Intel released the Core i5, a mainstream processor that is much faster than its predecessors. The new chip comes with Intel Turbo Boost 2.0 and an unlocked multiplier for overclocking capabilities built in, making it ideal for gaming desktops and laptops alike.
The “intel core i5 laptop” is a laptop that is designed for people who are looking to use their computer for work and play. The laptop has an Intel Core i5 processor with 8 GB of memory.
Intel Core i5-10600(K) vs. AMD Ryzen 5 3600: Which is the best deal?
Every PC builder and gamer must ask themselves the same question: Which CPU delivers higher performance and which CPU offers the best price-performance ratio?
This article compares Intel’s Core i9-10900K is a high-end processor. and Intel Core i5-10600K processor K-models against AMD’s Ryzen 5 3600.
The CPU is a critical component of your computer and may have a significant influence on performance, both good and negative.
If your PC has a high-performance graphics card (GPU), a slow CPU might slow down your GPU and, as a result, your gaming performance.
If such is the case, this article will focus on either the Intel i5 10600K or the Ryzen 5 3600 CPU.
Intel Core i5-10600(K) vs. AMD Ryzen 5 3600: Which is the Best Value?
Intel Core i5-10600 comes in first place (K)
- For a midrange CPU, top-notch gaming frame rates
- Excellent thermal efficiency
- HyperThreading on 6 cores
- In comparison to Ryzen 5s, it’s more expensive in terms of core/thread count.
CPU with the best performance
Santa Clara’s Comet Lake-S processors now have 10 cores and clock speeds of up to 5.3 GHz in the top variant. Intel Core i-10000 means 32 different models, up to DDR4-2933 support (only for Core i9-10900 [K/F] and Core i7-10700 [K/F]), core variations of two to ten computing hearts including HT (SMT), a new maximum Thermal Design Power (TDP) limit of 125 watts, and a new Boost Technology reserved for the top model, the Core i9-10900 (K/F).
The CPUs, however, are still made in 14 nm and only support PCI-Express 3.0. As is (usually) customary with Intel, the new CPUs need the use of a new CPU socket, which necessitates the use of updated motherboards.
Techtestreport will keep you up to date on all the latest developments in the socket 1200 platform.
We expanded our test setup and customized it for the Intel Core i9-10900K and Core i5-10600K, since Comet Lake-S is an entirely new platform:
The mainboard, an Asrock Z490 Phantom Gaming Velocita with BIOS version 1.30, is a recent addition. The rest of the components are the same:
- NZXT Kraken X52 CPU cooler + “case fan” to cool the voltage converters
- MSI Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 Ti Lightning Z graphics card (clock rate per MSI Afterburner set to +1000 (MEM) to get around GPU limit).
- Seasonic Prime Platinum power supply (750 Watt, 80-Plus Platinum)
- Per accessible memory channel, 16 GiByte Dual-Ranked-RAM is used. The speed is determined by the CPU manufacturer’s specifications.
Operating system and driver
- In its default setup, the Geforce driver is now in use.
- The most recent version of Windows 10 is the 64-bit version.
We’re collecting vital information on Comet Lake-S before we refer to the two test candidates. Many fascinating data regarding the new Intel CPUs are hidden in the table, which we will now outline briefly:
- The Core i9-10900 (K/F), Core i7-10700 (K/F), and Core i5-10600 (K/F) are the only variants with a TDP of 125 watts.
- Only the Core i9 and Core i7 processors support DDR4-2933 memory; all other versions use the standard DDR4-2666.
- Only the Core i9, Core i7, Core i5-10600 (K/F), and Core i5-10400 (F) models are soldered and use thermal paste under the heatspreader; all other CPUs utilize a 6-core die (Stepping: G1) and use thermal paste under the heatspreader.
- Thermal Velocity Boost is only available on Core i9 CPUs, with the exception of the Core i9-10900T.
- Turbo Boost 3.0 is only available on Core i9 and Core i7 processors.
- All Pentium and Celeron CPUs provide no performance gain. (See below for explanations of the enhancements.)
- SMT is available on all CPUs save the lowest Celerons.
