Comet Lake Core i9-10900T CPU at 35 Watt rating hits 123 watts in Sandra benchmark
Click here to post a comment for Comet Lake Core i9-10900T CPU at 35 Watt rating hits 123 watts in Sandra benchmark on our message forum
bobblunderton
...and so they haven't named this Lava Lake yet, why?
It's definitely looking to be Lava Lake to me if THAT is the low TDP version.
Hope the rather useless noisy cooler they include is made of something that doesn't melt easily. Aluminum might not cut it at the rate they're going.
Undying
Imagine the 10900k, thats 200w chip easy.
cryohellinc
Gaming Chillers - Soon from Corsair.
nevcairiel
Is it still not globally understood by now that Intel TDP is designed at base clock, not turbo? Its the amount of cooling they require to guarantee operation without throttling the base clock. Turbo will *always* overshoot that.
kakiharaFRS
looks like it's a fail bin underclocked 10900 or something, why did they think that would magically make them 35watts, who knows
my 9900k stock (so 4.7 all cores stock) was around 120W if memory serves but udnerclocked to 4.1 it dropped to 60W i'm not incredibly surprised by 125w at 4.5Ghz
amd 3xxx threadripper stock easily go to 280+Watts overclocked 340+ watts
whatever you think is hot at Intel you have no idea what TR is like but it has 2x-3x the cores without 2-3x the watts, that's the thing
UnrealGaming
I mean... TDP is usually about thermals. Which is wasted electricity. Photons not hitting the electrons they should be hitting, but going perpendicular and leaking out as heat. Maybe only 35W ( or some typical % of that ) worth is leaking out on average, so its a cooling solution spec.
Silva
So, I guess the i9 10900K with 125TDP will top at 439 Watts. Glad I went with AMD in this one!
UnrealGaming
Peak boost isn't that much higher than 10900T. So, probably wont pull 4x more power at peak vs 10900T at peak lol
BLEH!
So slower, hotter, and more expensive than AMD *again*... :P
schmidtbag
Am I the only one who thinks 125W is reasonable for all 10 cores to be running at 4.8GHz? I assume this is also a 14nm part.
Sure, this isn't great. Intel does need to step up their game. But it's not that bad.
JamesSneed
Agree. Plus if you know how Intel rates TDP's and all of the engineers making laptops, desktops etc do, then you know you can't correlate it to actual power draw. Personally I think Intel and AMD should have an actual power draw rating to end everyone discussing TDP's. It would be the layman's technical spec so to speak vs the engineers tech spec for TDP's.
Webhiker
The way TDP is used is just wrong in every aspect.
6 Core i5, 8 core i7 and 10 core i9 all with the same 125W TDP.
Sure they have different base and boost clocks, but i9 have the highest boost clock,
but still the same TDP. Makes no sense at all the way TDP is used.
The Thermal Design Power is the maximum amount of heat generated by a computer chip.
When using real applications so how does the i3's have the same TDP when running with different all core clocks ?
An i3 with an all core clock of 4.1 GHz generates just as much heat as one running 4.4 GHz ? They have the same TDP.
Edit
Yes I know Intel list TDP for base clocks
Alessio1989
I really doubt that a cooler meant for a 35W TDP is enough. Intel on TDP is simply fraudulent.
TLD LARS
I am having trouble with finding the same test in Sisoft Sandra 2020 downloaded from Guru3d.
The interface does not look the same.
nevcairiel
Efficiency rises quite rapidly with lower frequency, its not linear, so it'll keep its base-clock just fine. You could limit the CPU to 35W and see how it clocks, everything else is only hoping that the boost algorithm works fine, but there has been no evidence to suggest otherwise.
Kool64
couple more security holes should bring it down a notch.
ruthan
Intel is going this for last of two years, because its performance is no worse that AMD, they are not more respecting old TDP sense logic, to make their CPU looks better. Its simple like that..
Do you remember their workstation cpu with bundled fridge presentation fail?
H83
I agree with you but the problem here is the TDP bs. Is extremley misleading and Intel knows that very well but they insist on rating their CPUs as being extremely power eficient when they are not that good. Like others wrote before, this should be forbidden.
UnrealGaming
As its already been pointed out ( and as stated on Intel's page about TDP ), the TDP number, is actual power draw, for a CPU running at base clocks, under typical loads. Since there's so many different scenarios ( different Turbo clocks, different workloads ) it does seem almost impossible to publish a number for every single one. But maybe they should at least have a ballpark Peak number as well.
Sixtyfps
Will intel be making a new chipset ? or will be ok with Z390 boards ?
