that.
 
Ajay said:
LOL, so at least a semi custom 360 loop just to avoid throttling. Never mind overclocking. I see some angry posts in Intel's future.
Click to expand...

I don't believe in such sorcery of Intel making this 10 core behemoth run on air. No sorcery in the history of the ancients nor now will convince me otherwise that this thing will run on air. I am more likely to believe in ALL the sorcery/magik of any of my fellow pagan brothers/sisters before i believe the 10900k will run on anything less then water.

If a spell was cast perhaps we could fix the heat but good luck collecting the tears of 666 Intel Pentium 4 extreme buyers for the basis. I got better luck pulling hen teeth at this point.
 
Ajay said:
Well, as usual, people who don't read motherboard reviews pay the price. There are some really crappy x570 boards out there too. I'm often shocked that board manufacturers don't phase those boards out quickly - but a fool and his money are easily parted. Neither AMD nor Intel seem to be able to control their board partners.
Click to expand...
This is exactly my point, you never had to go for a x570 board with a 3600. The B450 Tomahawk is better than most low-end x570s while being much cheaper. We'll see how fast Intel comes out with B460 and how fast Zen 3 comes, because then the Ryzen 3000 series will drop dramatically in price, poasibly making CML obsolete.
I don't mean that as a prophecy, but I see that as the most likely scenario.
 
lobz said:
This is exactly my point, you never had to go for a x570 board with a 3600. The B450 Tomahawk is better than most low-end x570s while being much cheaper. We'll see how fast Intel comes out with B460 and how fast Zen 3 comes, because then the Ryzen 3000 series will drop dramatically in price, poasibly making CML obsolete.
I don't mean that as a prophecy, but I see that as the most likely scenario.
Click to expand...

Yeah i had my eyes on the B450 Max for even a 3700x but with a 3900x i much prefer a 570 and since i wanna exploit pci-e 4.0 with a 1tb MP600 then yeah i should be good with such a set up perhaps right pass the 5000 series?

I will prob upgrade the second 5000 drops assuming the 5000 offers a bit, i know the rumored 15% IPC of the 4000 series won't get me budging off a 3900x unless some serious sorcery takes place and a higher core count used less power and pulled in higher clocks and was cheap enough. Amd been like Wonka behind closed doors but yeah i am excited to see what team green does next. Its like a Billy Mays commercial this generation especially when the 3950x dropped. That was AMDS mic drop.

Sorry Intel for not rooting for ya, you milked people on 14nm for YEARS then you got caught with your pants down. Unless you pull some serious sorcery with Jafar for example i can't imagine many opting for the 10 core chips over a 3900x. The 16 thread stuff has more hope for sure and hopefully it can compete.
 
lobz said:
This is exactly my point, you never had to go for a x570 board with a 3600. The B450 Tomahawk is better than most low-end x570s while being much cheaper. We'll see how fast Intel comes out with B460 and how fast Zen 3 comes, because then the Ryzen 3000 series will drop dramatically in price, poasibly making CML obsolete.
I don't mean that as a prophecy, but I see that as the most likely scenario.
Click to expand...
Okay, yeah, see your point. CML will be, in some ways, because of Zen 3000 and B550 on the low end. High end enthusiasts who prefer Intel will still prefer CML. Heck, if I had the money - I'd love to buy the 8 core K version just to play with - it will be a perfectly suitable system for high end gaming, and save money on heating in the winter. Win-win 😀
 
videocardz.com

Intel 10th Gen Core (Comet Lake-S) Final Specs and Pricing leaked - VideoCardz.com

Intel has just confirmed the final pricing and specifications of its upcoming 10th Gen Core-S series. Update: We have added a presentation leaked by HD-Tecnologia. Intel Core i9-10900K: 10 cores, 488 USD and a new box Intel will formally announce the Comet Lake-S series on April 30. The new CPUs...
videocardz.com videocardz.com

With these prices these are DOA. Availability is also questionable so expect around 20-30% higher prices for top models.For lower end models around 10% higher prices.
 
Honestly, the i5 and i7 parts don't look too bad for the price. On balance their Ryzen 5 and 7 counterparts are probably still going to be better buys, but you could make a strong case for Comet Lake i5 and i7 depending on use case and how aggressive Intel are being with the turbo bins.

The i9 on the other hand... yeah, that's just gonna get slaughtered by the 3900X, outside of one or two fringe scenarios where the i7 would offer much better bang-for-buck.
 
BigDaveX said:
Honestly, the i5 and i7 parts don't look too bad for the price. On balance their Ryzen 5 and 7 counterparts are probably still going to be better buys, but you could make a strong case for Comet Lake i5 and i7 depending on use case and how aggressive Intel are being with the turbo bins.

The i9 on the other hand... yeah, that's just gonna get slaughtered by the 3900X, outside of one or two fringe scenarios where the i7 would offer much better bang-for-buck.
Click to expand...
Plus the 3900X is already cheaper -> and I wouldn't be surprised if it touched $400 shortly after CML actually hits the shelves.
 
