Watched Harbour on Box first... learned all there is to learn about the new i9-10900K... watched over a dozen of other video’s... learned nothing new 🤪
The LTT video actually looks like fanboy nonsense compared to this. They even present the price per 1000 units in their price comparisons instead of the MSRP. It's looking pretty bad for LTT on this one.
Sure , if your mobo get some trouble such as chipset failure , buy a new mobo and put the old CPU. 😊 . With Intel , you will be forced to change the CPU together. I faced the damn issue 2 times . 😎
@@Demonkingx5 Not really, yeah okay it's not the top for gaming, but I think you'll find it performs quite alright, and will continue to do better as more new games optimise for heavy multicore usage.
It's not just 130 dollars more for the CPU... Its that + a 360 AIO ( another 160, Ryzen 9 come with usable coolers no need for AIO) + 100 dollars for Z490 motherboards (Ryzen can use an MSI B450 Tomahawk Max for 100 dollars for example) ... So in total is 300 - 400 dollas more expensive for a slower overall CPU !!!! You should have made this comparison this way !!!
At the time of premiere of intel in Poland i found the difference in price between the cheapest 3900x and 10900k is 35%. New i9 is priced in the half way from 3900x to 3950x exactly.
@@HenryTownsmyth the price comparison you're referring to is in AUSD (Australian dollars) the prices in US dollars or UK pounds are in the $512/£510 for Intel and $400/£400 for ryzen
Great job on the review Steve! I think we came to pretty much the same conclusions for this launch 😁 I am very curious about the "paper launch" part you mentioned though, it will be interesting to watch availability in the next few weeks
It's sad when I was more interested in the 3300X performance vs the 10900k. Guess it says it all when the benchmark of the 10900k is exactly what I expected month ago.
4 cores may be dead on desktop - but 8 threads aren't! If being the "gaming king" means having just over a 10% FPS advantage over a $130 4C/8T, then... well... congrats, I guess...??? I've always believed in buying the most cores that you can afford, and I'll continue to believe that; but the 3300x reminded me of how capable 8 threads really are, even if they're divided up across only 4 cores. I mean, this testing was with a 2080ti - you can LEGITIMATELY run the 2080ti with a $130 4C/8T CPU in 2020, and not feel like you're leaving much on the table.
really good point. $120 CPU just like 10% slower. Absolutely crazy. For the money saved going with 3300X you move up and entire GPU tier...maybe two. You could go 5700XT->2080 Super with the savings
Not really, it's just means that the software is lacking behind, like always. Which is why the whole extra core count on Ryzen hasn't been giving them the edge over existing cpu's like 6700k, ect. Intel was aware of this, which is why they kept us on quad core's for so long.
Look into memory tuning with the 3300x and it will rival even the top Intel CPUs, even if Intel CPUs get same memory tuning. (In games that doesn't take advantage of more cores) Here you will see the 3300x have the best WOW experience, even beating out OC 5ghz 9900k with tuned memory. th-cam.com/video/84OkOLzRPxY/w-d-xo.html
@TheGoat AMD midrange processors (like ryzen 5 1600af) are 12 threads and so cheap, you can't say about wasted money. Like you get these threads for free
Why buy a heater, when you can get the 10900K, heating and gaming all-in-one!! The perfect winter gaming machine and definitely anti-greenies! $$$ totally worth it!!
@@Alien8ed96 Yes it's well seated. Idle temp is 44 celsius. I'm just using a $20 cpu cooler at the moment. I used to have better cooling with custom loop but the pump is broken. Will go back to custom loop soon.
Luckily in northern Europe one needs heating for 98% of the time. I have electrical heating in my apartment so electric bill should remain pretty much the same ;)
Let's what big navi brings first, i heard that Nvidia is making last minute changes to their 3**** line up cause big navi is performing better than expected. tho the 3080 ti will probably come out on top any way xD
At 1440p 144hz your GPU will be a limiting factor anyway. Steve did the testing with an rtx2080ti (!!!) any GPU below that will bring the results closer to each other. If you have an Rx5700xt, gtx1080ti, rtx 2080, 2070 super, it's already limiting, regardless if you have a r5-3600 or 10900k ;)
200 watts at 4.9GHz. Holy smokes! When you're done testing the rest of the lineup, can we have a look at how hungry it gets when you manually overclock it? Maybe some comparisons to the 9590? :D Could also be interesting to see if it scales at all over the 9900K in games when pushed to the absolute limit. And it could be interesting to see how it performs with faster memory. If you're throwing around that much money for a CPU for gaming performance, then surely you'd opt for higher than 3200MHz. But again, I'm patient. Could just be interesting to see these kinds of tests in a week or two when your workload has decreased :)
I got tjr fx9xxx...ar 5Ghz. Way hotter and even more power usage. Reason? Same as Intel, look good or at least not as bad on paper. So another mostly paper launch.. essentially top of the bin, shaved cpu.
Tech deals has a test showing it was drawing 290watts at 5.1ghz. But on a 280mm it was at 101 celsius. Considering that even intel themselves suggest a 360mm, which arent....cheap..... NZXT one is $177.
@@cristiansori3366 ....who uses integrated graphics? you're spending 400 dollars on a processor, you're going to get a gpu anyway and using the igpu in your processor for a secondary monitor while you're gaming on a good gpu actually impacts gaming performance.
I9 10900K is the new FX 9590 Congrats Intel, now you have a good marketing for the 11th gen "Worlds hottest CPU in the world" 84 °C with a 360mm WC Impressive
It's not, the FX9590 was trash all around, you AMDidiots are hard fanboys, that CPU wasn't even the best in anything at all, was trashed by something like a 2700k with far less cores, so what's your point? If you compare core to core the 10900k smokes amd cpus, the only reason the 3900x wins is because of 2 more cores DUH! If it was a 10 core it would lose in the multi core as well so hard, so jokes on you my peanut brain friend.
@@AdiiS Well the Ryzen 9 3900x isnt a 10 core processor. It's really quite a dumb argument, I understand what you are trying to say but there is no point in trying to make that kind of comparison
I was laughing when you said "where the 10900K is very strong is single core performance" while that may be true, that's ironic for a 10 core $500 CPU!
It's not as unimportant as you might think. It's one of the things that make it so good at gaming. In the future with next gen gpus, the gpu bottleneck wil be smaller and the gap between i9 and ryzen 9 will widen.
@@Mandrag0ras you know that 10900k is just an extremely binned processor so it could run high on all cores with extreme temp and watt right? intel doesn't improve much on their design whatsoever, and when ryzen 4000 desktop series came, we'll soon see intel dropping their prices more and more (and that's actually a good thing right?) lmao....
I was simply hoping these new cpu's would lower prices across the board, but this is Intel, so I'm not surprised it didn't. I'm jsut gonna stick it out and see what the new gen consoles do to the market and new tech. 3700x is a great choice tho.
th-cam.com/video/84OkOLzRPxY/w-d-xo.html Take a look at unlocking the potential of the chip. Up to 20% more performance without overclocking, just memory tuning.
If its a Hardware Unboxed video, I will watch it. Even though I have zero intention of buying a 10th Gen Intel part. Just passing the time until Ryzen 4000 gets here.
I wouldn't suggest the chip in review fill the same kind of spot though. If a Ryzen 3600 has you covered for all your needs at a level satisfactory to you, then the 10900K (or the 9900K(S) for that matter) shouldn't really ever been up for serious consideration. IMO a more realistic potential alternative, is maybe the 10600(K)? That _seems_ to make more sense on paper at least...
these arent purely gaming GPU's and idk why some of you people keep doing this. for the last time, for the people in the back of the room. THE 3900X AND 10900K ARE NOT PURE GAMING CPUS! of course dont buy one if you dont need it for workload/editing type shit, that would be overkill and just gaming. anybody who suggest you need it for gaming is straight up full of shit and has no idea what their talking about.