- There is no new iGPU, and even the most expensive versions still utilize the old UHD Graphics 630, which is already overworked with most FullHD games but perfectly suitable for office work.
- Intel has lowered the prices of the CPUs, for example, the Core i7-10700K processor is almost identical to the Intel Core i9-9900K but costs roughly 100 euros less. With Zen 2, AMD should be the deciding factor.
Overall, the K-CPUs receive the lion’s share of the new features, including the benefits of a bigger energy budget and improved memory connection, making the hexa and new quad cores appear pretty awful in comparison.
Because the new motherboard must be able to cope with the higher power consumption of those processors, upgraders with today’s tuning ambitions must limit themselves to K-CPUs from Comet Lake-S and pay a hefty surcharge compared to the practically equally fast CPUs without the K-suffix, especially because the new motherboard must be able to cope with the higher power consumption of those processors, and Z490 boards are to be consistently more expensive than their predecessors.
Because the heatspreader is now a little thicker and the die is a little thinner, cooling the CPUs should be a little simpler.
This difference is hardly visible at first glance, but both CPUs keep cool under stress, in our view.
Introduction to the Intel Core i9-10900K and Core i5-10600K processors
The first is the Intel Core i9-10900K, which is Comet Lake-top S’s model.
The CPU has ten native cores, and each HT can support up to 20 threads.
The base clock rate is (up to) 3.7 GHz, but with a special thermal velocity boost, single core speeds of up to 5.3 GHz and all-core speeds of up to 4.9 GHz are possible.
This new sort of boost is being employed in desktop CPUs for the first time, and the Core i9-10900 (K/F) is the only CPU in the whole Comet Lake S lineup that utilizes it.
Intel makes it clear that the clock rates will be decreased if the CPU is utilized for a longer length of time. The Core i9-10900K has a TDP of 125 watts.
This should not be accepted at face value, as Coffee Lake-R has shown.
On the other hand, Intel’s Core i5-10600K is the long-awaited successor to the wildly successful i7-8700K (Core i7-8700K).
Yes, there is a Core i7-9700K processor, however it has eight native cores without SMT, while the Intel Core i5-9600K has just six native cores with SMT.
As a result, a Core i7-8700K is often the superior option.
Returning to the Intel Core i5-10600K: The new Hexacore has a TDP of 125 watts and a clock speed of 4.8 GHz, according to Intel. In comparison, the following models:
| Model | Threads / cores | Clock’s foundation | Boost for the whole body | 2.0 Turbo Boost (SC) | 3.0 Turbo Boost (SC) | Thermal Velocity Boost (SC / MC) is a technique for increasing the speed of a vehicle. | TDP is a term that refers to the (watts) | Support for memory | The cost (US dollars) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Core i9-10900K | 10c / 20t | 3.7 GHz | 4.8 GHz | 5.1 GHz | 5.2 GHz | 5.3 GHz and 4.9 GHz | 125 | DDR4-2933 | 488 |
| Core i9-9900K | 8c / 16t | 3.6 GHz | 4.7 GHz | 5.0 GHz | – | – | 95 | DDR4-2666 | 499 |
| Core i7-10700K | 8c / 16t | 3.8 GHz | 4.7 GHz | 5.0 GHz | 5.1 GHz | – | 125 | DDR4-2933 | 374 |
| Core i7-9700K | 8c / 8t | 3.6 GHz | 4.6 GHz | 4.9 GHz | – | – | 95 | DDR4-2666 | 399 |
| Core i5-10600K | 6c / 12t | 4.1 GHz | 4.5 GHz | 4.8 GHz | – | – | 125 | DDR4-2666 | 262 |
| Core i7-8700K | 6c / 12t | 3.7 GHz | 4.3 GHz | 4.7 GHz | – | – | 95 | DDR4-2666 | 370 |
| Core i5-9600K | 6c / 6t | 3.7 GHz | 4.3 GHz | 4.6 GHz | – | – | 95 | DDR4-2666 | 263 |
The Core i5-10600K is not only less expensive than its predecessor, but it also has faster clock speeds.
Obviously, Intel has improved the manufacturing process over time, but with a purified energy corset, greater clock speeds are achievable as well.
