Intel Core i9-10900K 10-Core Comet Lake-S Monster CPU Leaks With 5.1GHz Turbo Clock

erek

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
5,198
Pretty cool! Looking forward to new products

“As we previously reported, the Core i9-10900K will support Intel Z490-based motherboards along with the new LGA 1200 socket. And according to previously leaked information, the Core i9-10900K has a TDP (PL1) of 125 watts compared to 95 watts for its Core i9-9900K predecessor. In addition, its TDP (PL2) is rated at a higher 250 watts. However, it's alleged that the processor is hitting 300 watts under maximum load.”

https://amp.hothardware.com/news/intel-comet-lake-s-core-i9-10900k-z490-leak
 
Joined
Oct 23, 2018
Messages
600
you don't like chipsets?
I'm waiting for them to have an ad campaign featuring Xzibit exclaiming, "yo dawg! We heard you like chipsets! So we put a chipset on your chipset!"

And that's how socketed chipsets were born.
 
  • Like
Reactions: erek
like this

aokman

Gawd
Joined
Jan 3, 2012
Messages
975
Chipset obsoletion has been an Intel game for years. Let me know when they bring new actual features along with the new chipset.
I can understand the change if they guarantee* the chipset will be supported for say the next 3 gens with tons of pipeline headroom but we all know it is BS like z170 to z390 were...
 

Ebernanut

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
1,175
The proverbial mammaries on a bull. Congrats.
More bandwidth is always nice even if it's not currently needed. Since it's also not mandatory to use the newest CPU I don't really think it's comparable to what Intel has been doing.

TBF I think AMD still has the worst example of chipset fragmentation with the whole 939/AM2 split, especially with the way they abandoned 939 before it got all the processors that it was supposed to.
 
Joined
Apr 1, 2008
Messages
2,606
Being stuck on 14nm isn't really doing favours for Intel and a max of 10 cores is rather unappealing considering AMD has 16 on their mainstream platform.
 

Red Falcon

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
10,388
Chipset obsoletion has been an Intel game for years. Let me know when they bring new actual features along with the new chipset.
Ivy Bridge chipsets were mostly backwards compatible with Sandy Bridge CPUs, and if I remember correctly, Kaby Lake chipsets were backwards compatible with Skylake.
Outside of that, though, totally agreed.
 

Red Falcon

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
10,388
TBF I think AMD still has the worst example of chipset fragmentation with the whole 939/AM2 split, especially with the way they abandoned 939 before it got all the processors that it was supposed to.
That was mainly due to 939 CPUs supporting DDR1 and AM2 CPUs supporting DDR2.
What is Intel's excuse? (other than wanting more money and market fragmentation)
 

Algrim

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 1, 2016
Messages
1,683
My wife kinda kidded me a few days ago saying it's time to upgrade our desktop computers. For the first time in years I'm not even looking at the Intel platform. This new release doesn't change my mind on that decision.
 

Ebernanut

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
1,175
That was mainly due to 939 CPUs supporting DDR1 and AM2 CPUs supporting DDR2.
What is Intel's excuse? (other than wanting more money and market fragmentation)
I'm aware of the difference but AM2 came out very shortly after 939 and as a result 939 never got the full range of processors it was supposed to. I guess it bothers me more(in historical terms) because I bought into 939 planning to upgrade the processor based on what AMD said and then there never was a worthwhile upgrade path, not that this excuses what Intel has been doing with chipsets.

Mainly I was trying to add some context and point out that AMD hasn't always been perfect in that regard either but I do think that they've learned from it. Currently all of their chipsets offer different features and support a wide range of CPUs which certainly isn't the case for Intel right now.
 

Red Falcon

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
10,388
Mainly I was trying to add some context and point out that AMD hasn't always been perfect in that regard either but I do think that they've learned from it.
Agreed, and I remember when AMD was getting a bit arrogant in 2006, charging around $1600 for their 939 FX-60 dual-core CPU.
These megacorps are all the same, and this is why competition is good, primarily for us - this is the only reason I'm siding with AMD at this point in time, and it certainly isn't because they are more saintly than Intel. ;)

Hopefully Intel will bring a few new features with Z490, aside from more pins on the socket. :p
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,585
I'm aware of the difference but AM2 came out very shortly after 939 and as a result 939 never got the full range of processors it was supposed to. I guess it bothers me more(in historical terms) because I bought into 939 planning to upgrade the processor based on what AMD said and then there never was a worthwhile upgrade path, not that this excuses what Intel has been doing with chipsets.