@@turk88 Not really... but OEM's love them (due in large part to Intel paying them lots of money to favor Intel), and that's where the money is. There's also the "premium brand" image. It has been proven that inferior performing pre-built systems with Intel CPU's and Nvidia GPU's sell significantly better than superior performing pre-built systems with AMD CPU's and AMD GPU's, because even if it's not true in that specific case, the masses think AMD is the "cheap" brand.
@@turk88 linus is a CEO of a company not the typical gamer like those of us who watch these reviews and buy our parts. Might aswell ask boris Johnson what he thinks of them for about as relatable as they are.
in 2020 buying intel CPUs is beyond my understanding, I run an i5 9600k as I just game and on 4K but the next CPU will be AMD for sure seeing the current situation and facts...
Intel sent me a 10900k, that's right, I've got one. I'm currently using it to heat the house. Yes, 5.3 ghz eats 350watts, but I save money turning off my heater. It not a big deal because the human eye can't even see 350watts.
and you haven't even considered the power bill yet on this insanely desperate attempt to stay relevant. This isn't quite AMD's FX-9590 debacle... But it sure as hell has Vega 64 written all over it.
@@nottsoserious Yeah, and even the 3900X is a very poor value for a gaming CPU. Not even the 3700X is a good value for gaming either. A 9700K (or KF) is a better value than a 3700X IF gaming is the most demanding thing that you do, but that would only really make sense if you're pairing it with a 2080 ti, but that graphics card is a terrible value, and if you're buying a 2080 ti, you're probably also getting a 9900K or 10900K anyway. But, once Zen 3 and the next gen graphics cards come out, that's when people who bought the 2080 ti will really start to question their purchases (unless they're rich enough that it doesn't matter to them).
@@nottsoserious 10% is no joke but when youre already pushing way past playable framerates... that 100$ or more premium can go to other things like a better gpu, more ram, better mobo ect. by the time that 10% comes in to play in the future, youll have upgraded a long time ago. So unless its like 20% or more, its not worth it.
Take it from someone who ran a Xeon X5675 6c/12t @ 4.8GHz 1.46v for 3 years, CPU's that pull 300+ watts are no joke. Don't plan to keep it your bedroom, it's miserable. It's fine in the winter when you can crack a window, but during the summer you'll have the A/C cranked and it will destroy your power bill. After switching to Ryzen, my power bill has gone down $26 a month during summer. That extra 10 FPS is NOT worth it.
Just upgraded my i7 4790k to 3600x asus b450 F and crucial ballistix rgb 3200mhz ram for £370 while a 9900k costs £500 no wonder AMD are dominating the market
I can just picture Intel's Marketing dept now: "INTEL SMASHES OVER 10% FASTER IN (HERE). SMASHES AMD IN PERF! SMASHES AMD WITH WATTS! SMASHES AMD IN HIGH TEMPS! SMASHES AMD IN PRICE!" Intel Engineer: no sir, more temps and watts aren't a good thing, we need pretty extravagant expensive cooling too. If you have given us more time would could show you some real gai... Intel Marketing: what? its not a higher score? Pfft, I don't know, I don't know anything about computers! I used to work at corporate Circuit City! QUICK, PUBLISH, WE SMASH! GET PRINCIPLED TECHNOLOGIES ON THE PHONE!
That's kinda underwhelming. I was expecting it to match or even beat 3900X with that massive clock speed advantage, but well there's only so much you could get from 14++++++++.
It's exactly where I was expecting it to be, likewise its price being 25% higher than the 3900X, without a cooler. The clock is high, but AMD now has much better IPC, ie. at the same clock Zen2 is 13% faster (it's going to be a slaughter with Zen3, the unified cache and other changes will likely remove the final advantage Intel has long had in gaming). Pushing the clock ever higher also has decreasing returns, ie. each extra BIN level higher is an ever smaller percentage gain, at the same time pushing power through the roof, while needing a monster cooler to keep the thermals in check, on a more expensive mbd, all of which draws significant funds away from the GPU budget. Reviews tend to use the fastest GPU available, but in the real world people don't have infinite budgets, especially in the current economic climate. Within a year the market will have gone 4K mad because of the new consoles, then Intel's reliance on 1080p marketing will be dead. If Adobe actually got their thumb out their ass and updated Photoshop to be properly multithreaded then Intel would have nothing to point to at all (it's insane that an *image processing* app can't use multicore properly; GIMP supported this on ancient SGIs 20 years ago. :D)
I was on a 4790 build from 5 1/2 years, on Nov19 I upgrade to a 3600 build, best decision I ever made, for that time I know that my build needs to last at least 4 years. I Don't planning to upgrade when ryzen 4000 come out.
Yes. If you are already on Ryzen then it is Zen3 you should be waiting for. I am picking up an 4950x on release. I am happy for Intel gamers though, at least CPU prices will be lower for the 8 and lower core chips. And they do still game at high refresh rates very well. I think it is Intels 11th gen that will be their actual step back into competition. 10th gen is a stopgap (like Steve said). But so many of us are on Ryzen now, and with Zen3 on the way and looking to be a fantastic update to AMDs architecture, I don't see any Ryzen users jumping ship. Intel will need to release a very competitive 11th gen (and 12th gen) before I think anyone actually considers jumping ship. I am not dissing Intel or anything (nor AMD) I am just saying what I see and hear all the time. Ryzen really has taken over mind share that much. Intel really needs to get their new architecture out the door, and Intel also needs to work on their public image. I am really happy with Ryzen at the moment, 10th gen is not Intels new architecture and I will be picking up my 4950x, and that should keep me going for a few years. Hopefully Intel will be back and in competition fully by then. Even if someone never wanted to buy Intel again, it is still good for us consumers to have a competitive Intel spurring on tech advances and giving us an price war with AMD. AMD looks to sorted with Ryzen now (and AMDs CPU architects) and I know they will keep giving us excellent CPU architectures for years to come. I would like Intel to get back in the game and keep this market competitive.
Excellent video as always guys, really enjoyed it. And the only big surprise is that there were no big surprises, the test results were pretty much what I expected....
A cheaper CPU will always beat a more expensive one in price/performance. If we used this logic, we would all be silly to buy more than an Athlon 200GE, being that is has 4x the price/performance of a 3700x. You need to factor in the entirely of a system when making this calculation, otherwise, it means nothing.
@@moddedimlose Considering the 3700x does the job jsut fine and is far cheaper itself. Even the 3900x with two extra cores is a hundred dollars cheaper. But let's factor in the rest of the build. I can throw a 3700x onto a 50 dollar mother board, and use the inbox heatsink all while not burning my house down.
Still not with gaming. Is this a blender enthusiasts club, or do most of us here care about gaming? Thankfully AMD has come back from brink of collapse to bring some excellent competition. Finally , after 15 years or so...
"Intel 10th Gen Review: The Core i9-10900K is indeed the world's fastest gaming CPU " - PCWorld and all the others have followed suit. Unfortunately when buyers see that they will once again ignore the AMD options.
fredfinks The major issue you are conveniently overlooking is that AMD’s performance is actually competitive this time round. If you go for any AMD CPU, you’re not going to have a bad gaming experience whatsoever (unlike Bulldozer, which was terrible). Additionally, Zen3 is getting closer and closer to launch, and from everything that has been leaked so far the 10900k may not be on top of gaming for all that long.
