News Intel 10th Gen Comet Lake-H Arrives With Up to Eight Cores at 5.3 GHz

[Admin]

Intel whipped the covers off its Comet Lake-H series of chips that will tackle Ryzen 4000

Intel 10th Gen Comet Lake-H Arrives With Up to Eight Cores at 5.3 GHz : Read more

 

[salgado18]

5.3 GHz sound nice, but the base clocks compared to Ryzen 4000 may tell the real story. Until 10nm, Intel will only have its brand name and leverage among OEMs to fight.

 

[irish_adam]

the gaming benchmark chart is disgusting, the new laptop has the latest generation Nvidia GPU while the old one has the last generation. The jump in performance in those charts has nothing to do with the CPU and its shameful, pinch of salt

 

[RodroX]

Well I guess this article is informative, but for the moment its just that. Unless you are able compare laptops of similar weight, size and TDP configurations, and so the whole media can bring thier own result numbers too then all you have is what Intel said.

Intel numbers, as AMD, Nvidia, and the likes have to be (always) taken with a grain of salt.

 

[jeremyj_83]

"Intel also brought its Core i7 lineup to a maximum of eight cores and sixteen threads with the -10750H " according to the chart the 1075H & 1085H are 6c/12t. The only i7 that is 8c/16t is the 1075H

 

[jeremyj_83]

the gaming benchmark chart is disgusting, the new laptop has the latest generation Nvidia GPU while the old one has the last generation. The jump in performance in those charts has nothing to do with the CPU and its shameful, pinch of salt my ass

Even the i7-10750H has a better GPU, 2070 Super, than the test i7-7700HQ. GTX 1080. As you said the added performance has nothing to do with the CPUs and everything to do with the GPUs being much faster. While it is nice that they included the configurations, I wish that companies would put the configurations before the benchmarks instead of at the end of the slide deck.

 

[jeremyj_83]

5.3 GHz sound nice, but the base clocks compared to Ryzen 4000 may tell the real story. Until 10nm, Intel will only have its brand name and leverage among OEMs to fight.

Outside of bursting workloads, I feel the new i9-10980HK will be slower overall than the Ryzen 9 4900H/S. With the Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 review, we saw a Dell XPS 15 with a i9-9980HK end up being a bit slower than the 4900HS. The only difference between the 9980HK & 10980HK is +300MHz boost and 2933MHz RAM vs 2666MHz RAM. When looking at that review in regards to the 20x Cinebench R20 runs, which shows sustained clock speed and performance, we see that the 4900HS ended with an average clock speed of just 3.1GHz; that is only 100MHz above its base clock which likely doesn't speak well for the i9 either. We already know that the current generation Core draws more power and creates more heat than Ryzen. That is probably why "Intel also divulged that the -10980HK offers an all-core boost of 4.4 GHz and several of the chips have a configurable TDP that peaks at 65W. Peak power (PL2) weighs in at 135W." At the peak PL2 you will burn through your battery in a matter of minutes.

 

[Dragonking_1]

"Intel also brought its Core i7 lineup to a maximum of eight cores and sixteen threads with the -10750H " according to the chart the 1075H & 1085H are 6c/12t. The only i7 that is 8c/16t is the 1075H

Its the i7-10875H that is 8c/16t, other than the 10980HK.

 

[PaulAlcorn]

"Intel also brought its Core i7 lineup to a maximum of eight cores and sixteen threads with the -10750H " according to the chart the 1075H & 1085H are 6c/12t. The only i7 that is 8c/16t is the 1075H

Oops, thanks for the heads up. fixed.

 

[jeremyj_83]

Its the i7-10875H that is 8c/16t, other than the 10980HK.

Whoops, missed a number in my statement. Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[JamesSneed]

First they compared to three year old part the i7-7820HK which is just trying to game results.

Second there is no way we see laptops with these boosts. See this from Ian at Anandtech. There is virtually no way a laptop maker will implement a PSU capable of producing the amperage needed.

"It does mean that in order to hit 5.3 GHz, the Core i9 is by default allowed to take 135 W across two cores, or 67.5 W per core. Even at 60W per core, you're looking at 50A of current per core... in a laptop. "

 

[grimfox]

Gonna play devil's advocate and probably get some gnarly downvotes for it. 3 years is about the upgrade cycle on a laptop. So marketing could make the argument that buying a laptop now would get you about a 25% improvement. If you are in the market. Which if you have a 3 year old laptop, you would more likely to be interested in these new laptop processors.

