-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Intel 10th Gen Core (Comet Lake-S) Final Specs and Pricing leaked
- Thread starter kostacurtas
- Start date
AMD have updated their link from the chipset back to the main memory controller to PCI-E 4.0 x4 so they can support a PCI-E 4.0 SSD at full rate. You can run an x8 3.0 SSD on a Z490 but it cuts the memory bandwidth of the graphics card in half (not that bad) but also there aren't any x8 PCI-E 3.0 controllers for SSDs (i.e. you'd have to run twin x4s in some sort of RAID).
It's not so much a case of loading time but streaming assets in a more complicated scene in a JIT fashion to be rendered. This is how the next generation of games are probably going to work as both MS and Sony are laying down the necessary parts for it to happen. If you're going through a city at speed the game engine is going to be continually pulling data up from the storage media in advance of you getting there. How much data can be pulled in during these short bursts is going to dictate both the smoothness of next-gen console ports and how detailed the geometry and texturing can be. If your SSD can't pull in fast enough then you might have to turn detail down or there might be pop in or frame hitches as the assets get there late.
Do you have a 370 series board with 8 core support?
If so a 9900k when prices drop on it.
Otherwise get a new board and a ryzen 3700.
Makes sense, thanks. Probably won't have to really worry about that until the second or third year though once the cross-gen stuff is phased out and next-gen becomes the primary focus. I build a new PC every 3-5 years (depending on need), so it likely won't really affect me.
I'd hold fire for now. I'm expecting AMD to announce price cuts in response to this launch. (And if you can't wait, at least save yourself some coin)
It's nice and all that Intel is lowering prices but they don't future proof their boards.
I'm still pissed that I was stuck with z170 a board with a 6500 CPU with my upgrade option being more expensive than switching to b450 paired with a 3600x.
I'm still pissed that I was stuck with z170 a board with a 6500 CPU with my upgrade option being more expensive than switching to b450 paired with a 3600x.
No, Ryzen 4000 will be the last upgrade available to socket AM4, given that it started on Ryzen 1000. For longer upgrade timeframes, you gotta wait until they release their next socket.
93% of people have 16GB of RAM or less. 54% have less than 16GB of RAM. Using RAM as a backing store in the same vein as a super fast SSD is not that practical a solution.
When games increase RAM needed they increase RAM needed. It happens. What would be unusual and a first for PC is requiring a different long term storage medium.
Usually it was some high profile game that needed more RAM, like a Battlefield title. And if you didn't have the RAM you'd expect to wait on loading screen for 3 minutes.
I clearly remember this happening on Battlefield 2 and BF Vietnam. For each of those owning the optimal RAM was not at all common - like owning 32GB today.
RAM requirements will 100% increase. It just remains to be seen if any game will actually require 32GB, or utilize it.
Even fewer will (initially) have a PC capable of keeping up with the (compressed) I/O on the next-gen consoles (whether any game, much less a cross-platform one, will rely on this is a separate issue). Memory is a great equalizer, if you use it (i.e don't port a console version with fixed-size arenas and call it a day).
Last edited:
I'm stuck on a Z170 board with a 6700K right now and waiting for Ryzen 4. Admittedly, the board I'll probably buy is more expensive than when mine was new.
Where do you get this stat? How many of those 93% people have RTX capable cards? How many of those people have NVMe SSD?
How does it even relate to around 1.5-2 years from now when actually next gen games launch?
Also people really got into this 5-6GB/s SSD marketing. Just because SSD can achieve those speeds, doesnt mean that games will utilize it. Writing an engine and games on those engines that utilize truly this kind of bandwidth to the full extend wont be that easy. Probably most of the time even 1GB/s wont be utilized properly, maybe at the end of the next-gen.
they were sitting on that 4 core 8 thread for years. Greed got them really hard when AMD launched 6 core 12 thread CPU's in the market.
here is a nice video
I really want to build a PC now as it would be a nice lockdown project and I have funds to do so. I quite like the look of the 10700k but not being 100% tech savvy when it comes to specs the reception has been lukewarm for all these chips. I assume we will start to see benchmarks over the coming days/weeks for a number of these new CPUs?
The overall vibe I'm getting is to wait until Zen 3 hits to build?
The overall vibe I'm getting is to wait until Zen 3 hits to build?
A small nitpick to add, but there's one other difference. AMD actually has some extra I/O built into the CPU that doesn't have to share its bandwidth with the x4 link to the PCH as Veliladon mentioned. This diagram explains it better than just listing off everything in here.