Definitely looking forward to 10700k and 10600k reviews plus would be really interested in see the ~$200 Motherboard VRM Thermals too!! Great Work as Always Steve! 👍😎
This is literally the most unbiased 10900k review on TH-cam period. I'm an avid AMD user and love the price/performance and even though the 10900K does lead out the best of AMD's CPU "in gaming" and equal to AMD in others with the obvious no competition in multi threaded application I agree and feel like the truth is the truth. Thank You for always providing an in-depth and honest review as I've become accustomed to. No one these days or a very small user base "ONLY" play games on their PCs. Most will admit that they either Stream/Edit Photos or Videos on the same PC they game on. So to me.... Picking an AMD CPU is still going to be the smarter buy for your money IMHO.
Love mine though it does run hot without water cooling... Using both the full CPU and GPU on Folding@Home the CPU hits 83C! All fans (Noctua) running full speed.
Something really funny is how the 3900x will run all core at the same temps as the 10900k on the stock cooler included for free with the processor as the 10900k will do with a $150 water cooler. You will literally need to spend a minimum of $100 but likely $150 for the 10900k to stay under 90C. Combine this with the fact that the 3900x is $90 cheaper than the 10900k and the 3900x will be more then $200 cheaper then the 3900x including the cooler while *still* beating it in multicore performance.
Intel will be ready for AMD zen 4000 with rocket lake AMD will still and always loose to intel in gaming. So all u AMD fanboys just need to sit back and play ur cinabench while i go and play some real games
Great point Steve about having to pay $1000 for an Intel 10 core CPU just two years ago. Now Intel is releasing a faster CPU for less than half the price. What's more, if you genuinely need all those cores, even at that halved price Intel's option isn't really competitive. It's a similar story with their 18 core... despite a 50% price cut it's just not the best option for core heavy workloads.
You guys make some of the best videos. I think the only thing missed (might of been me) was that the Ryzen also has PCIE4.0 too (which I know isnt that important atm, but could be in the future).
Open TH-cam this morning, 10900K videos everywhere...scrolling/searching for HWB to watch the best one, thanks Steve! Also cheers for AUD PC Case Gear pricing, I know we make up a small percentage of your audience but love seeing what we need to pay here.
@Martin Naydenov they all 3000 series cpus but the 3900x isn't just a 2700x with 4 extra cores so it is very different intel 10th gen is the same as 9th and 8th and 7th just minor tweaks in between mainly core/thread changes Edit: I missed a generation 6th as well
psykosonikwarrior But that's pretty much the only major market that Intel still holds any kind of performance leverage, even without mentioning the absolute avalanche of security flaws and heating issues vs Ryzen.
Cheaper Noctua? Anywhere from 80 to 125... that is not cheap, cheap is 35 to 50... if you are getting this I9 10900 you need a very good cooler, a new very expensive motherboard, and a 2080TI to actually feel those 3 to 15% more framerates at 1080P... but obviously you will be playing at either 1440p or 4K, why in the heck will someone spend over 1K on a video card to play at 1080p?
Love this bruh. Ryzen 5 3600 is truly the gaming value king!! I love mines and I will wait patiently for the Ryzen 5 4600 whenever that comes out. lol. Intel is trippin' with some of these prices.
For me, I have a hard time knowing I am getting as much as 20%+ less out of my 1,000$+ GPU by using a 3800x for instance instead of a 10900k. While 9 out of 10 custom PC's are built for gaming, there is still quite a few people who are building one primarily for productivity work, so there is still plenty of incentive to use something like the 3900x, it is amazing performance per dollar.
Funny how time changes things. This past weekend I picked up an i9-10850K for $399. Micro Center had no Zen 3 CPU's and a few Ryzen 9 3950X models at $679.99. You don't need to overclock it to kick butt. It will run Cinebench R23 at 4.8GHz all cores with max temps in the mid-70's to low-80's on an air cooler. The multi-core score is 16,066. Most of the time the fan doesn't even run on the Notua NH_U12S when watching TH-cam or surfing the web. Needless to say I am very please with the 10850K.
So still slower in productivity, fractional gaming improvement at low res, massive power consumption increase. Whoopty do I guess. I3 i5 will be more interesting
@@jamzqool It`s very expensive to grow computing performance on smaller nodes at this point. Idk maybe they will go to 3D stacking or something but that is still many years down the road.
@@vlada881 i don't understand what you mean with your first sentence. i just know that as long as tsmc or samsung could keep improving their fab node to 5 and 3/4nm means that nothing could stop amd from improving in the next 10years or so...
I guess you are the only person Intel didn't pay off to overrate their new cpu's. The last youtuber I happen to watch about this and also the most reasonable. Was hoping INtel would price these properly but their brand name is too damn high I suppose. Gonna wait for Zen3 now, which is probably for the better. The way they are implementing tech from gaming consoles should be very interesting and worth the wait.
It is adorable that you think AMD includes that for free. You are absolutely paying for it, the cost of which is most certainly calculated into the MSRP. This is a frustrating thing for people who opt for 3rd party coolers, being forced to buy one you will not use. To praise a company for this is on the verge of a dystopian mentality. Furthermore, who the hell says you need to spend 150-200 on a cooler? Stop misleading people man, there is already so much misinformation.
@@moddedimlose Yes cost included in MSRP but in any case while comparing the cost of two product we should consider the cost of cooler as well because at end of day one need to spend additional money for it with Intel and which makes Intel even more expensive to own.
Here I am with a 6700k. Was at 4.2 @1.3v, but in the last month I put it at 4.7 @ 1.45 v (yea it's high and it varies. Still trying to get 4.8 but not sure I can). It's keeping up with 9900k and 10900k so I'm happy.
Except then sales would slump. Consumers will continue to buy new gens with incremental numbers. same reason stores rearrange their shelves and change the look of packaging periodically.
Ryzen 5 3600 - still best gaming CPU out there, for under 200 bucks. Steps for profit: Step 1 - oc and lock all cores at 4,1-4GHz at 1.325V max Step 2 - Get 32GB Corsair Vengeance 3200 CL16 for 140 Bucks and set D.O.C.P. Step 3 - oc the subtimings with Ryzen dram calculator (tons of guides on YT) = you get 95% performance in gaming of the this 500 dollar, 200W+ monstrosity you need a 360mm rad just for stock settings. Plus you save 4x on electricity and a 120mm cooler is enough.
Results as expected! , more cores : better and faster. More Threads: better performance too. That's the most expected and reasonable results, because this is a comparison between *16~12 Cores* vs *10 cores* , *16~12* Cores vs *8* cores in performance tasks. For games I find both brands so good, a very short FPS difference and I can increase FPS with a little touch of graphic settings, maybe I could decrease the CPU-tasks time depending motherb, RAM, temperature, OverC, as every brand says: _results may vary_ :D I will add 16 GB Optane.
What is it with so many buying new CPUs they don´t need? My neighbour is at 1440p and I really tried to explain that a new GPU would be considerably better than fundamentally changing his rig, he still went ahead and bought a new CPU. He had a 6700k like I do and now complains that the FPS gains are minimal, no shit Sherlock? If you are at 1440p and only game with a good CPU overclock there is very little reason to invest in a new one, better off looking at the GPU side of things. I guess he can browse 20 porn videos at the same time instead of only 10 now.
Because they are stupid and don't know better? Many are, sadly.. Bigger number, new and more is enough for most, bragging-rights and sheepish beveling marketing.. Same with many things today!
