Easy Technology Tips, Tricks & Guides

CPU benchmark: AMD or Intel? The duel!

AMD or Intel? The duel goes into a new round!

AMD or Intel? Competition stimulates business – Intel had to experience this painfully with the resurrection of its almost written-off adversary AMD.

With CPUs of the new Comet Lake series, the company, which was founded in 1968, is reaching for lost market shares.

However, AMD does not stand idly by the goings-on: With brand new processors from the Ryzen 5000 series, the one year younger company wants to maintain its strong market position – and gain further shares.

Does this work?


14 nanometers? 7 nanometers!

On paper, however, the new Comet Lake S processors look pretty old: While the opponent already includes his notebook processors from the Ryzen 4000 series and current PC CPUs such as the Ryzen Threadripper 3990X and the new Ryzen 5000 series 7 nanometer thin structure widths, Intel continues because of massive problems with the conversion of the manufacturing process for the Comet-Lake-H- (for notebooks) and Comet Lake S processors (for PCs) continue to use 14 nanometer-thick conductor tracks.

One disadvantage: With finer 7-nanometer structures, eight-core processors with a power loss (Thermal Design Power; TDP for short) of 15 watts can be produced, while Intel’s Comet Lake H series notebook processors can handle themselves with 45 watts all three times as much.

And the thinner the conductor tracks, the more computing units fit on the same area.

For example, AMD installs up to 64 processor cores in the Threadripper 3990X, whereas Intel currently only creates a maximum of 56 cores – and only with huge server processors.

Only child: Intel Core i9-10980XE

Intel’s top processor Core i9-10980XE from the tenth core generation suggests to buyers that it is also a model from the Comet Lake S series .

But that’s not true. He comes from the Cascade Lake range and is therefore an only child.

Despite the thick 14-nanometer structures, Intel squeezes 18 processing units into this processor, which allows the Windows 10 operating system to believe 36 cores for better distribution of tasks using Hyper-Threading technology.

Over 5 gigahertz clock

Within the normal Comet Lake range, the Core i9-10900 models are at the top.

And Intel has bored that out: While the Core i9-9900 (K) still had to make do with eight cores, the five models within the Core i9-10900 series now all have ten cores.

Using hyper-threading technology, they can even fool the Windows operating system into 20 computing units.

The base rate is between 1.9 and 3.7 gigahertz, depending on the model, but for demanding tasks a single processing unit can now work briefly at up to 5.3 gigahertz instead of “only” at 5.0 gigahertz.

New: The CPUs reach 5.3 gigahertz Core i9-10900Kand 10900KF not exclusively with turbo technology, but with “Thermal Design Velocity Boost”.

That means: It may briefly exceed the TDP limit significantly.

For this, however, there must be an effective cooling system for the CPU, otherwise the processor will die an excruciating heat death.

Intel Comet Lake S processors

32 Comet Lake processors, up to six types within one performance class. But where are the differences? Be careful when buying, because even one letter within the product name often makes a huge difference:

  • K: Intel processors that have a “K” at the end of the product name can be overclocked for an even higher working pace.
  • Q: If there is an “F” at the end of a product name, the processor does not have a graphics chip on board. That means: A separate graphics card has to be plugged into the PC for image reproduction.
  • T: Intel processors that have a “T” at the end of the product name are energy-saving models. They have a lower power loss (35 instead of 58, 65 or even 125 watts), clock with lower frequencies and therefore work more slowly. Since they also generate less waste heat, they are often used in small mini PCs.
Note on the prices in the overview: The sales prices in US dollars apply to dealers who purchase at least 1,000 pieces of a processor. The individual prices for end customers are therefore likely to be higher.

Comet Lake S: Core i7-10700

The two new Core i7 processors 10700K and 10700KF are also allowed to use the “Thermal Design Velocity Boost”, but the 10700, 10700F and 10700T models are not. All processors in the Core i7 series have eight cores or 16 threads, and the base clock frequencies are between 2.0 and 3.8 gigahertz, depending on the model.

