New Intel CPUs

[zeusthemoose]

Summary

 A couple of new cpus from intel are now available. There will be a new i9 processor along with three Celerons.

 The core i9 will be called the i9-10850k and is essentially a 10900k with 100 MHz lower clocks. It is currently only available from system integrators but seems to be moving towards a retail launch. It should be around $50 less than the 10900k.

 In addition to the new i9 processor, there are 3 new celeron processors. They are the G5925, G5905, and G5905T. All have two cores and two threads and clock speeds in the 3GHz range. They are priced around $50.

 

Quotes

Quote

The Intel Core i9-10850K 10 Core CPU is going to be the latest addition to the 10th Gen Desktop lineup with the chip already being listed by OEMs but now, the newest entrant is being listed by retailers, confirming that it will be available to consumers in boxed retail packaging too.

(wccftech)

Quote

The boxed variant of the Intel Core i9-10850K CPU has been listed by two retailers while three new additions to the Celeron family have also been spotted. The Core i9-10850K is simply put, a regular Core i9-10900K CPU with 100 MHz lower base and boost clock. The shortages for the Intel Core i9-10900K have led the blue team to release a lower binned variant to make up for the high demand for its flagship 10 core part.

(wccftech)

Quote

In addition to the high-end CPUs, Intel is also preparing to launch new Celeron options for the entry-level market. There are three Celeron CPUs that have been listed by LambdaTek which include the Celeron G5925 (BX80701G5925), Celeron G5905 (BX80701G5905), and the Celeron G5905T. All three CPUs feature two cores and two threads along with 4 MB of L3 cache,

The main difference is the clock frequencies that range from 3.60 GHz, 3.50 GHz, and 3.3 GHz, respectively and also the higher L3 cache which is double of the existing Celeron CPUs in the 10th Gen lineup. The two regular variants will feature a TDP of 58W while the 'T' variant will feature a 35W TDP.

(wccftech)

 

My thoughts

 I think the 10850k will be basically the same as the 10900k and will essentially replace it. I think it will be able to be easily overclocked to the same places as the 10900k and is only being released to get more intel products on the shelves. I also think the celerons will be take over for very budget systems from system builders. But, I doubt it will compare to the similarly priced Athlon CPUs that AMD has available as they have twice the number of threads.

 Ive noticed these articles are a couple of days old yet werent posted here yet, am I the only that hasnt heard of these processors before now or have they just not gotten alot of attention/coverage?

 

Sources

 wccftech

 techradar

 pcgamer

 tomshardware

[GDRRiley]

meh. seems like intel can't get enough dies to meet 10900k requirements so they made a step down.

those celeron should die

[GDRRiley]

3 minutes ago, Lord Vile said:

Celerons are fine for office work or just a streaming box.

its a dual core which in 2020 is sad

[thorhammerz]

4 minutes ago, Lord Vile said:

Lol but it'll be cheap which is what matters for that product

B-b-b-b-but muh moar cores to run Microsoft Word!! 

[GDRRiley]

4 minutes ago, Lord Vile said:

Lol but it'll be cheap which is what matters for that product  If i was building a streaming PC just for storing films and watching stuff from netflix etc i'd probably get these if they support wifi 6. 

issues is the 3000g is there with 2/4

[GDRRiley]

5 minutes ago, Lord Vile said:

Celerons are cheaper than the 3000g though and you can use 2133 RAM

they are the same or at least very close.

[piratemonkey]

1 hour ago, zeusthemoose said:

I also think the celerons will be take over for very budget systems from system builders

I think AMD will still be dominant with their Athlon. But it is nice to have some competition. I think that Athlon probably has better onboard video though.

 

Just now, Lord Vile said:

you can use 2133 RAM

But on AMD you can overclock the memory

[mr moose]

Not sure why it is a crime to release newer low end products?  last time I checked you still had better options and weren't forced to buy them.

[piratemonkey]

5 minutes ago, Lord Vile said:

I have a Zen chip myself but for a basic basic build I'd go intel. 

For me, I think that's AMD's biggest problem (and also taking the Intel route to knee cap their high end SKUs). With Intel, they have a rock steady base. They don't rely so much on memory speeds (for better or worse) and there isn't much trouble with memory, at least with their consumer chips.

That's not to say Intel is what people should choose. Besides having a basic build (like what you're saying), there isn't really a good reason to go Intel sadly.

