Intel Core i5 10600K and Core i9 10900K Review

[tinytomlogan]

Finally it's launch day for the 10th Generation of Intel CPUs, and we have the 6C/12T i5-10600K and 10C/20T i9-10900K to show you.



Intel Core i5 10600K and Core i9 10900K Review

 

[Damien c]

Watching the review now, but cannot stop laughing and hoping the table doesn't collapse.


Think you need some sturdier tables Tom

 

[AlienALX]

Thanks very much for the written review Tom. I just read it all.

The 3900x dropped to £414 today with a cooler. Exactly what I guessed would happen. Prices on the 3950x haven't dropped at all, I kinda suspected that too.

 

[looz]

Glad to see the old 8700k is holding up well.
But on a more serious note, at least until 4th gen Ryzen, that's pretty hard to beat for a gaming setup.
Binning and the stock situation of 10900k makes me think of it as a halo product with pretty scarce availability.

 

[WYP]

I'm currently looking up ways that he can bolt those desks together to make it wobble less. Lol.

 

[23RO_UK]

My 3900X is 12 months old next month and that's Intel's great comeback is it?

It's my prediction the next gen of Ryzen will wallop the final nail in.

We just have to wait a few more months to see...

 

[Avet]

Fantastic review. But somehow no one is actually addressing one very important thing. In pretty much 100% of the time renders are done by the GPU. Adobe got an update for GPU render. No one in the right mind would use CPU over GPU render in Cycles, V-Ray, Octane, take your pick. In Blender, for example, Viewport performance is still heavily single-threaded and much better and smoother on Intel CPUs because of the high clock speed. Also in Maya and 3DS Max. Puget Systems is recommending 9900K for editing rigs because of viewport and workflow performance instead of multi-core monsters. Because rendering software scales almost perfectly with multi GPU even 9900K with 2x 2080Ti would be a better rendering machine than 3990X with a single GPU. So for Blender, because you render on GPU and not CPU, 10900K would be a better processor than 3900X or even 3950X just because you get better Viewport performance and smoother workflow. And when you need to render you just let CUDA do it.

In some cases like editing 4K and 8K video having 3970X or 3960 is really nice and much better, but for Blender and similar 3D modeling software, Intel CPUs are better.

It would be nice to mention this in reviews.

 

[WYP]

Fantastic review. But somehow no one is actually addressing one very important thing. In pretty much 100% of the time renders are done by the GPU. Adobe got an update for GPU render. No one in the right mind would use CPU over GPU render in Cycles, V-Ray, Octane, take your pick. In Blender, for example, Viewport performance is still heavily single-threaded and much better and smoother on Intel CPUs because of the high clock speed. Also in Maya and 3DS Max. Puget Systems is recommending 9900K for editing rigs because of viewport and workflow performance instead of multi-core monsters. Because rendering software scales almost perfectly with multi GPU even 9900K with 2x 2080Ti would be a better rendering machine than 3990X with a single GPU. So for Blender, because you render on GPU and not CPU, 10900K would be a better processor than 3900X or even 3950X just because you get better Viewport performance and smoother workflow. And when you need to render you just let CUDA do it.

In some cases like editing 4K and 8K video having 3970X or 3960 is really nice and much better, but for Blender and similar 3D modeling software, Intel CPUs are better.

It would be nice to mention this in reviews.

We are looking to change up how we do reviews, but we didn't have the time to revamp things before this launch. As far a video editing is concerned, Tom tests his own workflow, though we are looking into Premiere Pro testing and Davinci Resolve in the future. It will just take a little time to learn these things.

Hopefully we will have some interesting things for all of you when the next set of new processors launch.

 

[AlienALX]

My 3900X is 12 months old next month and that's Intel's great comeback is it?

It's my prediction the next gen of Ryzen will wallop the final nail in.

We just have to wait a few more months to see...

News low down is that "Your processor will remain top end for two years at least or more" regarding the 4000 series.

Meaning it will be faster than anything Intel make for everything, and we are about to enter a total dominance barren spell. I just hope AMD don't get too greedy with their prices because of it.

 

[Bartacus]

I just hope AMD don't get too greedy with their prices because of it.

We're past that IMO. Look at the price of the 3950X compared to the 3900X, look at current Threadripper CPU prices versus previous gen. They're not exorbitant Intel prices, but it's getting steep.

 

[fadingfool]

And I thought my i7-7820X was power hungry. Does the ring bus architecture cause any issues with 10 cores (traditionally Intel utilised the mesh architecture for higher core parts)? Wouldn't effect the gaming but could cause a few issues (increased core to core latencies) in production workloads?
Of course X299 offers a little more than just opportunities to have a high core count processor (more PCIe lanes, AVX512 etc) so whilst it isn't pretty to see the 10980XE being pushed by its little cousin, it had already been previously schooled by Threadripper (and to some extent Ryzen 3950X) from AMD.