Yes, intel is not still supporting pcie4, AMD does. I meant the "waiting for pcie4" as "if you want to upgrade to an intel chip, waiting is advised"
-
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.
Intel 10th Gen Core (Comet Lake-S) Review Roundup
- Thread starter kostacurtas
- Start date
That's true of any CPU, for higher resolutions your money is always better spent on the GPU (that's why they test CPUs at low resolutions). If you're strictly gaming the 10600k or Ryzen 5 seem to be a good bang for the buck.
I'm a bit on the fence for my PC upgrade. Mainly due to SSD bottlenecks issues compared to next gen consoles, wondering if some solution will be analog in PCs (or just brute force). I know there's always something better next year, that's why my 2500k is still chugging along.
Better wait until 2021 if you can, ddr5 and zen4/Intel 10nm.
Otherwise just wait for zen3 q4 this year.
Man my 8700k just keeps looking like a better and better purchase. Bought it at launch and it's still a top tier CPU almost 3 years later lol.
Overclocked 9900K and RTX 2080...
...and I only play Vita JRPG ports. I think I'm good for a while.
It seems like it's plenty beefy honestly to last all through the console gen. Modern day 2500k feels like. Like it realistically could be good for like 10 years total lol.
This also deserves consideration. Zen 3 is the end of AM4. It's the end of DDR4. It's the end of everything. There's not going to be a good time to buy anything on a platform with legs until late 2021 at the earliest anyway. Early/mid 2022 if you wait until Zen 4 and AM5.
Yep, agree, if possible it's the best solution for someone that wants to invest a good amount of money and have their build last as much as possible (probably not as long a 2500k but those were special Intel times).
That's a weird way of thinking tbh. Like getting a Zen 3 + B550/X670 this year is going to last 90% of the people long enough for the next big thing, it's not like once DDR5 and AM5 came out Zen 3 is suddenly pure trash that isn't worth using. And if past trend is to go by DDR5 is more realistically to be mainstream well into 2021, or even 2022. If someone needs to upgrade or build something new, Zen 2 or Zen 3 are both excellent regardless.
What is the benefit of DDR5 going to be? Or is the point simply future-proofing?
Outside of GPU performance, the last "transformative" advance that I've perceived was going from a HDD to a SSD.
PCIe 5.0 isn't going to do much for GPUs or SSDs. DDR5, on the other hand, will probably help the CPU quite a bit.
My stock R5 1600 is feeling its age.
With the rumors of another "maybe +20%" IPC gain in Zen3, I have to be patient. The most CPU heavy thing I do these days is BOTW emulation in Cemu [it nicely holds 60fps in open spaces, but tanks to high40s/low50s in villages], and Zen3 will blow my Zen1 CPU out of the water.
With the rumors of another "maybe +20%" IPC gain in Zen3, I have to be patient. The most CPU heavy thing I do these days is BOTW emulation in Cemu [it nicely holds 60fps in open spaces, but tanks to high40s/low50s in villages], and Zen3 will blow my Zen1 CPU out of the water.
That was kind of the point although it was kind of unclear. You can buy now and it'll last until that generation.
In most cases it'll be at the value chain. APUs are going to get way better with DDR5. Having a 128GB/sec memory bandwidth for the onboard GPU is going to make cheaper rigs perform a hell of a lot better with onboard graphics.
Not gaming workloads.
Yeah it will be interesting so see what kind of igpus and and Intel start pushing in the next few years. Would be cool to actually see something with similar perf to the new consoles all just on the CPU without needing to shell out $500 for a discrete GPU.
It's still a way off yet. It'll make 1080p passable next generation but we're not going to see 448GB/sec buses to APUs any time soon. You'd need a $500 motherboard to take advantage of a $99 GPU.
Eh, I dunno. I could see AMD doing something pretty crazy. That Vega NUC chip they did was pretty bonkers and already does more than passable 1080p.
I actually could see an rdna2 ryzen chip with 36-40 cus like the PS5 chip. Add fast ddr5 and maybe it wouldn't really be much slower than the ps5 depending on the igpu clocks.
It would be disappointing for so many people because even with quad channel 6400MHz DDR5 there would still only be half the memory bandwidth of a console and it would hold the chip back.
Didn't the Vega chip have edram though? I'd imagine same deal with this or any chip Intel does. I nice cache of edram to help out.
LinusTechTips review was pretty positive, and remember, this is the same Linus who gave Intel tons of crap over the last couple of years.
99th percentile in gaming looking great for Intel.
99th percentile in gaming looking great for Intel.
LinusTechTips review was pretty positive, and remember, this is the same Linus who gave Intel tons of crap over the last couple of years.
99th percentile in gaming looking great for Intel.
Not enough to save this poor showing. Strong gaming performance was expected.
Also HW unboxed showed more closer results with the 3900x being slower on games 7% on average while productity is on average 17% faster on 3900x.
Price performance ratio also poor specially since you have to buy a cooler (and a good one if want want MCE enable for those 200w for the CPU alone).
Well this is gaming forum after all. I am positive vast majority of people buying Ryzen are just using it for gaming, they don't care or even know what any of these productivity applications are. It's kind of weird to put so much emphasis on productivity again and again, especially on a gaming forum. No one on gaming websites cared about CPU productivity before Ryzen came out.
