The Intel Comet Lake Core i9-10900K, i7-10700K, i5-10600K CPU Review: Skylake We Go Again
by Dr. Ian Cutress on May 20, 2020 9:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
- Intel
- Skylake
- 14nm
- Z490
- 10th Gen Core
- Comet Lake
Gaming: Grand Theft Auto V
The highly anticipated iteration of the Grand Theft Auto franchise hit the shelves on April 14th 2015, with both AMD and NVIDIA in tow to help optimize the title. GTA doesn’t provide graphical presets, but opens up the options to users and extends the boundaries by pushing even the hardest systems to the limit using Rockstar’s Advanced Game Engine under DirectX 11. Whether the user is flying high in the mountains with long draw distances or dealing with assorted trash in the city, when cranked up to maximum it creates stunning visuals but hard work for both the CPU and the GPU.
For our test we have scripted a version of the in-game benchmark. The in-game benchmark consists of five scenarios: four short panning shots with varying lighting and weather effects, and a fifth action sequence that lasts around 90 seconds. We use only the final part of the benchmark, which combines a flight scene in a jet followed by an inner city drive-by through several intersections followed by ramming a tanker that explodes, causing other cars to explode as well. This is a mix of distance rendering followed by a detailed near-rendering action sequence, and the title thankfully spits out frame time data.
There are no presets for the graphics options on GTA, allowing the user to adjust options such as population density and distance scaling on sliders, but others such as texture/shadow/shader/water quality from Low to Very High. Other options include MSAA, soft shadows, post effects, shadow resolution and extended draw distance options. There is a handy option at the top which shows how much video memory the options are expected to consume, with obvious repercussions if a user requests more video memory than is present on the card (although there’s no obvious indication if you have a low end GPU with lots of GPU memory, like an R7 240 4GB).
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
| AnandTech | IGP | Low |
| Average FPS |  |
 |
| 95th Percentile |  |
 |
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
220 Comments
View All Comments
catavalon21 - Wednesday, May 20, 2020 - link
The ability to edit (or ^Z) would be most welcome, trust me.eastcoast_pete - Wednesday, May 20, 2020 - link
Isn't that Skylake running a bit dry by now? But, seriously, Intel really risks losing a lot of market share in future years by selling these "classics" at high prices, and that is if one can get one in the first place.Curious: how many commercial customers buy Intel desktops just because they have iGPUs, but want more CPU oomph than the 3200G has? Is that why Intel still dominates the OEM desktop market?
AnarchoPrimitiv - Wednesday, May 20, 2020 - link
Intel dominates the OEM market through intimidation and threats of retribution... They were literally convicted of bribing OEMs to NOT use AMD CPUs all throughout the 2000s in several courts around the world. The trials uncovered emails between Intel executives that stated, and I quote, "Dell is the best friend money can buy".... The proof is in the fact that currently, the Ryzen 4000 mobile CPUs are the best mobile chips offered right now, but Dell only puts them in the low end laptops. Why? Because Intel is probably giving huge financial incentives to bar AMD from premium designs to perpetuate the myth that AMD isn't a premium brandRetycint - Wednesday, May 20, 2020 - link
Do keep in mind that these are baseless speculations, based on something that happened 2 decades ago. Both Intel and AMD have changed since then (new engineering team, new management etc) and there has been no evidence of Intel providing incentives to cripple AMD systems. Go take your conspiracy elsewhere.And before you inevitably accuse me of being an Intel shill, this isn't about Intel or AMD, it's about facts to support your claim, of which there have been none
Irata - Wednesday, May 20, 2020 - link
Baseless speculation? Financial horsepower, MDF and meet the comp funds are current and no secret.Why do you think there are no Ryzen 4000 laptops with GPU above a 2060?
Spunjji - Tuesday, May 26, 2020 - link
Not entirely baseless, as they made two distinct claims. I've been a party to how Intel's "Marketing Development Funds" work - and work it does, at all levels from OEM to reseller to retailer. These days they don't explicitly punish anyone for not buying AMD - they simply tie rebates that will improve the profit margins on a product to specific quantities of those products being sold. It's "nobody's fault" if those quantities happen to make the sale of an AMD product by a given retailer or reseller distinctly unlikely.As for incentivizing bad *builds* of AMD systems, though, I'm not so sure. Intel clearly do a lot of work building reference platforms, and the economics of doing integration testing for a new vendor is not trivial. Honestly though, it's hard to tell how we *would* know if this were going on, because it would absolutely be made to look innocent - just like last time.
brantron - Wednesday, May 20, 2020 - link
"literally convicted of bribing"1) No. That's not what "literally" means.
2) No. No one was even *charged* with a crime, much less convicted.
3) No. It wasn't about bribery.
The reason Athlon 64s weren't ubiquitous way back when is the same reason the 4000 APUs aren't today - there aren't enough to go around.
If your post were to be rephrased without hyperbole, baseless accusations, and whataboutism unrelated to the topic of this article, it would read something like this:
"6 months after AMD's announcement of Renoir, the number of 4000 APUs sold for desktops is literally zero (see how that works?) because TSMC is still slammed."
WaWaThreeFIVbroS - Thursday, May 21, 2020 - link
Your ignorance is amusingIt is technically a bribery
https://www.extremetech.com/computing/184323-intel...
Spunjji - Tuesday, May 26, 2020 - link
First 3 points: accurate, if not entirely on-topic. Nobody was charged with a crime, but Intel sure were fined a lot for collusion.Which gets to the 4th point: again, accurate, but not entirely relevant. AMD were definitely not able to match Intel for manufacturing, which is why they couldn't have beaten Intel out of the market entirely, but that was barely related to why they weren't getting into Dell systems. See the aforementioned proven-and-fined-for collusion.
drothgery - Friday, May 22, 2020 - link
Or because premium designs take longer when the new chip isn't just another respin of the same thing, and AMD hadn't produced a viable high-end notebook chip in well over a decade so it made sense to wait and see if Ryzen 4000 was any good rather than designing in advance?