@@sebastian_hakansson78 They're not stupid man. That's a bit harsh. Some just love the technology and are always eager to be a part of this movement that they are so passionate about. I don't "need" Zen 3 but marketing and hype aside, there's this feeling inside that I usually try to resist that makes me want to own a piece of this elegant, refined piece of technology. Then there are those who aren't able to analyze subtleties in the data presented and make purchases based on their level of interpretation, understanding and bias. Not everyone invests the amount of time and energy studying these things as us enthusiasts do.
What I find most comforting, thanks to Steve's & Co. work, is that people, with a few rare exceptions, appreciate "value" more and more. I think this is what satisfies most. Well, that along with a few bucks in the pocket, I guess...
MCE: 10% more performance for just 60%+ more power.
Unlimited poweeeer
and price
you save money on heating during winter
just dont use it during summer without air conditioning
@@krugec23 You can always use it to heat up swimming pool or Jacuzzi :)
overclocking in a nutshell: useless
There are as many techtubers in my sub box as there are +'s in 14nm.
Wow how many subscription do u have dude?
@@marcos14223 As many as there are +'s in 14nm!
Intel’s stuck in 14nm so hard that they are back-porting Willow Cove (Rocket Lake) to 14nm node.
So four?
That's funny 😂
No need to watch anyone elses video, I'll hit this one up and go to bed 😌
Watched Harbour on Box first... learned all there is to learn about the new i9-10900K... watched over a dozen of other video’s... learned nothing new 🤪
Nah I have to give love to GN. Always watch others for more information.
The LTT video actually looks like fanboy nonsense compared to this. They even present the price per 1000 units in their price comparisons instead of the MSRP. It's looking pretty bad for LTT on this one.
Matthew Snelling LTT is fairly trash for any reviews.
The CPU Jarrod has been waiting for. 300w vs 65w comparisons incoming
Can Intel Beat AMD thumbnail.... imagine this 2 years ago
There's no "?" but a "!" ... 3600x vs 10600k
All this video taught me was that I could use my 2700x for like 4 or 5 more years easy
Sure , if your mobo get some trouble such as chipset failure , buy a new mobo and put the old CPU. 😊 . With Intel , you will be forced to change the CPU together. I faced the damn issue 2 times . 😎
Not if you got a 144hz monitor, that CPU is lacking in gaming.
@@Demonkingx5 Not really, yeah okay it's not the top for gaming, but I think you'll find it performs quite alright, and will continue to do better as more new games optimise for heavy multicore usage.
@@Demonkingx5 i ran a 165hz monitor for my 2700x, I don't see why it'd be a problem, ran my refresh rate easily.
Same here, got mine close to launch and got it to -0.1v and 102mhz bclk and as of right now see nothing that would change much for me.
i9 Kelvin Edition is here finally
10900 Kelvin
LOL
Naming scheme explained! It is the temperature!
Oh, so that's what the K means
Deep stuff
Like your profile pic xD!
It's not just 130 dollars more for the CPU... Its that + a 360 AIO ( another 160, Ryzen 9 come with usable coolers no need for AIO) + 100 dollars for Z490 motherboards (Ryzen can use an MSI B450 Tomahawk Max for 100 dollars for example) ... So in total is 300 - 400 dollas more expensive for a slower overall CPU !!!! You should have made this comparison this way !!!
👏👏👏👏👏 well said
Isn't it 230 USD more than the AMD competition? 777 vs 1000usd.
note that only the r9 3900x comes with one
but still
At the time of premiere of intel in Poland i found the difference in price between the cheapest 3900x and 10900k is 35%. New i9 is priced in the half way from 3900x to 3950x exactly.
@@HenryTownsmyth the price comparison you're referring to is in AUSD (Australian dollars) the prices in US dollars or UK pounds are in the $512/£510 for Intel and $400/£400 for ryzen
i9-10900K: exists
FX9590: Finally a worthy opponent
Jake Islavić lol
Their battle will be legendary!
@Cleezty its a joke about how much power it uses not performance
@Cleezty not sure if trollin' or fanboy af
@Cleezty The Ryzen 3000 serie is a year old and Intel beat Ryzen 3000......in power consumption, lol.
Still blows my mind how good of a value the Ryzen 5 3600 is at 175-200$
its a 160 where i live
It's 225 where I live.
Yeah also the 3700x i got mine for over 80 bucks off
3300x the same in games and price lower than 3600)))
my home is where i live
Great job on the review Steve! I think we came to pretty much the same conclusions for this launch 😁 I am very curious about the "paper launch" part you mentioned though, it will be interesting to watch availability in the next few weeks
It's sad when I was more interested in the 3300X performance vs the 10900k. Guess it says it all when the benchmark of the 10900k is exactly what I expected month ago.
4 cores may be dead on desktop - but 8 threads aren't!
If being the "gaming king" means having just over a 10% FPS advantage over a $130 4C/8T, then... well... congrats, I guess...???
I've always believed in buying the most cores that you can afford, and I'll continue to believe that; but the 3300x reminded me of how capable 8 threads really are, even if they're divided up across only 4 cores. I mean, this testing was with a 2080ti - you can LEGITIMATELY run the 2080ti with a $130 4C/8T CPU in 2020, and not feel like you're leaving much on the table.
@@RyTrapp0 good point right here gentleman
really good point. $120 CPU just like 10% slower. Absolutely crazy. For the money saved going with 3300X you move up and entire GPU tier...maybe two. You could go 5700XT->2080 Super with the savings
Not really, it's just means that the software is lacking behind, like always.
Which is why the whole extra core count on Ryzen hasn't been giving them the edge over existing cpu's like 6700k, ect.
Intel was aware of this, which is why they kept us on quad core's for so long.
Look into memory tuning with the 3300x and it will rival even the top Intel CPUs, even if Intel CPUs get same memory tuning. (In games that doesn't take advantage of more cores)
Here you will see the 3300x have the best WOW experience, even beating out OC 5ghz 9900k with tuned memory.
th-cam.com/video/84OkOLzRPxY/w-d-xo.html
Conclusion: instead of spending a lot of money on Intel 10xx, buy a Ryzen 3600 and invest the difference in a powerful GPU to run games at 1440p.
@TheGoat the same people who said we need more cores because Intel wasn't providing enough. Now you guys are suggesting less LOL
Yeah, and those poor bastards aren’t running out and buying a $700 GPU either.
Amen
@TheGoat AMD midrange processors (like ryzen 5 1600af) are 12 threads and so cheap, you can't say about wasted money. Like you get these threads for free
@@trcs3079 well, if you enjoy being charged $400 for 4cores you can still buy a 7700k.....
I think adding AMD Ryzen 9 3900X with PBO would be good choice, so it was easy to compare with Intel Core i9 10900K with MCE
Why buy a heater, when you can get the 10900K, heating and gaming all-in-one!! The perfect winter gaming machine and definitely anti-greenies! $$$ totally worth it!!
My 9900k already does that. It runs over 97 Celsius at stock clock while gaming.
Henry that does not seem normal for a stock 9900k. Is your cooler well seated ? Might wanna check that out.
I don't understand what you guys mean because i9 9900k gets better temps than the ryzen, wym??? Fan boys
@@Alien8ed96 Yes it's well seated. Idle temp is 44 celsius. I'm just using a $20 cpu cooler at the moment. I used to have better cooling with custom loop but the pump is broken. Will go back to custom loop soon.
@@Realmccoy614 Because I'm using a $20 cpu cooler?
"M C E - The BULLDOZER on your electricity bill !" 😂
Luckily in northern Europe one needs heating for 98% of the time. I have electrical heating in my apartment so electric bill should remain pretty much the same ;)
*speaks in Captain America*: I understood that reference!
