An upcoming Intel Core i9-10980HK laptop chip has hit Geekbench 4 (opens in new tab) before being announced, as spotted by hardware sniffer @TUM_APISAK (opens in new tab).
The high-end i9-10980HK, which is the successor to the current Core i9-9980HK mobile processor, is reportedly based on the Comet Lake microarchitecture. However, the 14nm chip should retain the majority of the characteristics of its Coffee Lake predecessor, with upgrades mostly coming in the form of improved clock speeds (opens in new tab).
- Based on our testing, these are the best gaming laptops (opens in new tab)
- Before you buy, check out out gaming laptop buying guide (opens in new tab)
The Geekbench 4 listing (opens in new tab) shows the i9-10980HK with an eight-core, 16-thread configuration with 16MB of L3 cache (opens in new tab), just like the i9-9980HK . The octa-core chip reportedly runs with a 3.1 GHz base clock (opens in new tab), approximately 29.2% higher than that of the i9-9980HK. The boost clock improvement isn't as impressive, though. According to the entry, the i9-10980HK boosts up to 5.27 GHz, which is only 270 MHz or 5.4% faster than the i9-9980HK.
Intel Core 10980HK Specs
|Model||Cores / Threads||Base / Boost Clock (GHz)||L3 Cache (MB)||TDP (W)|
|Intel Core i9-10980HK*||8 / 16||3.10 / 5.27||16||45|
|Intel Core i9-9980HK||8 / 16||2.40 / 5.00||16||45|
|AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS*||8 / 16||3.00 / 4.40||8||35|
|AMD Ryzen 9 4900H*||8 / 16||3.00 / 4.40||8||45|
|AMD Ryzen 7 4800H||8 / 16||2.90 / 4.20||8||45|
*Specifications are not confirmed.
The i9-9980HK conforms to a 45W TDP (thermal design power), so it's only natural to expect the i9-10980HK to do the same. Comet Lake desktop chips (opens in new tab) are rumored to feature a higher TDP in comparison to their successors due to the increase in core count. In the i9-10980HK's case, the chip doesn't come with more cores than its predecessor; however, the faster clock speeds should make it run a bit hotter than the i9-9980HK.
THe i9-10980HK will go head-to-head against the likes of the AMD Ryzen 7 4800H and Ryzen 9 4900H (unannounced) APUs (opens in new tab) that operate within the 45W envelope.
The i9-10980HK as with the Ryzen 7 4800H and Ryzen 9 4900H haven't officially launched yet. Until we get reviews of the processors, take these early performance numbers with a grain of salt.
The i9-10980HK reportedly scored 6,321 and 32,038 points in Geekbench 4's single-core and multi-core tests, respectively. A Ryzen 7 4800H Geekbench entry (opens in new tab) from last week shows the octa-core chip putting up 5,228 single-core and 31,614 multi-core scores. This would mean the i9-10980HK has the advantage in single-thread performance by 20.9%. The performance difference in multi-threaded performance is only a mere 1.3%.
While the i9-10980HK appears to beat the Ryzen 7 4800H, AMD still has the Ryzen 9 4900H up its sleeves. Sadly, neither the Ryzen 9 4900H nor Ryzen 9 4900HS (opens in new tab), (an Asus-exclusive, according to AnandTech (opens in new tab)), have appeared in Geekbench's database, so a direct comparison isn't available yet.
This is terrible news for Intel because it means no IPC improvement and thus AMD Zen 2 gen is going to slay Intel mobile where it really hurts, power efficiency.
Nothing from Intel would be better, this just Intel proving to the world they have nothing. What is more alarming is the spin Toms is doing with this article, it's subtle but I would have expected more nuance and objectively, not such a superficial and simplistic article. The title is unjustified.
also 5.27ghz on a 45W rated chip? this bitch will throttle like mad, imagine manufacturers actually adding a 45W worth of cooling hardware, enjoy your campfire of a laptop.
I think Intel's single core boost clock is now just for marketing. Their desktop processors have trouble getting over 5.1ghz with 125watt tdp. How are we to expect a 45w chip to get to 5.27ghz? Doesn't make any sense.
Sustain performance is not something that people worry about. It only comes into question on tasks requiring no human intervention. You won't have a job in such a case, let alone a high-end laptop.
Example: I write my own code to do mapping. The idea is to show geopolitical events over time by updating a displayed map of an area (think world and migration of language or the Roman conquests of Europe, Asia or Africa). A typical map may have 16 M triangles to form areas on the earth. The projection to be used is user selectable. The orientation of the projection is user selectable and can change in real time. The globe can rotate at real time based on either user interaction or the passing of world time (one year per second).
A simulation consists of updating projected area, text, color of a rotating projection at 60 frames a second. A frame may contain maybe 16 M floating (double and divides ) calcs, packaging for OpenGL, and a redenering by the graphic engine. Hstorically, bandwidth is the issue. There is nothing gained by 6 vs 8 cores because memory BW is slow and the cache is too small. But while I watch or do the simulation , I can interact with it. The load is dynamically spread across the pools of cores based on the cycle times o each core on the last frame.
When I run it, the fans are high and florida power has to kick in another nuclear reactor.
I know I might be better off with a desktop, but I am among the poor and stupid that will do this crap from a 44ft sailboat, RV, my boycave or back lania at minutes at a time.
Not EVERYONE is the same. But I'm weird, retired and have no life.
If true, it'll probably be something like, one core boost for 0.2 seconds. Methinks Intel is stealing AMDs "boost" feature of high clocks for extremely short intervals.
While this feature will let users like Chung up there, open a browser in 0.001 seconds instead of 0.0015 seconds, (thank you Intel - we've been waiting for this!), unfortunately people will need to run sustained workloads on these processors, else why on earth would you need an 8 core in a laptop if one has no intention of doing anything but very light tasks? Just to brag about how many cores you have? Whatever, Bulldozer ...