[thechinchinsong]

1 minute ago, piratemonkey said:

For me, I think that's AMD's biggest problem (and also taking the Intel route to knee cap their high end SKUs). With Intel, they have a rock steady base. They don't rely so much on memory speeds (for better or worse) and there isn't much trouble with memory, at least with their consumer chips.

That's not to say Intel is what people should choose. Besides having a basic build (like what you're saying), there isn't really a good reason to go Intel sadly.

I mean if you're building a super basic build and performance doesn't matter, you can ignore expensive RAM for athlons too. You're leaving 10-15% performance out, but if you want to go budget, nobody is stopping you from spending less for athlon + budget RAM, just like nobody is stopping you from spending celeron + budget RAM.

[zeusthemoose]

8 minutes ago, piratemonkey said:

That's not to say Intel is what people should choose. Besides having a basic build (like what you're saying), there isn't really a good reason to go Intel sadly.

The only other reason people should go intel right now is for high performance laptops. They don’t make laptops with ryzen CPUs and GPUs better than a 2060 super.

[piratemonkey]

6 minutes ago, zeusthemoose said:

The only other reason people should go intel right now is for high performance laptops. They don’t make laptops with ryzen CPUs and GPUs better than a 2060 super.

Not yet at least. I don't pay attention to the mobile sector that much, but soon in a Zephyrus or something there could be a 2070 or 2080. That'd be fun

 

14 minutes ago, thechinchinsong said:

I mean if you're building a super basic build and performance doesn't matter, you can ignore expensive RAM for athlons too. You're leaving 10-15% performance out, but if you want to go budget, nobody is stopping you from spending less for athlon + budget RAM, just like nobody is stopping you from spending celeron + budget RAM.

For the low end, I would pick an Athlon as I could overclock (even if it's just a little bit). I'm not saying Intel is great, I'm saying that you can think about it for a minute unlike in the higher end segments.

 

2 minutes ago, Lord Vile said:

But a celeron + budget ram is cheaper than an Athlon 

It's by 10-20 dollars depending on where you get it. Along with that extra few dollars (as high as 15, or low as 5) you get overclocking support, and a better upgrade path (in respect to price, and some mobos will be able to run 4th gen ryzen I believe).

[Trik'Stari]

1 hour ago, Lord Vile said:

Celerons are fine for office work or just a streaming box. 

 

It's what intel gets for shipping chips that are red lining out of box. Suppose why sell them as a 10700K when you can squeeze out an extra $150

Celerons are trash and should die in a fire.

 

Totally not salty about waiting around for them to fucking boot up because Lenovo makes their systems restart on a bios or boot menu button press and I had to do 3000 of the fucking things

 

*sounds of my head beating against a wall*

 

[zeusthemoose]

22 minutes ago, piratemonkey said:

Not yet at least. I don't pay attention to the mobile sector that much, but soon in a Zephyrus or something there could be a 2070 or 2080. That'd be fun

If it ever happens, it won’t be for a few years. I’ve heard that intel has contracts with the manufacturers to prevent them from using other processors with the highest tier GPUs.

[piratemonkey]

15 minutes ago, zeusthemoose said:

If it ever happens, it won’t be for a few years. I’ve heard that intel has contracts with the manufacturers to prevent them from using other processors with the highest tier GPUs.

That's anti-competitive if I've heard

[thorhammerz]

1 hour ago, piratemonkey said:

It's by 10-20 dollars depending on where you get it. Along with that extra few dollars (as high as 15, or low as 5) you get overclocking support, and a better upgrade path (in respect to price, and some mobos will be able to run 4th gen ryzen I believe).

I rather doubt most buyers of the low-end boxed-PCs (particularly the office / educational / grandma space) care about "overclocking support" and upgrade paths. Especially if the process of getting a new piece of gear involves going through IT.

[zeusthemoose]

56 minutes ago, piratemonkey said:

That's anti-competitive if I've heard

Pretty much, yeah. But I think they set it up as an exclusivity deal so it’s not technically illegal.

[Zodiark1593]

2 hours ago, GDRRiley said:

its a dual core which in 2020 is sad

Honestly, two big cores are plenty for a lot of basics. A bunch of school PCs with celerons and SSDs would probably be plenty fine for most elementary-level academic needs. It isn’t as though (most) third graders are rendering projects on Blender.