Comet Lake S: Core i5-10500, 10400

While the new processors from the Core i7 and Core i9 series are primarily intended for use in high-priced PCs, the manufacturers use the Core i5-10500 and Core i5-10400 CPUs in affordable mid-range computers.

All Core i5 processors are allowed to distribute tasks to six cores, the base clock frequencies are between 2.0 and 4.1 gigahertz.

AMD Ryzen 5000: Same manufacturing process

AMD has not changed anything in terms of production: AMD also manufactures the Ryzen 5000 processors with thin 7 nanometer structures.

As mentioned above, Intel still builds its current 10000 core CPUs from the Comet Lake S series with thick and inefficient 14 nanometers.

The Rocket Lake S series , which appeared in the first quarter of 2021, also uses the wide structures.

With its improved 7nm FinFET manufacturing process, AMD promises a 19 percent increase in performance per cycle.

To this end, AMD has improved the output, loading and storage units as well as the buffer.

AMD Ryzen 5000: All CPUs at a glance

AMD or Intel

New structure of the CCX modules

Also new: For the production of an eight-core CPU, like the Ryzen 7 5800X tested here , AMD no longer wired two four- cores (CCX modules).

All eight processing units are now on a CCX – this is supposed to reduce latencies and increase the speed.

The tested Ryzen 9 5900X still consists of two six-core CCX.

The top model 5950X now consists of two wired eight-core CPUs (CCX modules).

In the predecessor, a CCX still had four processing units.

Also new: All cores can access the 32 megabyte cache (L3) of a CCX directly and do not have to take a detour via the I / O controller.

This also applies to the 32 megabyte cache of the 5600X whose six cores sit on a silicon chip.

Number 1 is and remains AMD’s Threadripper 3990X. Intel’s top CPU Core i9-10980XE has little to oppose even against AMD’s Ryzen 9 5950X and Ryzen 9 5900X.

Processors in tempo comparison

The test showed: Intel currently has little to oppose the rival.

The undisputed number 1 is and remains AMD’s almost 4,000 euro Ryzen Threadripper 3990X with its 64 cores.

But even in the area of ​​processors for end customers, Intel’s top CPU Core i9-10980XE cannot hold a candle to the AMD Ryzen 5950X.

Especially when applications distribute tasks to many cores, the AMD processors are significantly faster – for example for photo and video editing or for complex calculations in CAD applications.

Core i9-10900K

The new Comet Lake S processors are the final stage in Intel’s 14 nanometer manufacturing process.

The slight polish compared to the older Coffe Lake CPUs revealed small, but not huge, speed advantages in the test.
For sometimes much less money, customers today get AMD processors with more power from the rival: The much cheaper Ryzen 9 3900X is a little faster than the Core i9-10900K.

Power consumption

In return, the test systems with most Intel processors worked much more frugally than those with AMD processors.
The main reason: With the exception of the Core i5-10400F (graphics chip disconnected) and the Core i9-10980XE (no graphics chip), all tested Intel CPUs have a graphics chip on board, the AMD processors require a separate graphics card for displaying images.


AMD or Intel?
Thanks to the built-in graphics chip, the test systems with almost all Intel CPUs work significantly more economically than the AMD processors – with the exception of the tested Core i5-10400F (graphics chip disconnected) and the Core i9-10980XE (no graphics chip).

CPU benchmark: test result

AMD is still ahead of the game.

Even if you ignore the outrageously expensive Threadripper 3990X, the 5000 series works more jagged than the respective Intel counterpart.

In return, the Intel CPUs are much cheaper and therefore offer a better price-performance ratio.

The demand for AMD CPUs is currently so high that the manufacturer can hardly keep up with production.

The result: the sales prices are significantly higher than the manufacturer’s recommended prices.

Ryzen 9 5950X

The Ryzen 9 5950X is not a bargain. With the performance offered in the test, it stalks damn close to the much more expensive Threadripper top model 3990X.


What are your thoughts? Would you go for AMD or Intel? Share with us down below:




Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.