@@razeel2000 😂
So no point in intel in 1440p. Got it.
Waiting for Ryzen 4000 and 3080 ti
Let's what big navi brings first, i heard that Nvidia is making last minute changes to their 3**** line up cause big navi is performing better than expected. tho the 3080 ti will probably come out on top any way xD
Don't even mention 4k
@@Leandro_SWR deadass???(
6950 x2 XT? :D
At 1440p 144hz your GPU will be a limiting factor anyway. Steve did the testing with an rtx2080ti (!!!) any GPU below that will bring the results closer to each other. If you have an Rx5700xt, gtx1080ti, rtx 2080, 2070 super, it's already limiting, regardless if you have a r5-3600 or 10900k ;)
200 watts at 4.9GHz. Holy smokes!
When you're done testing the rest of the lineup, can we have a look at how hungry it gets when you manually overclock it? Maybe some comparisons to the 9590? :D
Could also be interesting to see if it scales at all over the 9900K in games when pushed to the absolute limit.
And it could be interesting to see how it performs with faster memory. If you're throwing around that much money for a CPU for gaming performance, then surely you'd opt for higher than 3200MHz.
But again, I'm patient. Could just be interesting to see these kinds of tests in a week or two when your workload has decreased :)
I got tjr fx9xxx...ar 5Ghz. Way hotter and even more power usage. Reason? Same as Intel, look good or at least not as bad on paper. So another mostly paper launch.. essentially top of the bin, shaved cpu.
The FX9590 to see here would be awesome, we always say it's super hot but we never put it in one ring with modern hardware.
@@aitorbleda8267 did you have to resort to a custom loop to cool that monster?
Tech deals has a test showing it was drawing 290watts at 5.1ghz. But on a 280mm it was at 101 celsius.
Considering that even intel themselves suggest a 360mm, which arent....cheap..... NZXT one is $177.
@@CarbonPanther But that was a 8 core .5 thread processor not a 10 core 20 thread one
3900X is 25% cheaper, runs cooler, pulls less power, -5% avg at 1440p, much better at multitasking and decompression.
But it comes without integrated graphics😑
@@cristiansori3366 ....who uses integrated graphics? you're spending 400 dollars on a processor, you're going to get a gpu anyway
and using the igpu in your processor for a secondary monitor while you're gaming on a good gpu actually impacts gaming performance.
@@GeorgePerakis I'm pretty sure they're being sarcastic & joking.
@@snozzmcberry2366 if its a joke, its pretty dumb...
@@snozzmcberry2366 Doesn't matter, I've seen people make this argument with a straight face.
Intel still scores higher in the temperature by 20c, and power consumption by 90W!
AMD wont be able to beat that!
*FX-9590 has entered the chat*
lol
Biggerw number is better
I9 10900K is the new FX 9590
Congrats Intel, now you have a good marketing for the 11th gen
"Worlds hottest CPU in the world"
84 °C with a 360mm WC
Impressive
lol
It's not, the FX9590 was trash all around, you AMDidiots are hard fanboys, that CPU wasn't even the best in anything at all, was trashed by something like a 2700k with far less cores, so what's your point? If you compare core to core the 10900k smokes amd cpus, the only reason the 3900x wins is because of 2 more cores DUH! If it was a 10 core it would lose in the multi core as well so hard, so jokes on you my peanut brain friend.
@@AdiiS are you trolling?
@@AdiiS Well the Ryzen 9 3900x isnt a 10 core processor. It's really quite a dumb argument, I understand what you are trying to say but there is no point in trying to make that kind of comparison
@@AdiiS If the AMD CPU cucked itself down to Intel level indeed it would be the same but it isn't lol
I was laughing when you said "where the 10900K is very strong is single core performance" while that may be true, that's ironic for a 10 core $500 CPU!
single core doesent matter that much anymore for our luck. And on all instances it does, all the others are good enuf. cheers :)
It's not as unimportant as you might think. It's one of the things that make it so good at gaming. In the future with next gen gpus, the gpu bottleneck wil be smaller and the gap between i9 and ryzen 9 will widen.
@@Mandrag0ras you know that 10900k is just an extremely binned processor so it could run high on all cores with extreme temp and watt right? intel doesn't improve much on their design whatsoever, and when ryzen 4000 desktop series came, we'll soon see intel dropping their prices more and more (and that's actually a good thing right?) lmao....
@@Mandrag0ras and that i9 gap with r9 is watt and temp that keep rising and rising
@@Mandrag0ras the only thing is latency and the IPC 👑 zen 3 will take back you see Intel is pushing everything they got
FYI the first video i watch for 10900K review =). After watching it.. I'm proud of my Ryzen 3700X (USD 290) purchase for 1440p Gaming
Thats because the 3700x is an awesome CPU, you don't need to justify it to yourself or anyone else bud, no one will disagree.
I was simply hoping these new cpu's would lower prices across the board, but this is Intel, so I'm not surprised it didn't. I'm jsut gonna stick it out and see what the new gen consoles do to the market and new tech. 3700x is a great choice tho.
Always amazed to see the 9700k outperform the top chips in game benchmarks
Shame there no 9600k, which is great too. Can't wait to see 10600k.
That's just show Intel is stagnating if a previous gen still can be on top.
@@rushdrift Intel - making good CPUs which quite future proof.
AMDfanboy - it's stagnation.
@@rushdrift Oh absolutely they are behind now, specially with the new gen coming in.
Awesome coverage Steve, consumed it one go right away!
It's amazing that the 3300x is so fast in gaming, quite a bit faster than the classic 2600 even!
th-cam.com/video/84OkOLzRPxY/w-d-xo.html
Take a look at unlocking the potential of the chip. Up to 20% more performance without overclocking, just memory tuning.
For a split second I thought you were talking about the Atari 2600.
I was expecting so much more. I expected it to go toe toe with the 3950. I was surprised. AMD it is then.
It would then cost over $700.
@@Twongz_does_anything my 2700x was $150
@@Twongz_does_anything now let's wait 3700x vs 10700k comparison.
If its a Hardware Unboxed video, I will watch it. Even though I have zero intention of buying a 10th Gen Intel part. Just passing the time until Ryzen 4000 gets here.
I hope ryzen 4000 will be worth the wait
LMAO so true bro
Basically just get a 3600 and save them sweet pennies
3300 x is prob best choice
Yup and upgrade to Zen3 in two years when prices have fallen.
I wouldn't suggest the chip in review fill the same kind of spot though. If a Ryzen 3600 has you covered for all your needs at a level satisfactory to you, then the 10900K (or the 9900K(S) for that matter) shouldn't really ever been up for serious consideration. IMO a more realistic potential alternative, is maybe the 10600(K)? That _seems_ to make more sense on paper at least...
No save your self a month payment of an entire car
these arent purely gaming GPU's and idk why some of you people keep doing this. for the last time, for the people in the back of the room. THE 3900X AND 10900K ARE NOT PURE GAMING CPUS! of course dont buy one if you dont need it for workload/editing type shit, that would be overkill and just gaming. anybody who suggest you need it for gaming is straight up full of shit and has no idea what their talking about.
I would've felt bad for Intel had they not price-gouged the market for years.
But they had and everyone felt it.
Linus still loves them ..
@@turk88 Not really... but OEM's love them (due in large part to Intel paying them lots of money to favor Intel), and that's where the money is.