The main concern is whether the CPUs need such a high TDP to stay up, or whether they perform as well as their predecessors, at least in terms of gaming.
The option to switch off HT for individual cores is a brand-new feature.
You can even run the 10-core with 12 or 16 maximum threads instead of 20 if you choose, which might improve performance in certain games.
We couldn’t find out whether this functionality is available on all Comet Lake processors until after the deadline.
Intel has received an enquiry, and we will notify you as soon as we get additional information at the right location.
An upgraded version of the well-known Intel Extreme Tuning Utility includes these and other new capabilities.
This application, like AMD’s Ryzen Master, enables you to overclock your CPU without having to enter the BIOS.
The multiple boost modes for the Intel Core i9-10900K and Core i5-10600K processors are discussed.
Everything begins with the base clock: the TDP of the particular CPU ensures that this clock frequency is maintained.
Individual cores (or all of them) adjust to the workload if the CPU now has a turbo mode.
All new Comet Lake-S core models have Intel’s Turbo Boost Max Technology 2.0, which elevates individual cores to a predefined maximum, which is typically the case with games since they are not yet built to utilise many CPU cores.
This is followed by Intel Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0, which offers a unique feature:
Comet Lake processors, like AMD’s Zen 2, feature independent “better quality” CPU cores that can tolerate a higher clock frequency while using the same power supply.
This boost mode automatically identifies certain cores and raises their clock speed by 100 MHz.
Boost 3.0, like Boost 2.0, is only available in single-core mode.
The Intel Thermal Velocity Boost function, which was first released in April 2018, but exclusively in the mobile industry, is the most intense of the feelings.
This increase is also available on a Core i9-9900K, at least theoretically, since it is deactivated by default on this model.
The CPU accelerates by another 100 MHz in the single-core range with the aid of Thermal Velocity Boost, but only if the core temperatures are below 70°C, which should be doable with sufficient cooling.
With the exception of the T-model, only the Core i9-10900 models in Comet Lake-S have this capability.
Finally, when all CPU cores are equally loaded, as they are in apps like Cinebench or Handbrake, the all-core boost is implemented.
It’s worth noting that support for the boost modes isn’t required for them to work properly.
A substantial impact is also played by the mainboard and, in particular, the CPU cooling. Individual Boost Modes have their own set of regulations.
Intel’s advice is categorized into three categories: “PL1,” “PL2,” and “Tau.”
The model’s TDP is described by PL1. The maximum TDP that may be used throughout the period of “Tau” is described by PL2. This time value for Coffee Lake was 28 seconds.
Comet Lake-S is a comet that orbits the sun. Intel cut the time in half, to 56 seconds. This indicates that the CPU may consume a 250-watt energy budget for 56 seconds.
Many benchmarks take less than a minute to complete. A prankster who has negative feelings about it.
We examined the boost behavior of the Core i9-10900K and Core i5-10600K and discovered that the CPUs strictly adhere to their energy budgets, if not exceeding them.
Individual CPU cores progressively clock down to keep within the maximum range of the allowed TDP if the CPUs are limited to Intel’s strict specifications.
However, if you keep all settings on “Auto,” the cores will perform the same thing.
However, in applications where the CPUs are inherently better used, a restriction produces a mild performance reduction relative to a “open” configuration, even while the absolute consumption under load has not changed or has very marginally changed.
In our situation, the temperature under load was also interesting: the Intel Core i9-10900K in particular made care not to grow warmer than 70°C in both apps and games.
The perfect balance of waste heat, power consumption, and performance has been found.
In general, the Comet Lake processors function similarly to AMD’s Zen 2 processors.
They boost as much as possible, particularly in the single-core area, which significantly speeds up games, and they keep to the all-core boost in apps, which leads us to the benchmarks.
No one could have predicted the Core i9-10900dominance K’s in gaming.
This CPU naturally has to give the highest performance, with 10 cores clocking at up to 5.3 GHz.
However, certain games, such as Total War Three Kingdoms or The Witcher 3, cannot run on more than eight cores.
Then a faster clock speed is pointless.
The Core i9-10900performance K’s in Anno 1800 is quite remarkable.
When it comes to single-core efficiency and minimal CPU-internal latencies, Ubisoft’s building game shines.