It's a bit more than just greed as you can see now with 9000 and 10000 series thermals.
Have we reached a level where we would need a 10-core gaming PC for gaming ultra-high-end performance?
www.cnet.com
Intel Core i9-10900K edges up to 5.3GHz, 10 cores for gaming desktops
Overclockers, start your engines.
www.cnet.com
Steam Hardware Survey. Dunno how many have NVMe SSDs but RTX is around about 8.5%. The most popular card is still the 1060.
This is exactly how PS5 and Xbox Series X are pitching their respective systems to developers though. RAM only holds the next second of gameplay, SSDs hold the next 30 seconds. Once this becomes a mainstream AAA thing disk I/O is going to represent a limiting factor and that 10C/20T monster with a 3080 Ti might not be able to get ultra level detail from the disk in time. Especially since AMD are throwing an NVMe slot direct onto the processor's PCI-E bus with its own dedicated lanes while the motherboard NVMe slots on a Z490 Intel board are going to be stuck sharing DMI 3.0 with every other thing hanging on the southbridge.
I expect Intel to rectify it in future platforms but Z490 is turning into an absolute clusterfuck.
I get uncomfortable imagining just how much money they've burned on P1274 trying to make 193nm work at 10nm. I don't think any of the other foundries even bothered with quad patterning. All the others kept going with double patterning then moved straight to EUV.
I'm torn. I generally always go Intel, and I think my 6700K is getting a bit long in the tooth to keep up with 4k/60 gaming so I need to upgrade, but I think the next AMD chips may be worth holding out for. Hmm.
Dude, brand loyalty is probably one of the stupidest concepts humanity has invented. Go for what is best at the moment of purchase, not for what you usually go for.
Oh, I don't really have brand loyalty. I just want the best for the money I'm spending. The only reason I've had some doubts with AMD is because of past compatibility issues, but those seem to have mostly worked themselves out now.
So almost all of those 93% PCs arent next-gen ready anyway, so stat isnt really meaningful as of yet.
RAM only holds '1s' of gameplay if there is not enough RAM. High disk bandwidth is meaningful only to circumvent the lack of RAM. If you have enough RAM, then it should not be required.
If we assume that next-gen games are at most 250GB uncompressed then 30GB RAM (20GB of DDR4 and 10GB GDDR5) can hold up even 12% of the whole game assets. Having in memory 12% of your game assets can sustain hours of gameplay in most (if not all) games, you definitely do not need to refresh that every several seconds.
Of course those napkin calculation doesnt take into account additional buffers, procedural generation of data etc, but generally those arent that massive in comparison to rest of the assets.
Its the RAM and VRAM that communicates directly with CPU and GPU, SSD is only there to put the data into memory, so if the data is already there then SSD can be mostly idle.
Btw writing high latency mitigating, multithreaded systems is really not easy. Also not every workflow can be scaled up linearly with bandwidth and not every game needs very high data throughput.
Remember that if devs want to utilize constantly 5GB/s transfer, they need to scale their data usage 100 times to what they are used to now. I see those SSD data rates more as bottleneck removal than something that will be utilized constantly to the full extend.
Microsoft and Sony are future proofing their systems and try to mitigate the low amount of RAM their have in their machines, but it doesnt mean that PCs need to work this way as well.
Developers should care about PC platform and use its hardware accordingly, instead of porting the games 1:1 from consoles. If system has 64GB RAM and 14GB VRAM it should use those resources efficiently.
Last edited:
Sort of similar here, I have a 6700k and generally prefer Intel due to gaming performance. After reading about the new CPUs at Anandtech, I'm most likely going to jump on the AMD 4000 series when they launch (later this year I believe). Mostly interested in the 4900x, assuming that's a thing.
Even with the chipset being half-assed PCIE 3.0 fare (or is it?), it's apparent that Rocket Lake is what these boards were really made for and that Comet Lake is the stopgap that should've been out last year. Why move to a new socket (its power requirements) when everything else is is the almost the same vs Coffee Lake v2? Rocket lake is going to be here so quickly that buyers will get whiplash.
This launch just feels ehhhhhh. Even the 65W chips don't look SFF friendly at all.
This launch just feels ehhhhhh. Even the 65W chips don't look SFF friendly at all.
