Intel Core i7-10700 vs Core i7-10700K Review: Is 65W Comet Lake an Option?
by Dr. Ian Cutress on January 21, 2021 10:30 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
- Intel
- Core i7
- Z490
- 10th Gen Core
- Comet Lake
- i7-10700K
- i7-10700
CPU Tests: Simulation
Simulation and Science have a lot of overlap in the benchmarking world, however for this distinction we’re separating into two segments mostly based on the utility of the resulting data. The benchmarks that fall under Science have a distinct use for the data they output – in our Simulation section, these act more like synthetics but at some level are still trying to simulate a given environment.
DigiCortex v1.35: link
DigiCortex is a pet project for the visualization of neuron and synapse activity in the brain. The software comes with a variety of benchmark modes, and we take the small benchmark which runs a 32k neuron/1.8B synapse simulation, similar to a small slug.
The results on the output are given as a fraction of whether the system can simulate in real-time, so anything above a value of one is suitable for real-time work. The benchmark offers a 'no firing synapse' mode, which in essence detects DRAM and bus speed, however we take the firing mode which adds CPU work with every firing.
The software originally shipped with a benchmark that recorded the first few cycles and output a result. So while fast multi-threaded processors this made the benchmark last less than a few seconds, slow dual-core processors could be running for almost an hour. There is also the issue of DigiCortex starting with a base neuron/synapse map in ‘off mode’, giving a high result in the first few cycles as none of the nodes are currently active. We found that the performance settles down into a steady state after a while (when the model is actively in use), so we asked the author to allow for a ‘warm-up’ phase and for the benchmark to be the average over a second sample time.
For our test, we give the benchmark 20000 cycles to warm up and then take the data over the next 10000 cycles seconds for the test – on a modern processor this takes 30 seconds and 150 seconds respectively. This is then repeated a minimum of 10 times, with the first three results rejected. Results are shown as a multiple of real-time calculation.
For users wondering why the 5800X wins, it seems that Digicortex prefers single chiplet designs, and the more cores the better. On the Intel side, the 10700 pulls a slight lead.
Dwarf Fortress 0.44.12: Link
Another long standing request for our benchmark suite has been Dwarf Fortress, a popular management/roguelike indie video game, first launched in 2006 and still being regularly updated today, aiming for a Steam launch sometime in the future.
Emulating the ASCII interfaces of old, this title is a rather complex beast, which can generate environments subject to millennia of rule, famous faces, peasants, and key historical figures and events. The further you get into the game, depending on the size of the world, the slower it becomes as it has to simulate more famous people, more world events, and the natural way that humanoid creatures take over an environment. Like some kind of virus.
For our test we’re using DFMark. DFMark is a benchmark built by vorsgren on the Bay12Forums that gives two different modes built on DFHack: world generation and embark. These tests can be configured, but range anywhere from 3 minutes to several hours. After analyzing the test, we ended up going for three different world generation sizes:
- Small, a 65x65 world with 250 years, 10 civilizations and 4 megabeasts
- Medium, a 127x127 world with 550 years, 10 civilizations and 4 megabeasts
- Large, a 257x257 world with 550 years, 40 civilizations and 10 megabeasts
DFMark outputs the time to run any given test, so this is what we use for the output. We loop the small test for as many times possible in 10 minutes, the medium test for as many times in 30 minutes, and the large test for as many times in an hour.
