1. OCAU Merchandise now available! Check out our 20th Anniversary Mugs, Classic Logo Shirts and much more! Discussion here.
    Dismiss Notice

10th gen Intel Desktop Comet Lake CPU(i9 10900K, i7 10700K, i5 10600K, i3 10320 & Z490)

Discussion in 'Intel x86 CPUs and chipsets' started by Azzan, Dec 30, 2019.

  1. OP
    OP
    Azzan

    Azzan Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2009
    Messages:
    2,650
    Location:
    Melbourne
    coolroy and JSmithDTV like this.
  2. shane41

    shane41 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    6,541
    Location:
    dice que no sabe
    Ha. :thumbup: Why am I not surprised. Previous processors are puny in size and have to dissipate a ton of heat.
    You see the 12 core part dissapear. Was there ever one? Now the 10 core part. Shrink the processor to maximize profits and now they feel the penalty.

    Penalty that is AMD with multiple processors under the IHS hood. Cooling easier with a much larger surface area.
     
  3. demiurge3141

    demiurge3141 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2005
    Messages:
    1,949
    Location:
    Melbourne 3073
    Eh you got it the other way around. Intel's problem is they are not able to to shrink their processors.
     
  4. shane41

    shane41 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    6,541
    Location:
    dice que no sabe
    That too. :D Warehouses are empty of the good stuff. Jim Keller will be busy making more parts for us to abuse
     
  5. Strik3r

    Strik3r Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2002
    Messages:
    253
    Location:
    Brisbane
    I'm building 2 new pc's for friends/family this week. Mostly gaming PC's, no other regular workloads beyond general pc use. When assessing the mid-range market, I chose the 9600k over the ryzen 3600x. After you budget in a cooler for the intel, the price is pretty much identical (intel can be cheaper if you go for a cheaper cooler or more expensive if you go for something a bit more hefty).

    The intel's lack of hyper threading on the 9600 seems meaningless in a 6 core system for gaming use, and knowing most users simply aren't doing regular multi-threaded workloads, i'm not really sure where the perceived better value for money with AMD is for most people at the moment.

    It is good to see them applying pressure though - will force intel to keep prices more competitive.
     
  6. OJR

    OJR Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2013
    Messages:
    4,615
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Why not the 3600? Cheaper and has HT. And when you factor in the cooler needed for Intel chip, the Intel is more expensive.

    http://staticice.com.au/cgi-bin/search.cgi?q=ryzen+3600&spos=3
    http://staticice.com.au/cgi-bin/search.cgi?q=intel+9600k&spos=3

    Also have a look at some benchmarks, HT does make a difference in games.
     
  7. darkbastard

    darkbastard Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    682
    Location:
    Duranbah - near Kingsclif


    Worth a look as it includes 9600k numbers as well as 9400F.

    It was some time ago and new bios updates will have helped the AMD chip oossibly to a greater extent than the Intel.

    Interestingly the 8700k with HT usually outdoes the 9600k.......
     
  8. Strik3r

    Strik3r Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2002
    Messages:
    253
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Mostly because the 3600 (non X) comes with a smaller cooler and lower clocks, and the 200mhz deficit will have a small impact in gaming performance. If I have to then buy a better cooler so I can OC it, I'm undoing the price advantage.

    The reviews I read (https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3489-amd-ryzen-5-3600-cpu-review-benchmarks-vs-intel) seems to have the intel winning nearly every gaming benchmark, though admittedly its fairly close (few %).

    I guess I went with the devil I knew. Like I said, I'm all for competition and in productivity workloads, the new ryzen's are destroying the intels. For these 2 systems, it was only for gaming, so I'm reasonably happy with the choice.
     
  9. OJR

    OJR Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2013
    Messages:
    4,615
    Location:
    Melbourne
    The stock AMD cooler on the 3600 is actually quite competent. I wouldn't change it.
     
  10. jpw007

    jpw007 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2008
    Messages:
    4,039
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Did i miss some CJ antics?
     
    Hive likes this.
  11. Hive

    Hive Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2010
    Messages:
    5,944
    Location:
    AvE
    I'm afraid so, his recent alt account has been removed.
     
  12. JSmithDTV

    JSmithDTV Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    6,735
    Location:
    Algol, Perseus
    Yep... was WhtPwRanger or something.