Mainly I was trying to add some context and point out that AMD hasn't always been perfect in that regard either but I do think that they've learned from it. Currently all of their chipsets offer different features and support a wide range of CPUs which certainly isn't the case for Intel right now.
That was a very different time... when hardware was actually improving at a decent pace. Hard to blame AMD... I mean what where they supposed to do, not release DDR 2 boards so people with 2 year old machines could buy a upgrade CPU. I know it sucks but that one is forgivable. I have no doubt they hadn't intended to replace 939 after 2 years. With AM2+ they where able to make it backwards and forward compatible as it was a hypertransport bump, so new CPUs on old boards just ran at the slower speed if you where ok with it so be it. (much like Zen 2 on 470/370 boards run fine juts no pcie4) With RAM and Athlons having integrated Memory controllers there was no way to make a Athlon64 with a DDR2 controller work in a board with DDR ram.

Currently AMD has released actual real features with each AM4 chipset generation. We all know AM5 is probably not far off, as DDR 5 is not far off. But its hard to knock what AMD has done, even 939->AM2... AMD took enough heat over memory support as it was for them to delay a new socket for too long.

I agree though Intels actions on chipsets and sockets the last while is pretty inexcusable. Greed seems to be the only real motivation. Although I guess I could defend them a bit on this one perhaps... it sounds like these CPUs are really going to be packed with thermite. I imagine board partners have not made all Intel boards capable of supplying 300 watts to a CPU and dissipate that kinda heat.... perhaps all these new Z490 boards will have heatsinks on the back of the pcb or something. lol Just wait for the new case standard ATX_IR (Intel Reactor) which will mount the MB in middle of the case so the back of the PCB can be lined with heatsinks and fans, front side and backside cooling zones. lmao
 
Last edited:

aokman

Gawd
Joined
Jan 3, 2012
Messages
975
Being stuck on 14nm isn't really doing favours for Intel and a max of 10 cores is rather unappealing considering AMD has 16 on their mainstream platform.
It will depend on the clocks, I would take 10 cores at high clock speeds over 16 low speed ones.
 

wyqtor

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 30, 2011
Messages
442
5.1, just 100 MHz more than the previous flagship CPU? Things are quite bad for Intel if that's the best they can do. I have a feeling Ryzen 4000 is going to stomp on them, this time even in games.
 
Joined
Oct 23, 2018
Messages
600
Not only has AMD brought new features with every new chipset, it maintains compatibility with older CPUs. AMD also does not force you to get a new chipset to run their new CPUs, so if you don't want the new features of X570, you can buy and use an X470 board.
I'm curious what this long list of new features might be. The most recent one that people who can't use it brag about is just a slightly faster version of a bus that was already too fast for its primary application.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,585
I'm curious what this long list of new features might be. The most recent one that people who can't use it brag about is just a slightly faster version of a bus that was already too fast for its primary application.
If you are talking about their last 3 Zen chipsets. 300s covered all the basics and where in line with what Intel offers. A few more PCIe lanes perhaps but nothing ground breaking... but = in features. 400s brought storemi and PBO. PBO may have been an evolution of precison boost, but as most people have found including [H] before Kyle closed shop was that it basically makes overclocking pointless giving everyone 99% of the benefit without having to do nothing. 500s brought 4x the Gen 2 USB 3 ports and yes PCIe 4, you can debate if home users really need it right now or not but there are GPUs and SSDs on the market today that slot in... its not a fluff feature. If the rumors are true Intel can't manage to get it working properly on their platform at all, and perhaps may skip it choosing to jump to PCIe 5 down the road in a few years.
 