And fun fact about productivity, did you know that, for example, many video editors actually use Intel. Why you might ask? Well because video editing applications and plugins work a lot better on Intel. Doesn't matter if rendering is faster by 10% on AMD CPU. 95% of time video editors spends while editing footage, not rendering.
Also in regards to having to buy a cooler... People buying high end CPUs don't really want to use stock coolers. This is why Intel stopped including them in the first place. Do you know many people using 3900X with stock cooler? And if you buy mid range CPU, then coolers for those cost like 20-30 Eur. Hardly worth mentioning.
I think this is actually quite a decent upgrade from Intel, it's just the value is hidden further down the stack. The locked i5s and i3s look like really decent value gaming CPUs and they don't put you at a core and thread disadvantage like the higher tier parts.
The 10400f is showing up at £165 here in the UK and that should be within touching distance of a stock 8700K which is still a fantastic gaming CPU. Lack of PCIe 4.0 is kind of inexcusable though, even if it doesn't mean a great deal to a lot of people yet.
The 10400f is showing up at £165 here in the UK and that should be within touching distance of a stock 8700K which is still a fantastic gaming CPU. Lack of PCIe 4.0 is kind of inexcusable though, even if it doesn't mean a great deal to a lot of people yet.
So the 10600 is a 6c/12t? That's the 8700k replacement and a much better deal. Probably smarter to buy that over even a 9700k.
Well as someone who has a 6700k CPU I will be picking up the 10700K as it would be a significant upgrade for me
Yes, but as I mentioned in another comment, I meant "(if you want intel) it's better to wait for (intel) pcie4 instead of buying now". Really should've specified that in the comment :P
All of that still doesn't make any of the 10th series line up a better buy than the equivalent zen counterpart.
All the i5s are, you can now get a 12 thread Intel CPU for ~$160, that's tremendous progress in my book. A few years ago Intel were trying to sell a dual core for that sort of money.
Not really impressed, I'm thrilled with my 3900X and don't see a reason to upgrade any time soon.
I think there is a strong argument based on pricing if it's purely for gaming purposes a 10th gen i5 is a pretty good way to go especially if you can clock it up around 5.0ghz. It will beat more expensive ryzen chips if your main concern is gaming.
But yeah in general it's a bad time Intel or AMD to buy a new board and CPU as they are purely 1 gen board and ram setups. So yeah if you can hold onto whatever you have for a couple more years then yeah just hold on.
Brand new build yeah I don't think it really matters honestly if you go ryzen or Intel. Amd pricing has brought Intel pricing back to earth and chips in the same price brackets perform pretty similarly and have similar core/thread counts.
That's your opinion. There are plenty of people who gladly pay a little bit extra for the best gaming performance. This is why Intel CPUs and RTX 2080Ti kept selling out for months.
Plenty is an overstatement, that market is pretty much niche even on the DIY market.
Meh, happy with my 9700k. Besides they are still stuck with PCIe 3.0. So no super fast SSDs which a huge problem IMO. I will wait until a die shrink and then consider upgrading if it's needed. Considering I am playing at 4K resolution, I would stay with this CPU for several years.
Luckily for Intel, they manufacture CPUs for a full market spectrum and not just niche high end. For example i5-10600K is on par with 3900X in gaming for only a fraction of a cost, but you didn't mention that.
gotta also consider how crazy cheap ddr4 is right now. i cant imagine ddr5 being this affordable.
Can purchase 32GB ram for like 120.
Oh you're talking about the one with HBM on board. I guess that'll help but that would be a hell of a premium on a value CPU.
If you're talking about Adobe Premier, hasn't it gotten a lot better on AMD platforms lately? Otherwise, AMD is pretty clearly the best for video editing these days...
no point in Intel currently imo. they have chance when we jump to DDR5 but right now there is no logical reason to pick Intel over AMD currently. Performance difference are pointless. Value is better in AMD, and 4000 series will likely butcher these CPUs as well. Im hoping they sort themselves out and come out strong when DDR5 hits.
But... that's not what LinusTechTips review said, at all. They've spent like entire minute explaining that thermals are better than previous gen (9xxx).
Not meaning to offend but, that's quite the thing to think, you'd be willing to let life pass you and your loved ones by just to get future tech? maybe a therapist could be an option. Maybe your not serious dunno
Much as I've enjoyed my 3700/3900x experience, my usage is almost all gaming and no productivity work. If I was building a new PC today, I'd benefit more from going Intel. I never use stock cooling so AMD's included HSF is useful as a back-up only. As long as my case has adequate airflow and I use a decent motherboard, I don't have as much concern for the thermals after seeing these reviews. Honestly I expected less from this line-up, so I'm probably in the same boat as Linus.
Not meaning to offend, but I think maybe you're taking my obvious joke comment as an opportunity to make a passive insult. Maybe you're not. I don't know.
I understand that. I was more using it as an opportunity to point out that people waiting on PCIe 5.0 are probably going to be waiting a while.
The whole me wanting to skip ahead in time was more of a statement to myself with wanting MCM architecture in consumer GPUs.
Last edited:
At stock speeds, sure. But when you look at the voltages needed to hit 5.2GHz and the chip is pushing up past 300W at load it's a different story. Even if you're OC on a 3900X it stays well below 200W.