 

[piratemonkey]

7 minutes ago, thorhammerz said:

I rather doubt most buyers of the low-end boxed-PCs (particularly the office / business / educational / grandma space) care about "overclocking support" and upgrade paths. Especially if the process of getting a new piece of gear involves going through IT.

I was talking about myself more than anything, but agreed. As long as you can go through the Facebooks or Word good, it's fine for them. Though there is a case to be made with the Athlon having two more threads is better for multi tasking and snapiness.

[GDRRiley]

10 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Honestly, two big cores are plenty for a lot of basics. A bunch of school PCs with celerons and SSDs would probably be plenty fine for most elementary-level academic needs. It isn’t as though (most) third graders are rendering projects on Blender.

 

the second though windows update hits good luck. the 2/4 make a lot more sense

[Zodiark1593]

13 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

the second though windows update hits good luck. the 2/4 make a lot more sense

For IT managed systems or those owned by hobbyists that know what they’re doing, this isn’t a problem. These are the sort of folk that can squeeze usable value out Atoms and miserly quantities of RAM if necessary. So long as admins keep a tight ship, user experience should be fine. 

 

However, there’s a reason I didn’t include Mom, Dad and Grandma as good candidates for a Celeron. These are the folk that are likely to clutter things up with lots of junk and bring weaker systems to their knees. For a family PC with no technically inclined person to look after it, I’m very much inclined toward a high clocked 4/8 CPU with robust SSD to ensure responsiveness years down the road.

[mr moose]

44 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

For IT managed systems or those owned by hobbyists that know what they’re doing, this isn’t a problem. These are the sort of folk that can squeeze usable value out Atoms and miserly quantities of RAM if necessary. So long as admins keep a tight ship, user experience should be fine. 

 

However, there’s a reason I didn’t include Mom, Dad and Grandma as good candidates for a Celeron. These are the folk that are likely to clutter things up with lots of junk and bring weaker systems to their knees. For a family PC with no technically inclined person to look after it, I’m very much inclined toward a high clocked 4/8 CPU with robust SSD to ensure responsiveness years down the road.

 

I think it is pretty important we remember that there is also a place for these CPU's with school kids that just can't afford anything better.  Sure the experience is going to be rough, but if it means the difference between being 50% in the race and not even making it to the start line then I am all for it.

 

 

[5x5]

6 hours ago, piratemonkey said:

For me, I think that's AMD's biggest problem (and also taking the Intel route to knee cap their high end SKUs). With Intel, they have a rock steady base. They don't rely so much on memory speeds (for better or worse) and there isn't much trouble with memory, at least with their consumer chips.

That's not to say Intel is what people should choose. Besides having a basic build (like what you're saying), there isn't really a good reason to go Intel sadly.

That's not true. Intel also benefit hugely from fast memory with low timings. Slow RAM isn't okay with anything anymore. Memory is, I'd argue, almost as important as on AMD.

 

4 hours ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Honestly, two big cores are plenty for a lot of basics. A bunch of school PCs with celerons and SSDs would probably be plenty fine for most elementary-level academic needs. It isn’t as though (most) third graders are rendering projects on Blender.

 

Not really. Our uni had an i3 4130 setup for mass use several years ago. It was pretty slow once you actually had to do work. When you have 10 browser tabs, a 50 page paper, several internal programmes and an AV running, the i3s would start chugging hard.

 

Same reason we moved to quad cores standard at work. Even for the secretaries. Dual cores are REALLY shit for any environment starting 2016

[5x5]

12 minutes ago, Lord Vile said:

Not on the A series boards you don't and for what these CPUs are aimed at I don't think people will be shoving anything higher in them. 

 

The £200 X570 boards will and so will the B550, the B450 board can if the manufacturer allows and if you jump through all the hoops. But why would you pair a £50 CPU with a £150 board? 

A320 overclocking is possible on Athlons.

[Kisai]

7 hours ago, Lord Vile said:

Celerons are fine for office work or just a streaming box. 

 

It's what intel gets for shipping chips that are red lining out of box. Suppose why sell them as a 10700K when you can squeeze out an extra $150

Celeron's are essentially useless except for signage and kiosk systems. Businesses hurt their own productivity by using these weak parts in office equipment since you need 8GB RAM just to open Office 365 and 16GB to do anything productive in Excel.

 

AMD's A-series APU parts are at least not rubbish.

 

Do you know how long it takes to apply Windows Updates just to a U-series part? on the average of 10x longer than the high end H series part. The same applies to desktops using Celerons vs i5/i7 parts.