A Core i5-10600K is quicker than a Core i9-9900KS in this test.
Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, on the other hand, depicts the two test applicants in a more realistic daily setting.
Overall, both models’ game performance may be considered as successful. The tiny i5 is somewhat quicker than AMD’s 3700X on average, while the i9 raises the bar to 31%.
The Intel Core i9-10900excellent K’s frametimes demonstrate the great gaming performance, since they are consistently low and smooth.
Due to its high clock rate and the addition of L3 cache, the Core i5-10600K may also excel here.
In the future PCGH edition, there will be more benchmarks and frametimes.
Benchmarks for Applications for Intel Core i9-10900K and Core i5-10600K
Despite having numerous cores on the desktop, Intel’s Coffee Lake CPUs were rather poor in applications. With Comet Lake-S, Intel has effectively addressed this problem.
Of course, the Core i9-10900two K’s more cores assist, but the greater clock speed and internal enhancements to the L3 cache also aid.
The ten-core gets uncomfortably close to the Ryzen 9 3900X, while the Core i5-10600K takes on the hexacores of the Zen-2.
Even though Intel touts the CPUs as gaming processors, the eight- and ten-cores of the Comet Lake generation are attractive for Content Creator.
Electricity usage of Intel Core i9-10900K and Core i5-10600K processors
The device will detonate as soon as possible. Most people would assume the first two Comet Lake-S models to have a high power consumption under load, yet they don’t.
Of course, we look at power use in games with higher stakes.
That’s almost identical to the Core i9-9900K in the Core i9-10900K.
Sure, a 10900K can boost up to 250 watts, but in most games, this isn’t required to reach the 5.3 GHz velocity increase.
Shadow of the Tomb Raider got the highest single figure, with an average power usage of 93 watts.
This is even lower than an Intel Core i9-9900TDP K’s and far lower than Intel’s TDP recommendations for the Core i9-10900K.
We predicted a continuously greater power consumption with open limitations since we essentially evaluate CPUs with TDP lock, thereby restricting them to Intel’s specs.
PL1 and PL2 have been boosted to 4,000 watts, and the tau value has been extended to over 128 seconds.
The “Unlocked”-10900K test only indicated a rise of one (in number 1) watt in average power usage in games.
Even in the programs we use, the value has stayed constant.
This raises the issue of why Intel gave the top model such a high TDP.
One argument is that Intel wants to set clear limitations in terms of TDP, since many people have criticized the predecessor, the Core i9-9900K, for its excessive power consumption.
In any event, we can give the green light on power use for commonplace tasks:
Comet Lake-S CPUs, like as the Core i9-10900K and Core i5-10600K, are more efficient than their predecessors and do not cause excessive power usage.
In Handbrake, the maximum figure was 187 watts with the Core i9-10900K.
However, in most applications, the CPU performs just as well as an AMD Ryzen 9 3900X, and in terms of gaming performance, both opponents are closer than AMD would want.
More information will be available in the next edition of PCGH, as well as in the next update of the efficiency index.
Conclusion: Intel Core i5-10600K is the best gaming CPU.
Apart from the absence of PCI-E 4.0 compatibility, it’s tough to find anything bad to say about the CPUs.
The major emphasis of this test was gaming performance, and both CPUs sailed through with flying colors.
They exceed Coffee Lake and are continuously more efficient than its predecessors. They are also quicker than AMD’s Zen 2.
As long as games with earlier engines are called, the latter are almost equivalent; nonetheless, on average, Comet Lake-S outperforms Intel’s prediction of 30%.
Intel has also re-evaluated its pricing in light of the competition.
Comet Lake-S is quicker, less expensive, and more efficient than Coffee Lake, and 14nm manufacturing is still going on.
Ryzen 5 3600X is ranked second.
- In applications, it outperforms the Intel Core i5-9600K, and it comes close to matching the 8700K and 10600K.
- Gaming performance has increased by 10% compared to the previous generation.
- The best value-for-money
Ryzen 5 3600x has the best price-performance ratio.
The Ryzen 5 3600X under test is the most cheap Zen2 CPU from the current Ryzen 3000 series, after the Ryzen 5 3600.
