News Intel: Yes, There Will be 10nm Desktop CPUs (Upd)

[Admin]

A rumor emerged on Monday that Intel might have no plans at all for desktop processors on 10nm, and would bring 7nm to the desktop in 2022. However, Intel refuted the rumors and says its 10nm roadmap still includes desktop products.

Intel: Yes, There Will be 10nm Desktop CPUs (Upd) : Read more

 

[Olle P]

So 7nm is going to be late as well...

Relevant questions:
1. Will there be 10nm desktop CPUs (from Intel)?
Official answer: Yes!
2. What type will those be?
Speculation in the article: We don't know if it's NUC, HEDT and/or regular CPUs.
3. When will they be available?
My speculation: Way too late to meet the competition?

 

[GetSmart]

Here is an initial sign of Intel's (10nm) Jasper Lake, that could also qualify as desktop CPUs as well. The only other possibility are those 65W Intel Tiger Lake chips.

 

[McGaz]

Hmm. These time frames seem a bit too long to wait for my computer rebuild! I'll have to see how these 10 series perform.

 

[mitch074]

Hmm. These time frames seem a bit too long to wait for my computer rebuild! I'll have to see how these 10 series perform.

Or maybe have a look at the competition? Or do you have a "Intel Inside" tattoo on your left buttock that prevents you from owning anything that isn't Intel-powered?

 

[McGaz]

Or maybe have a look at the competition? Or do you have a "Intel Inside" tattoo on your left buttock that prevents you from owning anything that isn't Intel-powered?

I waited for and watched the AMD Ryzen launch and it was good that they took a big step to catch up to Intel, but that's all they did. Intel's individual core speeds are still better (Better for gaming), but they managed to get more cores/threads.

I would have bought then if they'd overtaken Intel's top chip but, despite the improvements in the Ryzen 9 chips, they're still not better than the 9900K at gaming and I don't create videos or anything that would require the extra cores.

Since it was just a catch-up to a year old chip, I thought I'd see what happens next. Hoping for a smaller process on the chips would give (hopefully) a significant improvement, but 2021 is too long to wait, so "I'll have to see how these 10 series perform".

That wasn't so hard was it?

 

[mitch074]

I waited for and watched the AMD Ryzen launch and it was good that they took a big step to catch up to Intel, but that's all they did. Intel's individual core speeds are still better (Better for gaming), but they managed to get more cores/threads.

I would have bought then if they'd overtaken Intel's top chip but, despite the improvements in the Ryzen 9 chips, they're still not better than the 9900K at gaming and I don't create videos or anything that would require the extra cores.

Since it was just a catch-up to a year old chip, I thought I'd see what happens next. Hoping for a smaller process on the chips would give (hopefully) a significant improvement, but 2021 is too long to wait, so "I'll have to see how these 10 series perform".

That wasn't so hard was it?

Thing is, even in gaming now Ryzen works the same or better than Intel - only the 9900 chips work better, and that's because they clock much higher. So, except if you can spend 550+ on the CPU alone, a chip like the 3600X wipes the floor with Intel's equivalent in games.
And the benchmarks are out for the 10th generation Intel: it works marginally better and is quite cheaper, but clocks the same - which probably means price cuts on Ryzen soon.

 

[joeblowsmynose]

Intel's individual core speeds are still ... (Better for gaming)

Ahhh ... you have a 2080ti, a 9900k and play at 1080p with a 244hz monitor? In that select scenario ... then yes. Have you ever tried to notice the difference between 230fps and 244fps? Is there a difference to your eyes? Between 144 and 244 maybe ... but not the difference in what the CPU makes.

If those aren't the hardware and settings scenario you game with, then the GPU will be bottlenecked - not the CPU. So the CPU at that point makes no difference. I think it was Anand that had 4K cpu numbers and the R7 1800x was actually ahead of the 9900k in most scenarios - only by margin of error (<5%) but ti just shows thw CPU doesn't really make any difference when the GPU is the bottleneck.

But if you just say ... "I always just want Intel ", without trying to justify it will be a little less like a grasp at that last straw. Especially in for in the near future.

Adobe+Quicksync is an actual reason to stick with Intel ... if you are a heavy Adobe user.