BigDaveX said:
Honestly, the i5 and i7 parts don't look too bad for the price. On balance their Ryzen 5 and 7 counterparts are probably still going to be better buys, but you could make a strong case for Comet Lake i5 and i7 depending on use case and how aggressive Intel are being with the turbo bins.

The i9 on the other hand... yeah, that's just gonna get slaughtered by the 3900X, outside of one or two fringe scenarios where the i7 would offer much better bang-for-buck.
Click to expand...

I agree the i5 and i7 could be decent good gaming chips if they will be actually availabe for that price. But Z490 is a cluster**** IMO. At least some boards have PCIE 4.0 hardware (which can't be cheap) but no CPU support for that.

So either all boards have it (and that would make them way too expensive for any i3's) or some will land some wont and there will be a lot of confusion and dissapointment once Rocket Lake is out
 
But the review is out:

AnandTech Forums: Technology, Hardware, Software, and Deals

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

And yep, the PL2 is 250W, but mobo builders built for 320-350W!

In comparison:
32 core Threadripper 3970X never exceeds 280W without overclocking
64 core Threadripper 3990X never exceeds 280W without overclocking

16 core Ryzen 3950X never exceeds 145W without overclocking
8 core Ryzen 3770X never exceeds 88W without overclocking


https://twitter.com/x/status/1255846440208863233
 
Last edited:
Gideon said:
I agree the i5 and i7 could be decent good gaming chips if they will be actually availabe for that price. But Z490 is a cluster**** IMO. At least some boards have PCIE 4.0 hardware (which can't be cheap) but no CPU support for that.

So either all boards have it (and that would make them way too expensive for any i3's) or some will land some wont and there will be a lot of confusion and dissapointment once Rocket Lake is out
Click to expand...
You have to be aware that those are tray prices for 1k units, not retail.
Secondly, Intel is still capacity constrained and will be for the rest of the year.
It is highly unlikely that one will se those prices throughout the product cicle.

Hence my DOA statement.

Edit: Have to read review, it may make my post obsolete or confirm it.
Edit2: Yeah, I stand to my original post.
 
Last edited:
Interesting that they include per-core HT enable and disable in the specs. This sounds like an effort to allow Intel to have the best two performing cores have HT disabled to allow them to clock even higher to eek out slightly better benchmark scores. It'll be interesting to see the effectiveness in the reviews...
 
LightningZ71 said:
Interesting that they include per-core HT enable and disable in the specs. This sounds like an effort to allow Intel to have the best two performing cores have HT disabled to allow them to clock even higher to eek out slightly better benchmark scores. It'll be interesting to see the effectiveness in the reviews...
Click to expand...
Yeah, they are grabbing for straws.
 
coercitiv said:
Time for me to eat some crow, I never believed they would end up doing this crap.

These are not 125W TDP CPUs, and from now on Intel's TDP numbers are just marketing names. What a sad legacy for a CPU architecture that was once the best at everything.
Click to expand...

Maybe it is just me but that was quite naive from you.
To me writing was on the wall with 8 and especially 9 series.
And I have to agree with you, skylake is way past its time.
 
I am disappointed. Wanted a Hecta i7 Platform that was 2S and combined two "125W" Core Series CPUs for "ultimate gaming prowess" where one CPU was for gaming and the other was dedicated to streaming and running your AV suite 😉

AMD Quad FX platform - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Haha, it seems like only a few years ago we were choosing Intel over (the admittedly pretty terrible) AMD options because "think of the power bill".

I never thought that Intel's foundry woes would have this result.

I thought that maybe these CPUs would be interesting from a drop in upgrade standpoint, I didn't realize this required another new chipset (or am I wrong?) *edit* Nevermind, I see that we have more pins now and the Anandtech article is more than one page.

"There's even a possibility that Intel could be reusing the same Coffee Lake silicon masks and just binning them to Comet Lake specifications." <-- Per Anandtech. Ha.

The more I read about these the more I am reminded of the AMD FX-9370 and FX-9590. Think of the overclocking! They said. Think of the 5 Ghz all core speeds! They said. Buy a custom loop watercooling solution! They said. 🙄
 
Last edited:
coercitiv said:
Time for me to eat some crow, I never believed they would end up doing this crap.

These are not 125W TDP CPUs, and from now on Intel's TDP numbers are just marketing names. What a sad legacy for a CPU architecture that was once the best at everything.
Click to expand...
Intel's TDP has always been rated at base clocks, nothing shady there.
It's just the boost clocks have gotten much more aggressive so the power consumption while boosting went up considerably.
 
Can we get F's in chat for Intel's marketing?

They're starting to struggle a bit.
7c56f1e60626d40ccd7120544b5865bb.jpg
49bac4cff0c83656a6f036a9b30de844.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top