The only differences between the six-core processors are clock speed and thermal power dissipation, yet the 3600X costs around $30 more than the 3600 without the “X.”
In the Ryzen 5 3600X benchmark test, the obvious issue of whether it’s worth paying the additional money is explored.
In our evaluation of the Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 7 3700X, we go over the most significant advancements of the Ryzen 3000 generation, as well as the X570 mainboards that were also released with it.
Gaming benchmarks for the Ryzen 5 3600X
When two processors, such as the Ryzen 5 3600X and Ryzen 5 3600, have the same architecture, the same number of cores and threads, and no differences in cache sizes, the clock speed under typical gaming load is the only thing that practically remains as a potentially important factor for performance.
Higher clock speeds don’t seem to help Ryzen CPUs much anyhow, in our experience.
Our test samples of the two CPUs, on the other hand, show just a little variation.
In our test games, the Ryzen 5 3600X clocks at about 4.2 GHz, whilst the Ryzen 5 3600 clocks at 4.1 GHz.
The 100 MHz difference is hardly noticeable in the benchmarks, since both CPUs perform almost identically.
Application Benchmarks
The image is the same in apps as it is in gaming testing, as seen by our equal performance rating for the Ryzen 5 3600X and Ryzen 5 3600.
Both CPUs achieve a surprising result when compared to the generally considerably more costly processors with eight or more cores, thanks to six cores and virtual core doubling.
The Ryzen 5 3600X, on the other hand, cannot provide any justifications for its higher price when compared to the Ryzen 5 3600.
Benchmarks in real time
Not unexpectedly, the Ryzen 5 3600X continues to compete with the Ryzen 5 3600 in streaming benchmarks, where the two CPUs provide almost similar scores.
Both CPUs are only partly capable for streaming in 1080p with great picture quality at 60 frames per second.
The switch to 720p resolution, on the other hand, guarantees a perfectly smooth stream with a pleasingly modest fps drop in the game.
Power consumption
In terms of power consumption, the Ryzen 5 3600X matches the Ryzen 5 3600 in our tests, with both CPUs showing to be efficient models due to 7 nm fabrication, which means they don’t have to worry about competing with Intel.
The CPU benchmarking system
To avoid the GPU becoming a bottleneck as soon as possible, we choose Nvidia’s highly powerful Geforce GTX 1080 Ti as the graphics card for our test setup.
For the next test system, a switch to the even faster Geforce RTX 2080 Ti is already planned.
Different genres are represented in the games that have been tested.
Assassin’s Creed: Origins (third-person action role-playing game), Civilization 6 (lap strategy), Kingdom Come: Deliverance (first-person role-playing game), Project Cars 2 (racing game), Total War: Warhammer 2 (real-time strategy), and Wolfenstein 2: The New Colossus are among them (first-person shooter).
DirectX 12 is omitted on purpose.
The interface has yet to catch on, resulting in poorer frame rates in Civilization 6 and Total War: Warhammer on our test system than with DirectX 11.
In the shape of Wolfenstein 2, we have at least one game in our lineup that uses the Vulkan interface, which is largely technically impressive but not yet generally utilized.
In terms of resolution and detail level, we chose Full HD (1920×1080) and high details.
The visual card becomes more a bottleneck at greater detail levels and resolutions, such as WQHD (25601440) or 4K (38402160).
Lower resolutions, such as 128070, are, in our view, too far removed from reality.
Previously, we utilized Fraps to assess game performance; today, OCAT (Open Capture and Analytics Tool) is used instead.
Instead of the lowest attainable frame rate, OCAT displays the “99th percentile.” As the name implies, this limit is exceeded by 99 percent of all measured values.
The 99th percentile has the benefit of filtering out individual slips as compared to specifying a pure minimum fps number (or the one percent of the lowest values).
Because these errors are frequently undetectable while playing the game, the 99th percentile is more useful, as it better reflects the majority of attained performance.
All CPUs are tested at a clock rate of 2,933 MHz and 16.0 GByte DDR4 RAM in dual channel mode.
In our experience, using RAM with even higher clock rates may assist Ryzen CPUs reach better performance in particular.
