Test Bed and Setup

As per our processor testing policy, we take a premium category motherboard suitable for the socket, and equip the system with a suitable amount of memory running at the manufacturer's maximum supported frequency. This is also typically run at JEDEC subtimings where possible. It is noted that some users are not keen on this policy, stating that sometimes the maximum supported frequency is quite low, or faster memory is available at a similar price, or that the JEDEC speeds can be prohibitive for performance. While these comments make sense, ultimately very few users apply memory profiles (either XMP or other) as they require interaction with the BIOS, and most users will fall back on JEDEC supported speeds - this includes home users as well as industry who might want to shave off a cent or two from the cost or stay within the margins set by the manufacturer. Where possible, we will extend out testing to include faster memory modules either at the same time as the review or a later date.

Test Setup
Intel Cascade Lake Core i9-10980XE
Motherboard ASRock X299 OC Formula (BIOS P1.80)
CPU Cooler TRUE Copper + Silverstone Fan
DRAM Corsair Vengeance RGB 4x8 GB DDR4-2933
GPU Sapphire RX 460 2GB (CPU Tests)
MSI GTX 1080 Gaming 8G (Gaming Tests)
PSU Corsair AX860i
SSD Crucial MX500 2TB
OS Windows 10 1909

For our motherboard, we are using the latest firmware. I do not believe that ASRock has updated its BIOSes to provide fixes for the latest Intel security updates, as these take time.

The latest AMD TR3 benchmarks were run by Gavin Bonshor, while I attended Supercomputing in Denver last week. Unfortunately both Intel and AMD decided to sample processors before the annual trade show conference, with launches only a couple of days after the show finished. As a result, our testing has been split between Gavin and myself, and we have endevoured to ensure parity through my automated testing suite.

Also, our compile test seems to have broken itself when we used Windows 10 1909, and due to travel we have not had time to debug why it is no longer working. We hope to get this test up and running in the new year, along with an updated test suite.

We must thank the following companies for kindly providing hardware for our multiple test beds. Some of this hardware is not in this test bed specifically, but is used in other testing.

Hardware Providers
Sapphire RX 460 Nitro MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X OC Crucial MX200 +
MX500 SSDs
Corsair AX860i +
AX1200i PSUs
G.Skill RipjawsV,
SniperX, FlareX
Crucial Ballistix
Power Consumption CPU Performance: Rendering Tests
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • nt300 - Tuesday, November 26, 2019 - link

    Do not thank Intel for anything CPU related. They've been milking consumers for many years, confusing people with several different sockets, chipsets, price points etc., this processor not compatible with that socket and so on. They've caused an industry mess with very expensive CPUs and miniscule IPC increases.
    Who to thank? AMD for launching ZEN and catching Intel by the surprise.
  • evernessince - Tuesday, November 26, 2019 - link

    While your at bringing up irrelevant points from over 7 years ago, might as well thank AMD for X64 as well. Are you going to fellate Intel for everything they've done in the past?
  • Korguz - Tuesday, November 26, 2019 - link

    evernessince dont forget the on die memory controller that intel also copied from amd :-)
    not irrelevant points, they are valid points.. it kinda proves intel likes to milk people for all they are worth, while stagnating the cpu industry, and over charging for their cpus as well. come on, the top sku for 10xxx cpus is 1k less then the cpu it is replacing, and it cant even do that for the most part, may as well just stick with the 9xxx cpus....
  • Xyler94 - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link

    While technically Intel was first to 64bit X86, AMD beat intel to X86-64bit, meaning it was both x86(32bit) and x86(64bit) compatible. Intel tried to go 64bit only, but it backfired on them hard, and so they scrambled to do both 32 and 64 bit, but AMD beat them to the punch, so much so Intel had to license that from AMD, and is the sole reason it's still known today as AMD-64
  • Qasar - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link

    Xyler94 i remember reading that good old microsoft didnt want to have to code windows for 2 different x86-64 instruction sets, so they made intel drop theirs and adopt AMDs instead, as they had already started programming windows for amd64...
  • Samus - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link

    You realize the only reason Intel lowered the mainstream bracket to the $300 level was competition from AMD's Black Edition CPU's. And after Ivy Bridge, they shot right back up to $400.

    So stop pretending Intel doesn't price their products based on competition from AMD. That's just ridiculous.
  • Beaver M. - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link

    Yeah well, lower prices are nice and all, but the product isnt that good.
    Its still the Skylake architecture, still ancient 14 nm, still has dozens of security flaws.
  • ksec - Tuesday, November 26, 2019 - link

    Thanking AMD for Intel's Price Cut and then continue to buy Intel?
  • JlHADJOE - Tuesday, November 26, 2019 - link

    Now W3175X needs to drop down to $2000 for the 32-core TR3 to have any kind of competition.
  • UglyFrank - Monday, November 25, 2019 - link

    This could make a great workstation processor for me but AMD is still much compelling.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now