Slightly lower turbo, and lower price.

That really is a slightly lower price. For 10 euros on a 500 euro + buy, maybe take the extra 100mhz?

Intel must have a lot CPU`s not making the grade so give them an extra letter and knock of $10.00. This is starting to get ridiculous.

K I A series. hmmmm

So we will have 10xxx 10xxx k/kf/f/ka Jesus 😛

Intel this days, lol

Kick my Farkin Arse! <- version will be released eventually. I also see this as pointless.

going to start needing an intel dictionary soon to tell us what all the letters mean 😀 But seriously I find it hard to believe they need a new chip because of 100mhz? So same chip we not have the Non-K, the K, the F, the KF and now the KA With many chips making zero sense, KF the no iGPU but can overclock is £20 less in the UK making it useless, Least the F is a good £130 pound less making it somewhat appealing to people who dont need an iGPU and maybe dont care for overclocking at all. (unsure if you can do all core turbo overclock on these? Someone might know if that is possible or not)

Intel can keep their CPU's with the prices they're asking where i live their entire lineup averages around 100$ cad and even more as u get to the 10900k and 10700k.

jbscotchman:

And not a single frack will be given by any respective PC gamer.

oh really? Why is that? Gamers that you know game want the best gaming performance something AyMD and their fake boost cant provide. Its Intel and only Intel. AyMD is for people that rar all day

MegaFalloutFan:

oh really? Why is that? Gamers that you know game want the best gaming performance something AyMD and their fake boost cant provide. Its Intel and only Intel. AyMD is for people that rar all day

Intel gamers = 1080p gamers 600$ cpu and 100$ monitor. 1440p is for amd pussies.

Undying:

Intel gamers = 1080p gamers 600$ cpu and 100$ monitor. 1440p is for amd pussies.

You have nothing to be proud about, The only reason AyMD is somewhat valid for 1440p and 4K gaming is due to GPU bottlenecking, as 720p and 1080p proves, when there is no GPU bottlenecking, Intel is undeniable leader. With new Faster NVIDIA GPUs incoming, Intel lead will widen, the faster the GPU the better for Intel CPUs.

It also doubles as an electric griddle for those who need to save space.

While I have a 3950x and before that a 3700x (the 3700x is sitting on the desk waiting to go in a second build), I am thrilled for even the slim chance of competition. When AMD and intel are gunning for another, there are no winner except those building or buying PC's. With AMD I don't have to worry about another game running in the background while I am doing something productive for a bit, or my countless different production software all running at once slowing down real-time previews on an in-game editor. Gamers should buy the 10600k or 10700k/10900k (or various f or a-suffix versions) if they want to overclock and invest in a serious gaming machine. However, how many folks will spend 1000~2000$ to game only at 1080p? How many folks will genuinely overclock the processor? If you plan to leave it stock you might as well save a bunch and get a processor from AMD as you might never notice the differences without the numbers in your face. Sure, this isn't the case for 'hardcore fps multiplayer gamers', but with the money you save by buying AMD, you can go to a real range and learn to protect your REAL life. That said, there's no denying intel is faster in 1080p games - just as there's no denying that the AMD chips can render and work very well in production environments. It's all in what you need to do, and what your budget is, or how thrifty of a spender you are. Some people live their life on loans but manage to still have nice things even if they truly belong to the bank. Other people have a ton of liquid assets and can afford to spend good money on parts and not bat an eyelash. Others have their car and house paid off before they retire because they always went for the 'best bang for the buck' and didn't overspend. It's about more than a brand name, it's about buying what works best for YOU while still fitting in under or at budget. High FPS multiplayer gaming OR 1080p (and some 1440p) gaming only system, or light single-threaded bursty workloads - buy intel Gaming on a budget, a ton of work, rendering or encoding, or want to do a little of everything and cover all bases - buy AMD Want absolute best? Well then a 10900k it is, if a 10980XE on x299 or XEON solution isn't your bargain already. Want to demolish video editing / encoding, or render like it's nobody's business (gpu solutions excluded!)? get AMD Threadripper or EPYC. Everyone's needs and expectations for the money we spend or work we do are different. I merely just looked for the best price/performance deal that fit the workload I needed to handle, not caring who made what so long as it got my work done TODAY, and then could run games after that decently enough.

jbscotchman:

I've used CPU's from both Intel and AMD for over 20 years. And believe me, I love a good fanboy argument. But out of respect for guru3d I'm not gonna bring that trash here.

You started it.

bobblunderton:

While I have a 3950x and before that a 3700x (the 3700x is sitting on the desk waiting to go in a second build), I am thrilled for even the slim chance of competition. When AMD and intel are gunning for another, there are no winner except those building or buying PC's. With AMD I don't have to worry about another game running in the background while I am doing something productive for a bit, or my countless different production software all running at once slowing down real-time previews on an in-game editor. Gamers should buy the 10600k or 10700k/10900k (or various f or a-suffix versions) if they want to overclock and invest in a serious gaming machine. However, how many folks will spend 1000~2000$ to game only at 1080p? How many folks will genuinely overclock the processor? If you plan to leave it stock you might as well save a bunch and get a processor from AMD as you might never notice the differences without the numbers in your face. Sure, this isn't the case for 'hardcore fps multiplayer gamers', but with the money you save by buying AMD, you can go to a real range and learn to protect your REAL life. That said, there's no denying intel is faster in 1080p games - just as there's no denying that the AMD chips can render and work very well in production environments. It's all in what you need to do, and what your budget is, or how thrifty of a spender you are. Some people live their life on loans but manage to still have nice things even if they truly belong to the bank. Other people have a ton of liquid assets and can afford to spend good money on parts and not bat an eyelash. Others have their car and house paid off before they retire because they always went for the 'best bang for the buck' and didn't overspend.

