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 Core 10th Gen Intel Core i9-10900K
Intel Core i7-10700K
Intel Core i5-10600K
Motherboard ASRock Z490 PG Velocita (P1.30a)
CPU Cooler TRUE Copper (2kg)
DRAM Corsair Vengeance RGB 4x8GB DDR4-2933
Corsair Vengeance RGB 4x8GB DDR4-2666
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


Please note we are still using our 2019 gaming test suite for CPU reviews with a GTX 1080. We are in the process of rewriting our gaming test suite with some new tests, such as Borderlands and Gears Tactics, as well as changing the settings we test and moving up to an RTX 2080 Ti. It's going to take a while to do regression testing for our gaming suite, so please bear with us.



Many thanks to...

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


Scale Up vs Scale Out: Benefits of Automation

One comment we get every now and again is that automation isn’t the best way of testing – there’s a higher barrier to entry, and it limits the tests that can be done. From our perspective, despite taking a little while to program properly (and get it right), automation means we can do several things:

  1. Guarantee consistent breaks between tests for cooldown to occur, rather than variable cooldown times based on ‘if I’m looking at the screen’
  2. It allows us to simultaneously test several systems at once. I currently run five systems in my office (limited by the number of 4K monitors, and space) which means we can process more hardware at the same time
  3. We can leave tests to run overnight, very useful for a deadline
  4. With a good enough script, tests can be added very easily

Our benchmark suite collates all the results and spits out data as the tests are running to a central storage platform, which I can probe mid-run to update data as it comes through. This also acts as a mental check in case any of the data might be abnormal.

We do have one major limitation, and that rests on the side of our gaming tests. We are running multiple tests through one Steam account, some of which (like GTA) are online only. As Steam only lets one system play on an account at once, our gaming script probes Steam’s own APIs to determine if we are ‘online’ or not, and to run offline tests until the account is free to be logged in on that system. Depending on the number of games we test that absolutely require online mode, it can be a bit of a bottleneck.

Benchmark Suite Updates

As always, we do take requests. It helps us understand the workloads that everyone is running and plan accordingly.

A side note on software packages: we have had requests for tests on software such as ANSYS, or other professional grade software. The downside of testing this software is licensing and scale. Most of these companies do not particularly care about us running tests, and state it’s not part of their goals. Others, like Agisoft, are more than willing to help. If you are involved in these software packages, the best way to see us benchmark them is to reach out. We have special versions of software for some of our tests, and if we can get something that works, and relevant to the audience, then we shouldn’t have too much difficulty adding it to the suite.

Socket, Silicon, Security, Overclocking, Motherboards Core-to-Core Latency: Issues with the Core i5
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • Gastec - Friday, May 22, 2020 - link

    "pairing a high-end GPU with a mid-range CPU" should already be a meme, so many times I've seen it copy-pasted.
  • dotjaz - Thursday, May 21, 2020 - link

    What funny stuff are you smoking? In all actual configurations, AMD doesn't lose by any meaningful margin at a much better value.
    Anandtech is running CPU test where you set the quality low and get 150+fps or even 400+fps, nobody actually does that.
  • deepblue08 - Thursday, May 21, 2020 - link

    Intel may not be a great value chip all around. But a 10 FPS lead in 1440p is a lead nevertheless: https://hexus.net/tech/reviews/cpu/141577-intel-co...
  • DrKlahn - Thursday, May 21, 2020 - link

    If that's worth the more expensive motherboard, beefier (and more costly) cooling, and increased heat then go for it. If you put 120fps next to 130fps without a counter up how many people could tell?Personally I don't see it as worth it at all. Nor do I consider it a dominating lead. But I'm sure there are people out there that will buy Intel for a negligible lead.
  • Spunjji - Friday, May 22, 2020 - link

    An entirely unnoticeable lead that you get by sacrificing any sort of power consumption / cooling sanity and spending measurably larger amounts of cash on the hardware to achieve the boost clocks required to get that lead.

    The difference was meaningful back when AMD had lower minimum framerates, less consistency and -30fps or so off the average. Now it's just silly.
  • babadivad - Thursday, May 21, 2020 - link

    Do you need a new mother board with these? If so they make even less sense than they already did.
  • MDD1963 - Friday, May 22, 2020 - link

    As for Intel owners, I don't think too many 8700K, 9600K or above owners would seriously feel they are CPU limited and in a dire/ imminent need of a CPU upgrade as they sit now, anyway. Users of prior generations (I'm still on 7700K) will make their choices at a time of their own choosing, of course, and not simply because 'a new generation is out'. (I mean, look at 8700K vs. 10600K results.....; looks almost like a rebadging operation)
  • khanikun - Wednesday, May 27, 2020 - link

    I was on a 7700k and didn't feel CPU limited at all, but decided to get an 8086k for the 2 more cores and just cause it was an 8086. For my normal workloads or gaming, I don't notice a difference. I do reencode videos maybe a couple times a year. The only times I'll see the difference.

    I'll probably just be sitting on this 8086k for the next few years, unless something on my machine breaks or Intel does something crazy ridiculous, like making some 8 core i7 on 10nm at 5 ghz all core, in a new socket, then making dual socket consumer boards for it for relatively decent price. I'd upgrade for that, just cause I'd like to try making a dual processor system that isn't some expensive workstation/server system.
  • Spunjji - Friday, May 22, 2020 - link

    Yes, you do. So no, they don't make sense xD
  • Gastec - Friday, May 22, 2020 - link

    Games...framerate is pointless in video games, all that matters now are the "surprise mechanics".

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now