There's also the "premium brand" image. It has been proven that inferior performing pre-built systems with Intel CPU's and Nvidia GPU's sell significantly better than superior performing pre-built systems with AMD CPU's and AMD GPU's, because even if it's not true in that specific case, the masses think AMD is the "cheap" brand.
@@turk88 linus is a CEO of a company not the typical gamer like those of us who watch these reviews and buy our parts.
Might aswell ask boris Johnson what he thinks of them for about as relatable as they are.
@@praetorxyn I meant Linus from Linus tech tips , he made a video about it
@@tomstech4390 I meant Linus from Linus tech tips , he made a video about it
Amazon Uk Prices as of 20/5/2020. I910900K - pre-order at £637.98. Ryzen 9 3950X - £690.00. Ryzen 9 3900X - £414.98.
yeah i'll stick with my R7 3800X
in 2020 buying intel CPUs is beyond my understanding, I run an i5 9600k as I just game and on 4K but the next CPU will be AMD for sure seeing the current situation and facts...
Intel sent me a 10900k, that's right, I've got one.
I'm currently using it to heat the house. Yes, 5.3 ghz eats 350watts, but I save money turning off my heater. It not a big deal because the human eye can't even see 350watts.
lmfao
Still hilarious a year later lol. xD
Max 81c under load 5.2ghz all cores on a 280mm rad AIO..
200 watts.. 5.3ghz at 240 watts..
You don't have a clue what you're doing sport.
@ And you don't have the slightest clue that the op is a joke.
Understand the name, the over-exaggeration was not meant to be taken seriously.
The notification pop ups popping upping like crazy
just like pop popcorn poppin!
you can pinpoint the exact second the embargo lifts.
Im a 2600 owner and appreciate you adding it in the benchmarks :)
Haha same , got it for 120$ last year , good cpu for the price 😁
Well done Steve, this is honestly the best review I've seen today, keep it up.
I have no critique, 10/10 from me.
Room heating included 👍👍👍
You buy intel and get steam room for free
Let me get this straight: You can pay way more to get a CPU that is almost as powerful as a 3900x (that you can have for way less money)...
And about 10% faster at gaming for 60% more power consumption
and you haven't even considered the power bill yet on this insanely desperate attempt to stay relevant.
This isn't quite AMD's FX-9590 debacle... But it sure as hell has Vega 64 written all over it.
@@nottsoserious Yeah, and even the 3900X is a very poor value for a gaming CPU. Not even the 3700X is a good value for gaming either. A 9700K (or KF) is a better value than a 3700X IF gaming is the most demanding thing that you do, but that would only really make sense if you're pairing it with a 2080 ti, but that graphics card is a terrible value, and if you're buying a 2080 ti, you're probably also getting a 9900K or 10900K anyway. But, once Zen 3 and the next gen graphics cards come out, that's when people who bought the 2080 ti will really start to question their purchases (unless they're rich enough that it doesn't matter to them).
@@nottsoserious 10% is no joke but when youre already pushing way past playable framerates... that 100$ or more premium can go to other things like a better gpu, more ram, better mobo ect. by the time that 10% comes in to play in the future, youll have upgraded a long time ago. So unless its like 20% or more, its not worth it.
Imagine playing on 1080p with 2080ti.
That's sad overall. I just can't stop thinking at how ryzen 4th gen will do in production software and gaming.
I wonder how well it'll do. Good thing I didn't upgrade yet.
I can't stop thinking about Ryzen 4th gen pricing implications of Intel 10th gen sucking.
Intel just slapped 2 extra cores onto a 9900k and called it a day. This is really disappointing. AMD are here. I’m really glad I got myself a R5 3600.
@@mix3k818 me too, and mainly I haven't upgraded to 3rd gen because I've got my 2600 last year in may.
@@MegaElitez there are some improvements here and there with 10900k, but overall isn't impressive. At least we can't call it DOA.
Take it from someone who ran a Xeon X5675 6c/12t @ 4.8GHz 1.46v for 3 years, CPU's that pull 300+ watts are no joke. Don't plan to keep it your bedroom, it's miserable. It's fine in the winter when you can crack a window, but during the summer you'll have the A/C cranked and it will destroy your power bill. After switching to Ryzen, my power bill has gone down $26 a month during summer. That extra 10 FPS is NOT worth it.
Dude even my lil bro who use an FX 8320 feels hot I can't imagine people who use 300watt PC would feel like.
I always watch Hardware Unboxed reviews first. You guys are the best! And your graphs have the most appealing visual style too :)
I'm amazed with how ryzen 3300x is so powerful and is competing most high end processors
Just upgraded my i7 4790k to 3600x asus b450 F and crucial ballistix rgb 3200mhz ram for £370 while a 9900k costs £500 no wonder AMD are dominating the market
I can just picture Intel's Marketing dept now:
"INTEL SMASHES OVER 10% FASTER IN (HERE). SMASHES AMD IN PERF! SMASHES AMD WITH WATTS! SMASHES AMD IN HIGH TEMPS!
SMASHES AMD IN PRICE!"
Intel Engineer: no sir, more temps and watts aren't a good thing, we need pretty extravagant expensive cooling too. If you have given us more time would could show you some real gai...
Intel Marketing: what? its not a higher score? Pfft, I don't know, I don't know anything about computers! I used to work at corporate Circuit City! QUICK, PUBLISH,
WE SMASH! GET PRINCIPLED TECHNOLOGIES ON THE PHONE!
😂😂😂😂👌🏼
*only gaming perf
@@andymath89 *and compared with older gpu (if you get the joke)
As far as I can see Intel beats the shit out of amd with temps...
Your benchmarks are always so easy to comprehend and still in depth. Your's and Optimum Tech's are my absolute favorites at the moment.
That's kinda underwhelming. I was expecting it to match or even beat 3900X with that massive clock speed advantage, but well there's only so much you could get from 14++++++++.
It's exactly where I was expecting it to be, likewise its price being 25% higher than the 3900X, without a cooler. The clock is high, but AMD now has much better IPC, ie. at the same clock Zen2 is 13% faster (it's going to be a slaughter with Zen3, the unified cache and other changes will likely remove the final advantage Intel has long had in gaming). Pushing the clock ever higher also has decreasing returns, ie. each extra BIN level higher is an ever smaller percentage gain, at the same time pushing power through the roof, while needing a monster cooler to keep the thermals in check, on a more expensive mbd, all of which draws significant funds away from the GPU budget. Reviews tend to use the fastest GPU available, but in the real world people don't have infinite budgets, especially in the current economic climate.
Within a year the market will have gone 4K mad because of the new consoles, then Intel's reliance on 1080p marketing will be dead. If Adobe actually got their thumb out their ass and updated Photoshop to be properly multithreaded then Intel would have nothing to point to at all (it's insane that an *image processing* app can't use multicore properly; GIMP supported this on ancient SGIs 20 years ago. :D)
@@mapesdhs597 From what I've seen or heard Zen 3 is looking at 4.6Ghz plus Ipc, cache and instruction improvements.
@@mayumikentei Daaaaaaamn
Thanks guys for including the Ryzen 5 2600 as well!
I dont see the point of getting a 10900k, the 3900x can be had for a much lower price, and is the overall better performer.
My 3900x watched this review in disbelief at 10900K and it's on air ! (noctua though)...
Especially since in a few months the 3900x is going to be slashed in price
I was on a 4790 build from 5 1/2 years, on Nov19 I upgrade to a 3600 build, best decision I ever made, for that time I know that my build needs to last at least 4 years. I Don't planning to upgrade when ryzen 4000 come out.