AMD is not cheaper vs. Intel its a myth, and same goes for temps and power usage. They dont like it here when people post links to otehr tech web site for some reason, but there are enough tests, even here on Guru3D 10700K review, all of them except 10900K are on par with AMD in temps and power usage. As far as Prices go: Good x570 mobo + CPU will cost more then equivalent z490 + CPU or in same ballpark I posted links to Techpowerup's aggregated benchmarks, Intel is not faster just in FHD, but first 11 places in 1440p and 4K also belongs to Intel. As far as rendering goes, its not like Intel is stuck in 1990, the rendering time is in same area, but unlike Gaming where you need all the FPS you can get, waiting an extra minute or even 4 doesn't change anything, it has zero effect, its not like AMD renders 10 minutes and Intel 1 hour, the difference in most projects is seconds and minutes.

Kool64:

It also doubles as an electric griddle for those who need to save space.

https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/intel_core_i7_10700k_processor_review,5.html 9900K has better power usage then 3800XT, 2700X, 3950X 3900X and 3900XT If you look at that link, only 10900K has high power usage, all otehr intels are head to head or better then Ryzens and Temps come from power usage. Also, you love to ignore the fact that Ryzens dont clock as high as Intel, so of course an all core 4Ghz CPU will have lower temps vs. 4.8+ all core turbo CPU. Lets see Ryzens Temp when it actually manages to do all core 5Ghz.

@MegaFalloutFan You forget that while intel you have to buy a z490 mobo to make full use of a k series cpu that is not the case with amd so the amd processor is cheaper as well as the mobo being way cheaper there is no comparison in cost to performance amd wins by a landslide at least where i live pls just stop with these troll comments. Intel has a great product but unfortunately the value just isn't there and there's nothing that can change that until they slash prices.

MegaFalloutFan:

As far as Prices go: Good x570 mobo + CPU will cost more then equivalent z490 + CPU or in same ballpark

You can run a Ryzen 9 3900X on a $70 B450 motherboard and have all features except PCIe Gen 4 avaiable..... Or you can use an $80 B550 motherboard and get PCIe Gen 4 as well.... Either way, you can enable XMP without voiding warranty, run memory above 2933mhz and overclock.... Things you can't do on B460, H470, Q470 or W480...... There really isn't much reason to buy x570 anymore since B550 is available. There's no real-world benefit for most users.

MegaFalloutFan:

As far as rendering goes, its not like Intel is stuck in 1990, the rendering time is in same area, but unlike Gaming where you need all the FPS you can get, waiting an extra minute or even 4 doesn't change anything, it has zero effect, its not like AMD renders 10 minutes and Intel 1 hour, the difference in most projects is seconds and minutes..

In a production environment, those minutes and seconds matter....

sykozis:

You can run a Ryzen 9 3900X on a $70 B450 motherboard and have all features except PCIe Gen 4 avaiable..... Or you can use an $80 B550 motherboard and get PCIe Gen 4 as well.... Either way, you can enable XMP without voiding warranty, run memory above 2933mhz and overclock.... Things you can't do on B460, H470, Q470 or W480...... There really isn't much reason to buy x570 anymore since B550 is available. There's no real-world benefit for most users. In a production environment, those minutes and seconds matter....

B550 boards are not 80$ but 125$ for the cheapest asus prime. Also, with most b450 boards you can forget the overclocking 3900x so that cpu will stay stock.

Undying:

B550 boards are not 80$ but 125$ for the cheapest asus prime. Also, with most b450 boards you can forget the overclocking 3900x so that cpu will stay stock.

$79.99 https://www.newegg.com/asrock-b550m-hdv/p/N82E16813157953 $94.99 if you want something beefier https://www.newegg.com/gigabyte-b550m-ds3h/p/N82E16813145210 $120.99 if you want something better https://www.newegg.com/asrock-b550-phantom-gaming-4/p/N82E16813157935 And all support up to 3950X and upcoming 4950X. Cheapest Z490 at $129.99 and not the best board if you want to overclock the 10900K/KA/KF/F/ https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813157918?Item=N82E16813157918&Description=z490&cm_re=z490-_-13-157-918-_-Product&quicklink=true As for "3900x so that cpu will stay stock", shows ignorance of how AMD cpus work/overclock. All core overclock on AMD cpus is counter productive and only for those who want all core load 100% of the time. Light loads (aka gaming) better leave the CPU alone and tweak some of the settings. My 3900X was boosting on 2 cores at 4.65Ghz at stock (1 core 4.72Ghz) with the last V2 1002 AGESA bios came out for motherboard a month ago settings at 100% load (gaming) with just CPPC & Preferred Cores ON and PBO OFF with 1usmus power plan with just a D15. The rest of the cores are between 4350-4575 load depending. Same settings the 3950X now does 2 cores at 4.73Ghz and 1 at 4.8Ghz rest of cores varying. No manual overclock etc. And both CPUs operating at 3800C14 with 1900 IF.

Undying:

B550 boards are not 80$ but 125$ for the cheapest asus prime. Also, with most b450 boards you can forget the overclocking 3900x so that cpu will stay stock.

ASRock B550M-HDV is currently $79.99. I looked up the price, quite literally, minutes before posting..... ASRock B550M-HDV (currently on back-order, but listed price has been $79.99 for as long as I've been watching it) ASRock B550 Phantom Gaming 4 is $120.... That's $15 cheaper than the cheapest Asus Prime B550 board Asus Prime B550M-A/CSM is currently $135....and it's the cheapest listed Asus board. When I quote prices, I've actually verified the prices I'm quoting within a few minutes of posting.....