It's not a great argument and as others have pointed out it's absolutely riddled with holes. And I'm not sure many people in the market would be interested in intel as a source of data. They would be more likely to checkout Best Buy or look for reviews of the laptop directly. Rather than a announcement from Intel.

But yeah, it's been a long time since there has been honesty in marketing.

 

[bit_user]

@PaulAlcorn , the headline:

Intel Comet Lake-H Fights AMD's Ryzen 4000 With Eight Cores at 5.3 GHz

...makes it sound like this thing will have an all-core turbo of 5.3 GHz. I know that's not what you intended to imply.

 

[TCA_ChinChin]

@PaulAlcorn , the headline:

...makes it sound like this thing will have an all-core turbo of 5.3 GHz. I know that's not what you intended to imply.

Unless it was what Paul was trying to imply...

 

[salgado18]

Unless it was what Paul was trying to imply...

... but probably wasn't.

I think the headline should be:

Intel Comet Lake-H Fights AMD's Ryzen 4000 With Eight Cores at 2.4 GHz during winters

 

[JamesSneed]

@PaulAlcorn , the headline:

...makes it sound like this thing will have an all-core turbo of 5.3 GHz. I know that's not what you intended to imply.

Likely won't have a 5.3 GHz single core boost in 99.9% of laptops. You need 67.5 watts per core to pull that off.

 

[jgraham11]

Wow its not even close: I saw a few reviews, not Tom's, about the Asus G14 with the Ryzen 4800HS (a 35W
CPU), it destroyed the 9880H (a 45W CPU) in most workloads. In some reviews they had to crank the
9880H to 90W to be comparable with the AMD chip in actualy workloads like Handbrake, blender, 7-Zip, etc.

With the integrated graphics beating everything Intel has and even beating the Nvidia MX250.

Here is a pic from Techspot where they lowered the 45W TDP of the Intel chip to 35W for an Apples to Apples comparison:

Do they really expect the 10980, an almost identical chip to compete with this?

This reality is known to Intel as this is why Intel didn't compare their product to the competition, they compared it to a chip 3 generations old... Let the slaughter continue!

 

[hotaru251]

"boost clock" is pretty irrelevant...99% of time your cpu will not be at those speeds (especailly in a laptop)

real use case will likely have amd winning in most situations while also beng more energy efficient (and lasting longer on battery)

and im someone who uses an intel pc. (though tbh its old and i am just waiting for ryzen 4000 desktop to come out cause im annoyed at intels lack of improvements)

 

[mdd1963]

I'm looking forward to 4000 desktop CPU numbers, as compared to current gen of CPUs, especially if coincident with next batch of GPUs!

9900K/2080Ti and 3080Ti vs. 10900K/2080Ti and 3080Ti, and, then the same comparisons with 3800X/3900X upgrades/equivalent 4000-series...

Good times coming, we hope!

My poor 3-year old 7700K/GTX1060 combo might soon be relegated to just surfing! (which, sadly, is 90% of it's duties anyway, truthfully!)

 

[Deicidium369]

10nm has been shipping for quite a long time - got my 2 Dell 13 2-in-1s back in October with Ice Lake... So the idea that 10nm is not shipping is false. Process apparently does not matter to the market - AMD has yet to get any traction at all with their supposed "Superior Product" - all those extra useless cores are like fart cans on Hondas - serve no real purpose (outside 1-2% of the market, unless all you do is run benchmarks, rather than actually use the PC).

I will stick with my i9900K (5Ghz on all 8 cores on air) and dual 2080Tis until something much better comes along. Comet Lake is not for me, Rocket Lake will most likely be my next upgrade - would probably coincide with the new Nvidia GPU launch. Enjoy this "Netburst 2020" event, the new Core is coming - and history will once again repeat itself.

 

[Deicidium369]

Wow its not even close: I saw a few reviews, not Tom's, about the Asus G14 with the Ryzen 4800HS (a 35W
CPU), it destroyed the 9880H (a 45W CPU) in most workloads. In some reviews they had to crank the
9880H to 90W to be comparable with the AMD chip in actualy workloads like Handbrake, blender, 7-Zip, etc.

With the integrated graphics beating everything Intel has and even beating the Nvidia MX250.

