Intel's Comet Lake design changes will help keep their 5.3GHz i9-10900K cool

[WYP]

Intel has used some clever engineering to lower its Comet Lake thermals.



Read more about Intel's thermals-focused Comet Lake-S design changes.

 

[g0ggles1994]

Believe it when I see it, I'd suspect it would make heat worse since it compacts the heat source into a smaller area

 

[AlienALX]

More marketing pump.

Why didn't they do this years ago? like, when they were using paste because and I quote "We have no choice we can not solder the dies they are too small and prone to cracking" but soon figured it out when AMD released Ryzen?

Funny part is that most who would buy this would also delid. So they have removed that, better come up with some crap to get those people back.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsa4qqXjt5k

LOL

 

[AlienALX]

Not as high as I thought. Huge slap in the face for 9900k owners though, though at least the prices are heading in the right direction.

 

[WYP]

Not as high as I thought. Huge slap in the face for 9900k owners though, though at least the prices are heading in the right direction.

How is that a "slap in the face for 9900k owners". That CPU released in 2018. By that logic, every new processor is a slap in the face to anyone that bought the previous generation.

 

[dazbobaby]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agxSclh27uo

 

[looz]

Believe it when I see it, I'd suspect it would make heat worse since it compacts the heat source into a smaller area

Nah, lapping the die has been a legit way of improving thermals. Some previous gens have had overly thick dies and that has trapped the heat in.


This potentially makes delid benefits completely null, as with 9900k you can delid and lap it for a decent improvement.

 

[AlienALX]

How is that a "slap in the face for 9900k owners". That CPU released in 2018. By that logic, every new processor is a slap in the face to anyone that bought the previous generation.

Because they spent that much money on a CPU only to now have to buy a new board to take the next (small) step.

Sick of Intel changing boards all the damn time. Two years may seem like a long time, but what can they upgrade to? oh yeah, nothing.

In fact, the only difference on 490 is Wifi 6 support. Why on earth would you want a new board for that? Especially given Roman pointed out quite clearly today that 390 boards could have easily ran these CPUs. Why not launch these CPUs now on 390 instead of all of the "hoo har" and so forth and then when PCIE 4 might actually work release those CPUs on a new platform?

You know what? I don't care how good these CPUs are. I've learned my lesson very stiffly from Intel and their constant sodding socket changing. All it means is if you have a board failure your replacement options are used boards only, and they quickly become very expensive because people know you are screwed without them.

On AMD? hell, I could go and buy a cheap B450 board and be back up and running in no time.

Then let's not forget price. My X570 TUF 12 phase was £185. Not only does it actually support PCIE gen 4 but it also supports a 16 core CPU *and* overclocking that CPU. Let's see what these 490 boards cost huh?

I read a study lately that said in many cases manus make little to nothing from Intel boards. They literally just do it to stay current and big up their branding. Some AMD boards have been that way too, but only at the super high end. I would be very interested to get the figures on what Intel charges for chipsets and licensing VS AMD.

 

[looz]

^ Why would someone upgrade from 9900k, though? This new gen has only marginal gains over it. Unless they're doing some workloads which multithread well, in which case they probably should've gone with Ryzen anyway.

 

[AngryGoldfish]

Because they spent that much money on a CPU only to now have to buy a new board to take the next (small) step.

Sick of Intel changing boards all the damn time. Two years may seem like a long time, but what can they upgrade to? oh yeah, nothing.

In fact, the only difference on 490 is Wifi 6 support. Why on earth would you want a new board for that? Especially given Roman pointed out quite clearly today that 390 boards could have easily ran these CPUs. Why not launch these CPUs now on 390 instead of all of the "hoo har" and so forth and then when PCIE 4 might actually work release those CPUs on a new platform?

You know what? I don't care how good these CPUs are. I've learned my lesson very stiffly from Intel and their constant sodding socket changing. All it means is if you have a board failure your replacement options are used boards only, and they quickly become very expensive because people know you are screwed without them.

On AMD? hell, I could go and buy a cheap B450 board and be back up and running in no time.

Then let's not forget price. My X570 TUF 12 phase was £185. Not only does it actually support PCIE gen 4 but it also supports a 16 core CPU *and* overclocking that CPU. Let's see what these 490 boards cost huh?

I read a study lately that said in many cases manus make little to nothing from Intel boards. They literally just do it to stay current and big up their branding. Some AMD boards have been that way too, but only at the super high end. I would be very interested to get the figures on what Intel charges for chipsets and licensing VS AMD.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying, but it's far from impossible to find new and unused older boards. And realistically there's no reason to upgrade from a 9900K to a 10900K unless you're an absolute fan with spare cash. If you need the extra cores, buy a 3950X. A 10900K is just a slightly improved 9900K. That means, if you have a 9900K, don't bother upgrading unless you want to. If you need to upgrade, buy a 3950X.