Dolphin v5.0 Emulation: Link
Many emulators are often bound by single thread CPU performance, and general reports tended to suggest that Haswell provided a significant boost to emulator performance. This benchmark runs a Wii program that ray traces a complex 3D scene inside the Dolphin Wii emulator. Performance on this benchmark is a good proxy of the speed of Dolphin CPU emulation, which is an intensive single core task using most aspects of a CPU. Results are given in seconds, where the Wii itself scores 1051 seconds.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
210 Comments
View All Comments
sjkpublic@gmail.com - Friday, January 22, 2021 - link
Yes. There is an issue with power consumption. And that is a lead into the real story. Intel has been at 14nm for 3 years now. Historically that time frame is unheard of. Some may say the complexity of the Intel CPU die is partly to blame. Some may say it is no wonder that Apple went to M1. Everyone will say Intel has dropped the ball.DieselPunk - Saturday, January 23, 2021 - link
Wow, here's a shock. Modern games get very little difference from CPUs as they are all GPU bound. And a good high end GPU is going to burn far more coal than a CPU ever will.As a gamer, WTF do I care about CPU power usage for? When I run out of coal there is still lots of gasoline 😎
headmaster - Saturday, January 23, 2021 - link
it's a great post admin thanks for ithttps://www.snapseedforpcguide.co/
yankeeDDL - Saturday, January 23, 2021 - link
Is it fair to say that the 10700 is on par (at best) or slower (in most multi-threaded scenarios) than the Ryzen 5600X, despite using roughly 2X the power?Makste - Saturday, January 23, 2021 - link
Put the number of cores into consideration as another factor, and then come up with your own conclusion.HarkPtooie - Sunday, January 24, 2021 - link
I registered just to post this: you're nuts.I just measured my "65W" i7-10700 non-K while stress testing it, and it eats 165 W at the wall plug. 64GB RAM, good quality Corsair 450W PSU.
Then I compared to to my "65W" Ryzen 3700X, 32GB RAM = 157 W. That one has an expensive fanless Seasonic 500W PSU which nominally better efficiency at these power draw levels.
So the difference is 10W and may as well be attributed to PSU quality, RAM consumption and whatnot.
If you are going to make wild speculations whose veracity anyone can check, you might want to go over your material a bit better.
Smell This - Sunday, January 24, 2021 - link
LOL
mmm ... Let me see.
Three feature writers at AT versus some 'anecdotal' FUD-peddling troll on the Internet. The Universe will make the call.
The 65w 8c/16t AMD Ryzen 3700X, fully loaded, pulls 90w. There is also a fancy multi-colored chart for you!
https://www.anandtech.com/show/14605/the-and-ryzen...
The i7-10700, in this article, pulls 197w to 214w. Ooops.
Psssst ___ By the way, my local MicroCenter (Duluth) offers the AMD Ryzen 3700X at $299 after $30 off, and the i7-10700 for $280 after $120 off. My-my-my, how the mighty has fallen . . .
HarkPtooie - Tuesday, January 26, 2021 - link
So you are saying that their wattmeters are right and mine is wrong because... appeal to authority?It may be that my Ryzen draws 90 W, but from the looks of it, the i7 is not far off. 10 more watts, not 130.
The universe will indeed make the call.
Spunjji - Wednesday, January 27, 2021 - link
Plausible explanations for the discrepancy, in order of likelihood:1) The unspecified stress test you're using isn't actually stressing the 10700 very heavily.
2) You're not measuring like-for-like in some other way - be it components or configuration.
3) Your wattmeter is poorly calibrated (This level would be a reach).
4) You're simply not being honest (I don't like to assume this, but you seem aggressive about people questioning your implausible conclusions).
Implausible explanations:
1) Every review on the internet performed with calibrated equipment, specified configurations and specified software loads is somehow wrong and you are right.
Everett F Sargent - Wednesday, January 27, 2021 - link
I'll go as far as requiring/requesting/asking for their MB model (an exact model number and manufacturer thereof). Without that one key piece of information, I have concluded the following: Using a Z490 or other relatively high end LGA 1200 MB indicates that the i7-10700 will run at or significantly above 200W in continuous 247 operation.Remember this user claims to be using a 450W PSU, so very likely not a Z490 MB, so indicative of a rather low end system (e. g. no medium to high end GPU, not that that matters as these are essentially CPU tests unless stated otherwise in this review).
I believe their power number but I don't believe that they are testing on a medium to high end LGA 1200 MB. In other words it is all about the MB default settings for PL1, PL2 and Tau and not the CPU itself.