However, we chose to test with the Ryzen 2000 CPUs’ officially maximum guaranteed clock and to replicate the same conditions for the other processors in the test field (despite the fact that some of them only officially support slightly lower clock rates, such as 2,666 MHz or 2,400 MHz in the case of the Core i3 8100 – or slightly higher in the case of the Ryzen 3000).
The operating system is Windows 10, which, like the games, is installed on an SSD.
We put the CPUs to the test in a variety of real-world situations, such as encoding a movie with handbrake or monitoring load times in Civilization 6.
We also test the CPUs’ performance while broadcasting to Twitch.tv through OBS.
The power consumption is also determined, on the one hand, when playing Assassin’s Creed: Origins, and on the other hand, while running Cinebench R15, which utilizes all cores and threads to their maximum potential.
Already, a short time after its debut, the Ryzen 5 3600X from our test is approaching the Ryzen 5 3600 in price – no surprise, given that both versions show almost identical performance in our testing.
Conclusion: The best price-performance ratio is: 3600x Ryzen 5
While it’s conceivable that the Ryzen 5 3600X produces somewhat better overclocking results, in my experience, the Ryzen 3000 CPUs don’t have much space for improvement.
Last but not least, the Ryzen 5 3600X’s somewhat superior included cooler (Wraith Spire rather than Wraith Stealth) might be a point in its favor.
This is important to us since we do not use CPU coolers that are bought separately. AMD’s models give decent performance, but they still fall short of several other manufacturers’ products in terms of cooling performance and capacity.
Personally, I would choose the Ryzen 5 3600X over the Ryzen 5 3600 since the performance in overclocking varies. The better cooler alone is worth the money.
Overall, the Ryzen 5 3600X provides superior performance at a lesser cost than the i5 10600K.
As a result, the Ryzen 5 3600X is our best value for money.
Conclusion: Ryzen 5 3600 vs. Intel Core i5-10600(K)
At the conclusion of the day, the Intel i5 10600(K) and AMD’s Ryzne 5 3600 were neck and neck.
Both CPUs are quite powerful in terms of performance.
Overall, if you want the finest gaming performance without sacrificing anything, the Intel i5 10600 is the way to go (K).
If you use your PC mainly as a workstation rather than a gaming machine, the Ryzen 5 3600 is a better choice.
Also, of the two CPUs evaluated, the Ryzen 5 3600 has the greatest price-performance ratio.
When you consider that the i5 10600K only provides 10% greater performance than the Ryzen 5 3600 while costing over 30% less, it’s a no-brainer for budget-conscious individuals.
Overall, we have to declare that the Ryzen 5 3600 is our favorite. It simply provides outstanding performance at an affordable price.
There are also predictions that AMD will launch the new Ryzen 4000 series around the end of 2020.
If this series is successful, it might spell the end for Intel, particularly if AMD maintains its price approach.
We’ll keep you informed!
The “Intel Core i5 price” is a computer processor that is designed by Intel. The processor has the codename “Coffee Lake”. It was released on October 5th, 2017. Reference: intel core i5 price.
{“@context”:”https://schema.org”,”@type”:”FAQPage”,”mainEntity”:[{“@type”:”Question”,”name”:”Is the i5 a good processor?”,”acceptedAnswer”:{“@type”:”Answer”,”text”:”A: The i5 is a good processor for general computing.”}},{“@type”:”Question”,”name”:”Is Intel Core i5 outdated?”,”acceptedAnswer”:{“@type”:”Answer”,”text”:””}},{“@type”:”Question”,”name”:”What does Intel Core i5 mean?”,”acceptedAnswer”:{“@type”:”Answer”,”text”:”A: This means that this computer is equipped with an Intel Core i5 processor, which can be used to run many different programs such as Microsoft Word and Photoshop.”}}]}
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the i5 a good processor?
A: The i5 is a good processor for general computing.
Is Intel Core i5 outdated?
What does Intel Core i5 mean?
A: This means that this computer is equipped with an Intel Core i5 processor, which can be used to run many different programs such as Microsoft Word and Photoshop.
Related Tags
- intel core i5 macbook
- intel core i5-1035g1
- intel core i5 price philippines
- intel core i5-10600k
- intel core i5-3470