I'm liking these specs. And the pricing is good too. I'm on a 2500k still and have been meaning to upgrade sometime soon. I was hoping for 10nm though. Is it worth it to wait for the 11th gen?
If Rocket Lake is next, then a) It'll come very soon, and b) Still 14nm.
"Rocket Lake is expected to be released in Q4 2020 or Q1 2021." -- https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/intel/microarchitectures/rocket_lake
Anyone who buys into Comet Lake better be ready for it to have a very short life-span indeed, assuming everything goes Intel's way. Not having Rocket Lake as a response to Zen 3 would surely be yet another failure.
You'll get Intel 10nm desktop parts in 2022 probably, if you want to wait for that.
Last edited:
The fastest intel CPU is only 5% faster in games. Theres seriously no reason for 99.9% of gamers to buy an Intel CPU.
I think I've said it a couple times already but I've swung back to going with Zen 3 despite AM4 being near EOL and no new upgrade paths later but it's not like I'd be looking for an upgrade again anytime soon seeing how I've stuck with my 2500k for nearly nine years now and I'm probably going to go with the 3900X's successor which I'd been looking at Zen 3 since like mid-2017 despite really starting to feel the need to upgrade back in late 2016, going to be around four years since then before finally doing it, could end up early next year depending on how things go. Plus, DDR5 and AM5 for that matter are probably going to need time to mature, PCI-e 5 USB 4 will have as well and I'm not going to look to hold off nearly as long again.
I am too and been holding off four almost four years now from when I really started to feel it in late 2016 but I'm pretty much set on going with AMD/Zen 3 because Intel is not in a good place with the wall they've hit in recent years. I'd wait for benchmarks to see how far ahead they are in games compared to Zen 2 CPUs and whether the rumored Zen 3 improvements will be enough to close what's been a pretty small gap, there's potential for Zen 3 to surpass Intel in single core performance.
I mean yes the 2 gen cadence is policy and has been around for aeons. You could set your watch to it. I imagine some people will still be surprised in 2021 when LGA1700 is announced lol.
Darn. Well, at least it will have PCIe 4.0. This isn't a good year to build, anyway. I wonder how far AMD will be by the time Intel can manage 10nm on the desktop?
Intel has a long history of cutting up their product lines ins super shitty ways. They held back 64bit adoption for a long time by restricting their low end chips, which were totally x64 capable, as a way of differentiating their more expensive chips.
And in real gaming situations you are almost certainly going to be GPU limited in actual gameplay so that's 5% you never even see. Compared to the huge speedup you get in basically every other task it's a fools bargin every time.
CPU is less important at 4K, it's more GPU dependant at that point.
That's kind of my understanding as well. I have 2560x1080 ultrawide and I feel my 1080 FTW is going to be good for a little while longer.
I remember that someone hacked a Z170 board at one point to run an 8350K. Intel have always been so annoyingly conservative with current on each pin.
Same as 9000 series performed, adjusted for price changes and with a new 10C/20T SKU on top - which will likely be slower than 3900X on average and in production software but will beat it again in gaming.
More signs Rocket Lake-S is on track.
"Intel Sends Out Rocket Lake Linux Graphics Driver Patches - Confirms Gen12 Platform"
"Intel Sends Out Rocket Lake Linux Graphics Driver Patches - Confirms Gen12 Platform"
Oh Intel, what are you doing. This release is going to be like a fart in the wind that's for sure.
It's unknown what it will be.
RKL is rumored to be a port of TGL to 14nm. It's hard to say what it will achieve prior to seeing any solid numbers but if all will go well we may get one of the fastest gaming CPUs yet - in the form of an 8C/16T RKL, with Willow Cove CPU cores running at 5GHz.
Willow Cove should provide a sizeable boost in IPC over Skylake cores - around +20% or so - which coupled with high 14nm clocks may result in what will essentially be similar to running CML @ 6GHz.
The problem there though, and obvious to you no doubt, is that Intel's TDP measurements are deceptive and we could see some rather hot chips without the tomato sauce on top.
They won't be any hotter than CML, the platform's TDP is set.
I also kinda don't get the narrative that Intel CPUs are somehow especially hot these days. Ryzens aren't too cool either, and this is a natural result of both vendors trying to push their products as high as possible in both clocks and core counts. Anyone here thinks that it will be different once Intel will move from 14nm to 10 or 7? Think again.
Rule of thumb is - if the temps are bothering you so much don't go with a high end CPU (or GPU for that matter).