Zen 3 waiting room! I don't see the point buying these cpus looking at all this data
Agree! Waiting for zen 3 ^_^
I'd said wait for zen3, but with the virus situation now, I'm not sure when they'll be released. Maybe R5 3600 is the way to go
Yes. If you are already on Ryzen then it is Zen3 you should be waiting for. I am picking up an 4950x on release. I am happy for Intel gamers though, at least CPU prices will be lower for the 8 and lower core chips. And they do still game at high refresh rates very well. I think it is Intels 11th gen that will be their actual step back into competition. 10th gen is a stopgap (like Steve said). But so many of us are on Ryzen now, and with Zen3 on the way and looking to be a fantastic update to AMDs architecture, I don't see any Ryzen users jumping ship.
Intel will need to release a very competitive 11th gen (and 12th gen) before I think anyone actually considers jumping ship. I am not dissing Intel or anything (nor AMD) I am just saying what I see and hear all the time. Ryzen really has taken over mind share that much. Intel really needs to get their new architecture out the door, and Intel also needs to work on their public image.
I am really happy with Ryzen at the moment, 10th gen is not Intels new architecture and I will be picking up my 4950x, and that should keep me going for a few years. Hopefully Intel will be back and in competition fully by then. Even if someone never wanted to buy Intel again, it is still good for us consumers to have a competitive Intel spurring on tech advances and giving us an price war with AMD.
AMD looks to sorted with Ryzen now (and AMDs CPU architects) and I know they will keep giving us excellent CPU architectures for years to come. I would like Intel to get back in the game and keep this market competitive.
@@onlylonly888 amd latest statement on b450 support, they did say coming later this year. The problem might be availablity
Excellent video as always guys, really enjoyed it. And the only big surprise is that there were no big surprises, the test results were pretty much what I expected....
With two extra cores it still doesn't beat price to performance against AMDs two less cores for a much cheaper price.
A cheaper CPU will always beat a more expensive one in price/performance. If we used this logic, we would all be silly to buy more than an Athlon 200GE, being that is has 4x the price/performance of a 3700x. You need to factor in the entirely of a system when making this calculation, otherwise, it means nothing.
@@moddedimlose Considering the 3700x does the job jsut fine and is far cheaper itself. Even the 3900x with two extra cores is a hundred dollars cheaper. But let's factor in the rest of the build. I can throw a 3700x onto a 50 dollar mother board, and use the inbox heatsink all while not burning my house down.
Appreciate all the hard work that you did to have these numbers . Thank you so much .
AMD's favorite position is clearly, on top..
Still not with gaming. Is this a blender enthusiasts club, or do most of us here care about gaming? Thankfully AMD has come back from brink of collapse to bring some excellent competition. Finally , after 15 years or so...
"Intel 10th Gen Review: The Core i9-10900K is indeed the world's fastest gaming CPU
" - PCWorld and all the others have followed suit. Unfortunately when buyers see that they will once again ignore the AMD options.
@@fredfinks by 5 - 10 fps lol
Intel will always be on top for gaming.. but for price and all round amd is king. Nice to have some balance
fredfinks The major issue you are conveniently overlooking is that AMD’s performance is actually competitive this time round. If you go for any AMD CPU, you’re not going to have a bad gaming experience whatsoever (unlike Bulldozer, which was terrible). Additionally, Zen3 is getting closer and closer to launch, and from everything that has been leaked so far the 10900k may not be on top of gaming for all that long.
Definitely looking forward to 10700k and 10600k reviews plus would be really interested in see the ~$200 Motherboard VRM Thermals too!! Great Work as Always Steve! 👍😎
nah, no thanks intel, to much watt and thermal!! (like old amd)
love your benchmark as always!!
This is literally the most unbiased 10900k review on TH-cam period. I'm an avid AMD user and love the price/performance and even though the 10900K does lead out the best of AMD's CPU "in gaming" and equal to AMD in others with the obvious no competition in multi threaded application I agree and feel like the truth is the truth. Thank You for always providing an in-depth and honest review as I've become accustomed to. No one these days or a very small user base "ONLY" play games on their PCs. Most will admit that they either Stream/Edit Photos or Videos on the same PC they game on. So to me.... Picking an AMD CPU is still going to be the smarter buy for your money IMHO.
3900X looking real good right about now
If your workload is primarily productivity related, it is definitely the choice.
Love mine though it does run hot without water cooling... Using both the full CPU and GPU on Folding@Home the CPU hits 83C! All fans (Noctua) running full speed.
And again I am impressed by the high thoroughness of your review. It’s why I come
back to this channel every time.
So, whos ready for ryzen 4000
Thank you for this fantastic review, Mr. Steve.
Something really funny is how the 3900x will run all core at the same temps as the 10900k on the stock cooler included for free with the processor as the 10900k will do with a $150 water cooler. You will literally need to spend a minimum of $100 but likely $150 for the 10900k to stay under 90C. Combine this with the fact that the 3900x is $90 cheaper than the 10900k and the 3900x will be more then $200 cheaper then the 3900x including the cooler while *still* beating it in multicore performance.
Yes, plz test vrm thermals on all the price tiers like you did for x570. That would be nice!
Did anyone else catch the "gaming happens with Intel" it'll be awkward if ryzen 4000s beats intels
Intel will be ready for AMD zen 4000 with rocket lake
AMD will still and always loose to intel in gaming.
So all u AMD fanboys just need to sit back and play ur cinabench while i go and play some real games
@@lldjslim Fanboy detected.
@@lldjslim wow
@@lldjslim on your mother's money, because you are just a useless who don't work,
@@RahulJha-mc6nz
Wrong I'm at work now
Nice to see raw numbers and deep comparison
Thank you alot
Great point Steve about having to pay $1000 for an Intel 10 core CPU just two years ago. Now Intel is releasing a faster CPU for less than half the price. What's more, if you genuinely need all those cores, even at that halved price Intel's option isn't really competitive. It's a similar story with their 18 core... despite a 50% price cut it's just not the best option for core heavy workloads.
It’s a gaming CPU
You guys make some of the best videos. I think the only thing missed (might of been me) was that the Ryzen also has PCIE4.0 too (which I know isnt that important atm, but could be in the future).
Alternative marketing slogan:
The fastest gaming CPU for game settings you likely won't use.
i mean if you want the best of the best it's there, and if you want high res gaming Intel is better
@@hwstar9416 what are you talking about? High res is gpu limited, not cpu limited
Really? 1080p is the most commonly gamed at resolution, by far. Just check the Steam hardware survey. 1080p 144hz/240hz monitors are terribly popular.
I just wanted to say that I think having Tim read your ad spot (and vice versa) works really well to break up the content!
Do some z490 vrm test, just like you did with the b450 and x570 boards. So we can chose the best and " cheap" z490.
Open TH-cam this morning, 10900K videos everywhere...scrolling/searching for HWB to watch the best one, thanks Steve!
Also cheers for AUD PC Case Gear pricing, I know we make up a small percentage of your audience but love seeing what we need to pay here.
Intel you can't be serious? This is literally slapping 2 cores on a 9900k. This is just embarrassing now.
What did you expect? Intel has been slapping extra cores on skylake for a while.
Martin Naydenov but that’s within one generation, this is supposedly two separate generations of products.
It's not even better in gaming, what a waste
@Martin Naydenov they all 3000 series cpus but the 3900x isn't just a 2700x with 4 extra cores so it is very different intel 10th gen is the same as 9th and 8th and 7th just minor tweaks in between mainly core/thread changes
Edit: I missed a generation 6th as well
psykosonikwarrior But that's pretty much the only major market that Intel still holds any kind of performance leverage, even without mentioning the absolute avalanche of security flaws and heating issues vs Ryzen.