    JSmith
     
  13. Elyzion

    Elyzion Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2004
    Messages:
    7,329
    Location:
    Singapore
    Overclocking. Meh. I used to do that but now-a-days it’s not worth it. I have a 3700x now. Run it with box cooler and just set windows to performance mode so it doesn’t down clock so far. And thats it. Plays everything in 1440p that I throw at it. If I got 10fps extra on Intel I wouldn’t notice it as I’m already in the 100s.
     
  14. flu!d

    flu!d KDE Neon 5.16

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    16,429
    It seems he missed us and came back for a brief visit. ;)
     
  15. vid_ghost

    vid_ghost Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2010
    Messages:
    2,143
    LOL.. so you purchased a 9600 that is the same price but slower in games and much slower in everything else all while using more power and producing more heat... :) GOOD JOB!! you need to educate yourself.. intel only make hot overpowered trash these days and the only thing worth buying is the 9900k and even then its only for 240Hz 1080P Pro gamers who need every FPS they can get... once resolutions go higher then 1080P then any good CPU works fine and its all about the graphics card.

    Hardware unboxed had the 3600 winning
     
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2020
  16. Strik3r

    Strik3r Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2002
    Messages:
    253
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Hello little child, when the adults are talking, please stay quiet until you learn how to properly participate in a conversation. You are the AMD version of CJ (and that is not a good thing).

     
  17. OJR

    OJR Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2013
    Messages:
    4,615
    Location:
    Melbourne
    He is 100% correct though, in a very condescending kind of way.
     
  18. Strik3r

    Strik3r Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2002
    Messages:
    253
    Location:
    Brisbane
    See, when you say silly things like '100% correct' you invalidate the majority of your argument before you even begin.

    Lets break it down shall we ?

    As per my 2nd post on the matter, the reviews I read (and linked! had the 9600 ahead by ~5+% on most games. Obviously there are reviews out there that will put the 3600 winning slightly, showing that motherboard choice, bios settings and game selection probably play a significant factor. The advantage the 3600 has in other workloads is acknowledged but irrelevant as they will never be done on these systems.

    I have built literally hundreds of computers. I was likely working as a PC tech building computers before this kid went through puberty. I have a PhD in Computer Science. I research into artificial intelligence and robotics. I've owned both Intels and AMDs in the past. I had an AMD 2400+ Thoroughbred running a stupid 7000rpm 80mm delta fan on an nearly 1kg heatsink so I could overclock it to about ~2.5ghz back in 2003. I also did a reasonable amount of reading when coming up with the decision. So yea, I consider myself educated.

    These kind of absolute statements are easily debunkable. There are plenty of Intel products that are still great choices and it entirely depends on the use case. If I was building a system for myself at the moment, I would probably have a hard time choosing between the 9700 or a 3700 because my main use of the performance aspect of my PC is gaming and the single core performance of the 9700 is going to give me slightly better performance in games, and I already have aftermarket watercooling, so the $50 price difference is neither here nor there. The performance of the 9700 vs 9900 in games is almost identical (particularly if you bump the 9700 up 100mhz), so if you think the 9900 is a valid choice, I'm not sure why you would rule out the 9700.

    Anyway, my days of writing long posts debating with kids on the internet are long in the past, I only commented in this thread to say that I was hoping for either 5-10% more performance or 5-10% lower cost from the AMD to swing me around.

    Both systems now built and running, both people very happy!
     
  19. OJR

    OJR Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2013
    Messages:
    4,615
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Since you were concerned about value.

    [​IMG]
     
  20. Strik3r

    Strik3r Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2002
    Messages:
    253
    Location:
    Brisbane
    But those prices aren't accurate at all....

    From umart, the 9600kf is $289, the 3600 is $315

    After you factor in $30-$50 for a cooler, there is $10-$20 in it. There are budget coolers that would do the job at $20 that would have the Intel work out $5 cheaper if you wanted to be pedantic about it, but 1 of the systems already had a cooling solution from a previous build, the other I recommended a medium range air cooler for.

    To be clear, I am not (and never was) arguing that the AMD chips are no good or don't represent reasonable value. I said that for these 2 systems I am building that only have gaming as a meaningful workload, the 9600kf seemed to be the (albeit slightly) better fit.

    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page

Advertisement: