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: Final Fantasy XV
Upon arriving to PC earlier this, Final Fantasy XV: Windows Edition was given a graphical overhaul as it was ported over from console, fruits of their successful partnership with NVIDIA, with hardly any hint of the troubles during Final Fantasy XV's original production and development.
In preparation for the launch, Square Enix opted to release a standalone benchmark that they have since updated. Using the Final Fantasy XV standalone benchmark gives us a lengthy standardized sequence to record, although it should be noted that its heavy use of NVIDIA technology means that the Maximum setting has problems - it renders items off screen. To get around this, we use the standard preset which does not have these issues.
Square Enix has patched the benchmark with custom graphics settings and bugfixes to be much more accurate in profiling in-game performance and graphical options. For our testing, we run the standard benchmark with a FRAPs overlay, taking a 6 minute recording of the test.
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
| AnandTech | IGP | Low | Medium | High |
| Average FPS |  |
 |
 |
 |
| 95th Percentile |  |
 |
 |
 |
Even though our settings combinations end up being GPU limited very quickly, the Intel CPUs still appear near the top if not at the top.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
220 Comments
View All Comments
yeeeeman - Wednesday, May 20, 2020 - link
The CPU won't consume nowhere near 250w during gaming. 250w is valid only for short all core scenarios. Otherwise it will stay in its 130w tdp. Go and read other reviews and you will see I am right.yankeeDDL - Thursday, May 21, 2020 - link
According to this (https://images.anandtech.com/doci/15785/10900K%20y... it stays at 230W for almost 4min.In any case, you can read my sentence again and use 130W instead of 250W, and it does nt change anything.
arashi - Saturday, May 23, 2020 - link
You can't blame him, he's on Intel payroll and has to act the idiot.dirkdigles - Wednesday, May 20, 2020 - link
Ian, I think the pricing on the charts is a bit misleading. The $488 price for the 10900K is the 1000-unit bulk pricing, and the $499 price on the 3900X hasn't been seen since January 2020... it's currently $409 on Amazon. This would skew the ability for the reader to make comparison.I know MSRP is a good metric, but street price is more important. What can I buy these chips for, today? If I'm a consumer, I likely can't get that $488 bulk per chip price for the 10900K, and the 3900X is not going to cost me anywhere near $409. Please update.
dirkdigles - Wednesday, May 20, 2020 - link
*anywhere near $499. Typo.WaltC - Wednesday, May 20, 2020 - link
Yes, I paid ~$409 for my 3900X, and on top of that AMZN offered me 6-months, same-as-cash, which I was more than happy to accept...;) Good times!AnarchoPrimitiv - Wednesday, May 20, 2020 - link
Exactly, the 3900x is over $100 cheaper and is nowhere "around the same price"yeeeeman - Wednesday, May 20, 2020 - link
Well Intel has the 10900f at 400$. Locked with no igpu. almost same frequencies. That is a better buy than the 10900kSpunjji - Tuesday, May 26, 2020 - link
Right - the 10900F is likely a better deal, but the comparison was with the 10900K.Irata - Wednesday, May 20, 2020 - link
Waiting for comments on how the two small fans on the mainboard make this an unacceptable option. If I remember correctly, that applied to X570 boards.