Thanks for your hard work Steve.
And congrats for 500k subs.
The 10900k is NOT $500 if it takes a $150+ 360mm AIO to cool it enough for it to run as advertised.
I don't think this fact is emphasized much.
Hardware unboxed improved a lot they are the first I check.
Keep up the good job.
But how far can it go with a cheaper noctua heatsink? A 360mm is like another $130.
🔥 🔥 🔥 hazard!!
Cheaper Noctua? Anywhere from 80 to 125... that is not cheap, cheap is 35 to 50... if you are getting this I9 10900 you need a very good cooler, a new very expensive motherboard, and a 2080TI to actually feel those 3 to 15% more framerates at 1080P... but obviously you will be playing at either 1440p or 4K, why in the heck will someone spend over 1K on a video card to play at 1080p?
@@portedbikes 10600k ?
Love this bruh. Ryzen 5 3600 is truly the gaming value king!! I love mines and I will wait patiently for the Ryzen 5 4600 whenever that comes out. lol. Intel is trippin' with some of these prices.
Guessing Asus will be pushing a bios update soon for the MCE boost? I, personally, see no reason to go Intel over AMD at this point.
For me, I have a hard time knowing I am getting as much as 20%+ less out of my 1,000$+ GPU by using a 3800x for instance instead of a 10900k. While 9 out of 10 custom PC's are built for gaming, there is still quite a few people who are building one primarily for productivity work, so there is still plenty of incentive to use something like the 3900x, it is amazing performance per dollar.
Funny how time changes things. This past weekend I picked up an i9-10850K for $399. Micro Center had no Zen 3 CPU's and a few Ryzen 9 3950X models at $679.99. You don't need to overclock it to kick butt. It will run Cinebench R23 at 4.8GHz all cores with max temps in the mid-70's to low-80's on an air cooler. The multi-core score is 16,066. Most of the time the fan doesn't even run on the Notua NH_U12S when watching TH-cam or surfing the web. Needless to say I am very please with the 10850K.
Definitely interested in the Z490 motherboard testing ☺️
Holy power usage Batman!
I just want the best for gaming and VR. I don’t plan on running productivity benchmarks.
3:50 is exactly why I watch and recommend your videos more than anyone else's.
So still slower in productivity, fractional gaming improvement at low res, massive power consumption increase.
Whoopty do I guess. I3 i5 will be more interesting
@Coronavirus you mean Alder Lake in Q4 2021. Rocket Lake will be on 14nm too.
@@vlada881 dayummm q4 2021?! zen3 will melt intel's pricing more and more, lol
@@jamzqool wouldn't zen 4 becoming out by then to AMD isn't letting up like they back in the day they knew where they went wrong with
@@jamzqool It`s very expensive to grow computing performance on smaller nodes at this point. Idk maybe they will go to 3D stacking or something but that is still many years down the road.
@@vlada881 i don't understand what you mean with your first sentence. i just know that as long as tsmc or samsung could keep improving their fab node to 5 and 3/4nm means that nothing could stop amd from improving in the next 10years or so...
Thanks for your hard work Steve 👍
Mid parts gonna be more interesnting than this Core iMeh 10900K. Anyway, AMD still looks sooooo good.
Totally honest review. Well Done!
Does it come with a fire extinguisher? This is a need to know type thing.
That delicious, delicious B-Roll. A Hardware Unboxed specialty!
Yoooo everyone uploaded at the same time good thing I clicked you first!
Finally I found someone actually test CPUs by compiling code, not just gaming.
7:18
10900k and Corona fits very well these days. Disease all over the place ~.~
I guess you are the only person Intel didn't pay off to overrate their new cpu's. The last youtuber I happen to watch about this and also the most reasonable. Was hoping INtel would price these properly but their brand name is too damn high I suppose. Gonna wait for Zen3 now, which is probably for the better. The way they are implementing tech from gaming consoles should be very interesting and worth the wait.
And Gamers Nexus
You forget one important point Ryzen also come with free cooler. And for Intel you need to pay additional 150 ~ 200 USD.
It is adorable that you think AMD includes that for free. You are absolutely paying for it, the cost of which is most certainly calculated into the MSRP. This is a frustrating thing for people who opt for 3rd party coolers, being forced to buy one you will not use. To praise a company for this is on the verge of a dystopian mentality. Furthermore, who the hell says you need to spend 150-200 on a cooler? Stop misleading people man, there is already so much misinformation.
@@moddedimlose Yes cost included in MSRP but in any case while comparing the cost of two product we should consider the cost of cooler as well because at end of day one need to spend additional money for it with Intel and which makes Intel even more expensive to own.
Here I am with a 6700k. Was at 4.2 @1.3v, but in the last month I put it at 4.7 @ 1.45 v (yea it's high and it varies. Still trying to get 4.8 but not sure I can). It's keeping up with 9900k and 10900k so I'm happy.
You know they could just rest a year so they could work up their 7 or 10nm
Or 5 honestly. They really need to catch up.
Except then sales would slump. Consumers will continue to buy new gens with incremental numbers. same reason stores rearrange their shelves and change the look of packaging periodically.
Ryzen 5 3600 - still best gaming CPU out there, for under 200 bucks.
Steps for profit:
Step 1 - oc and lock all cores at 4,1-4GHz at 1.325V max
Step 2 - Get 32GB Corsair Vengeance 3200 CL16 for 140 Bucks and set D.O.C.P.
Step 3 - oc the subtimings with Ryzen dram calculator (tons of guides on YT)
= you get 95% performance in gaming of the this 500 dollar, 200W+ monstrosity you need a 360mm rad just for stock settings.
Plus you save 4x on electricity and a 120mm cooler is enough.
Finnally a TH-cam tech channel i can trust
Hardware unboxed
Results as expected! , more cores : better and faster. More Threads: better performance too.
That's the most expected and reasonable results, because this is a comparison between *16~12 Cores* vs *10 cores* , *16~12* Cores vs *8* cores in performance tasks. For games I find both brands so good, a very short FPS difference and I can increase FPS with a little touch of graphic settings, maybe I could decrease the CPU-tasks time depending motherb, RAM, temperature, OverC, as every brand says: _results may vary_ :D I will add 16 GB Optane.
What is it with so many buying new CPUs they don´t need? My neighbour is at 1440p and I really tried to explain that a new GPU would be considerably better than fundamentally changing his rig, he still went ahead and bought a new CPU. He had a 6700k like I do and now complains that the FPS gains are minimal, no shit Sherlock?
If you are at 1440p and only game with a good CPU overclock there is very little reason to invest in a new one, better off looking at the GPU side of things. I guess he can browse 20 porn videos at the same time instead of only 10 now.
Because they are stupid and don't know better? Many are, sadly..
Bigger number, new and more is enough for most, bragging-rights and sheepish beveling marketing.. Same with many things today!
@@sebastian_hakansson78 They're not stupid man. That's a bit harsh. Some just love the technology and are always eager to be a part of this movement that they are so passionate about. I don't "need" Zen 3 but marketing and hype aside, there's this feeling inside that I usually try to resist that makes me want to own a piece of this elegant, refined piece of technology. Then there are those who aren't able to analyze subtleties in the data presented and make purchases based on their level of interpretation, understanding and bias. Not everyone invests the amount of time and energy studying these things as us enthusiasts do.
What I find most comforting, thanks to Steve's & Co. work, is that people, with a few rare exceptions, appreciate "value" more and more.
I think this is what satisfies most.
Well, that along with a few bucks in the pocket, I guess...