Rumors of problems with regard to the TDP of the 9-10900K have not stopped growing, where leaks warrant further delays to overcome obstacles so far as not possible for stock CPUs. The output figure is between 300 and 305 watts when the processor charges under AVX instructions for all its cores.
But this fact could be far behind if, in the end, Intel is able to push AMD into multimedia, editing and video, to retain the crown of gaming performance. This seems likely, since data on the use of the i9-10900K against the Ryzen 9 3900X has been disclosed. Will you hit it?
3DMark is the first benchmark that offers good comparisons
The above shows two things clearly: first, that Intel provides everything with its process 14 nm ++, where TDP issues, if confirmed, are the point of criticism for a process that despite being reduced for more than 6 years, is not very appealing at the time.
Secondly, which even to the limit of its lithographic process, has been said to be ineffective, has discovered something that looked like a science fiction 3 years ago: put 10 cores over 5 GHz stock in full. Modesty doesn't take away the brave and far from criticism, it seems that, now, Intel can compete with the Zen 2 architecture.
Testing approved by the i9-10900K has been FireStrike and Time spy, for which he first gave a score on the Physics Score of 28462 points, while in the second he achieved 13142 points. Will it be enough to get up to the desired level as before and the processor passes smoothly on paper?
i9-10900K vs Ryzen 9 3900X: Intel is fast again. But what has been the result?
The Ryzen 9 3900X is capable of accomplishing 27137 points and 12624 points in one test and for one purpose, which leaves us with a difference of 4.88% on FireStrike and 4.10% during Test time you go to Intel.
Although the Ryzen 9 3900X gets 12 cores and 24 threads of 10 pounds and 20 strings for the i9-10900K, it should be noted that the Intel processor reaches a Turbo frequency of 5.1 GHz, which means 500 MHz higher than defined by AMD.
By way of comparison and a slight deviation from the comparison call, we found it interesting to compare the new 999K against distant competitors, i7-6950X
We took our CPU, moving it to the frequency limit (4.2 GHz) below the high prices shown by Intel and we decided to compare the same test categories:
As you can see, scores obtained with full overbacks were made 23849 points and 11152 points, leaving us with a 900 MHz low frequency difference difference + 19.34% and + 17.84% allowing a new 99,900900K.
To calculate the difference of 21.42% the frequency between both CPUs, one can say that the GAP between them is not as strong as one would expect. What is clear is that over the years Intel has taken this lithographic process and required a 10 nm high performance in the market as a liquid in May.
The Comet Lake-S looks like a good answer for AMD depending on the performance (at least for all the mature ones), they will have to see what it says and at what temperatures this 9-10900K will come.