Joined
Oct 23, 2018
Messages
600
If you are talking about their last 3 Zen chipsets. 300s covered all the basics and where in line with what Intel offers. A few more PCIe lanes perhaps but nothing ground breaking... but = in features. 400s brought storemi and PBO. PBO may have been an evolution of precison boost, but as most people have found including [H] before Kyle closed shop was that it basically makes overclocking pointless giving everyone 99% of the benefit without having to do nothing. 500s brought 4x the Gen 2 USB 3 ports and yes PCIe 4, you can debate if home users really need it right now or not but there are GPUs and SSDs on the market today that slot in... its not a fluff feature. If the rumors are true Intel can't manage to get it working properly on their platform at all, and perhaps may skip it choosing to jump to PCIe 5 down the road in a few years.
Wait - your entire list is auto-overclocking, "extra USB ports," and a tech for pairing legacy spinny drives with fast SSD caches? You're right - I would totally buy a new motherboard if had extra USB ports.

PCIe 4 is worthless. Plug in one of those compatible GPUs and what do you get? 0fps boost. What a game-changing feature.
 

jmilcher

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
4,488
The proverbial mammaries on a bull. Congrats.
You asked for innovation. Do I need to list off all of the firsts AMD has brought? Let’s just say you’d be on your 15th generation of 10nm+++++++++++++ quad core CPU if it were up to Intel.
 
Joined
Oct 23, 2018
Messages
600
You asked for innovation. Do I need to list off all of the firsts AMD has brought? Let’s just say you’d be on your 15th generation of 10nm+++++++++++++ quad core CPU if it were up to Intel.
That must be why they always outsell Intel.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,585
Wow, having future ready tech is bad now lol.
Yes all we need is USB 2.0 ports... manual overclocking, and PCI 2.0 8x and SATA.... cause I can pull out some gaming benchmarks that prove anything more then that is only worth a couple FPS tops, and games don't run any faster on NVME either. lol Fanboys going to fan I guess.
 

jmilcher

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
4,488
Yes all we need is USB 2.0 ports... manual overclocking, and PCI 2.0 8x and SATA.... cause I can pull out some gaming benchmarks that prove anything more then that is only worth a couple FPS tops, and games don't run any faster on NVME either. lol Fanboys going to fan I guess.
Exactly. I think people who bought the Intel 108097901x or whatever may have some buyers remorse.
 

TordanGow

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 25, 2015
Messages
1,434
Ivy Bridge chipsets were mostly backwards compatible with Sandy Bridge CPUs, and if I remember correctly, Kaby Lake chipsets were backwards compatible with Skylake.
Outside of that, though, totally agreed.
In terms of hardware I care about FORWARD compatibility, not backwards compatibility. I was able to drop a Ivy Bridge into a P67 (sandy bridge) chipset.

With my AMD Gigabyte X370 K5 I can run a Ryzen 1700 up through the new Ryzen 9 3950X on a board that came out around 3 years ago.
 

chameleoneel

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
3,256
Ivy Bridge chipsets were mostly backwards compatible with Sandy Bridge CPUs, and if I remember correctly, Kaby Lake chipsets were backwards compatible with Skylake.
Outside of that, though, totally agreed.
I've got a Z170 board with a Kaby Lake in it, after a bios update.
 

KazeoHin

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,054
Wait - your entire list is auto-overclocking, "extra USB ports," and a tech for pairing legacy spinny drives with fast SSD caches? You're right - I would totally buy a new motherboard if had extra USB ports.

PCIe 4 is worthless. Plug in one of those compatible GPUs and what do you get? 0fps boost. What a game-changing feature.
Okay bud, name ONE feature that Z370 has that Z270 didn't.

And then tell me why said feature made it completely incompatible with 7th gen chips.

Then explain to me why said feature is more significant than any chipset feature AMD has added in the last 3 years.
 

coynatha

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 9, 2004
Messages
350
Okay bud, name ONE feature that Z370 has that Z270 didn't.

And then tell me why said feature made it completely incompatible with 7th gen chips.

Then explain to me why said feature is more significant than any chipset feature AMD has added in the last 3 years.
Being I missed upgrading through ALL of those generations, I had to go look myself. Pudget had a nice overview of it.

Z370 vs Z270: What is the Difference?

z370vs270.JPG
 
Top