Here is a pic from Techspot where they lowered the 45W TDP of the Intel chip to 35W for an Apples to Apples comparison:

Do they really expect the 10980, an almost identical chip to compete with this?

This reality is known to Intel as this is why Intel didn't compare their product to the competition, they compared it to a chip 3 generations old... Let the slaughter continue!

And which slaughter is that? The one where Intel is making record profits on record revenue quarter after quarter and AMD is saying that Q12020 will be somewhat less than Q42019... I see you using those words, but I don't think you know what they mean. In business only 1 metric matters - Revenue. Not what the "Tom's Hardware Shillcorps" have to say, or even the Anandtech, LTT, Greasy Steve and WCC... Rabid AMD fans tend to be broke which amazingly enough doesn't translate into many sales...

I have built systems based on the 1800, the 2700x and just got my 3950X - the 1800 was given away to friends, the 2700X has a gigabyte 5700XT and the 3950X has the Vega VII... good systems, not nearly enough to dislodge my i9900K/dual 2080TI game rigs.

The Cascade Lake are as different from the Whisky Lake as the Gen 2 and 3 Ryzens are from the 1st gen Ryzen. Ryzen is nothing but small iterative changes - the move the "7nm" hasn't made much of a difference - little to no OC ability since the manufacturing is so janky that they have to ultra bin everything just to get usable parts... At some point the treasure chest that Jim Keller left is pretty much depleted...

My engineering workstations moved to Xeon when the Xeon Scalable series was released - all dual socket (single CPU installed on most) - each with a RTX6000 and back ended by 2 16GPU Nvidia DGX systems. We had auditioned the 2nd gen Turdripper and it was just that - ZERO ISV optimizations, janky memory access and godawful performance. TBH if the Xeon W with 28 cores had been around would have run with that over the more expensive Xeon multi socket CPUs... but you get what you need when you need it - cost was not even in the top 5 considerations.

So keep armchair quarterbacking a game you don't even play in - would wager you are on the 1st gen ryzen wth grandiose visions of upgrading to the 3990X...

 

[bit_user]

Unless it was what Paul was trying to imply...

Paul's articles are some of the deepest and most comprehensive on this site. I haven't seen him give in to the temptation of click-baiting, so I presume that was not his intent. Ultimately, I guess either time (or Paul) will tell.

 

[bit_user]

"boost clock" is pretty irrelevant...99% of time your cpu will not be at those speeds (especailly in a laptop

I don't know if you even want it boosting like that, in a laptop!

I was given a heavy, maybe 9-pound laptop to work from home, and it has some serious cooling + a 45 W Intel CPU. One of the first things I did was change the plug-in power profile, because it was so annoying when the fans would spin up past the first few steps. And my employer has so much "security" crap running in the background that it just does it randomly and inexplicably.

 

[bit_user]

10nm has been shipping for quite a long time - got my 2 Dell 13 2-in-1s back in October with Ice Lake... So the idea that 10nm is not shipping is false.

You're responding to whom? Yes, we know Ice Lake laptop CPUs have been out there, for a while.

AMD has yet to get any traction at all with their supposed "Superior Product"

There's a wave of Ryzen 4k APU-based laptops coming, in case you haven't been following the headlines closely. At 7 nm, they're finally getting competitive.

I will stick with my i9900K (5Ghz on all 8 cores on air) and dual 2080Tis until something much better comes along.

???

Do you also lease a new car every 2 years?

If I had a setup like that, I'd probably keep it for a minimum of 5 years, no matter what launches this year or next. I'm still on a Sandybridge and GTX 980 Ti. I can afford to upgrade, but I have better things to do with my $$$ until my current setup no longer meets my needs.

In truth, I almost pulled the trigger on a Xeon E-2288G (basically, a lower-clocked i9-9900KS), but decided to hold off a bit longer. I almost jumped on a Ryzen 3k, but held back, partly over the clock speed controversy. I like what Intel is now doing with more PCIe connectivity, which makes me very interested to see how Rocket Lake pans out.

Enjoy this "Netburst 2020" event, the new Core is coming - and history will once again repeat itself.

Sorry, which is Netburst 2020? You mean Comet Lake?

 

[bit_user]

We had auditioned the 2nd gen Turdripper and it was just that - ZERO ISV optimizations, janky memory access and godawful performance.

Yeah, 2nd-gen TR was just weird. Especially the ones with > 16 cores. 3rd gen is really the first one they got right.