A few weeks after the release of Comet Lake S like that Core i9-10900K / i5-10600K (test) Intel published the technical documents of the CPUs. These show that the processors can use a lot more energy in the short term than the TDP of 125 watts, 65 watts and 35 watts suggests. Even with cheaper boards with a B460 or H470 chip, a CPU behaves completely different depending on the board than the specifications (PDF # 1, PDF # 2) would be expected.
Job market
The background is that the TDP (Thermal Design Power) – i.e. the thermal power loss – is only one of many values at Intel. Specifically, the TDP corresponds to the permanent power consumption (PL1), but due to the thermal inertia of the CPU and cooler, Intel also allows significantly more energy to be supplied in the short term (PL2). The duration of this boost is determined by the Turbo Time Parameter (TAU), which also includes factors such as an exponentially weighted moving average (EWMA) that can reduce the TAU.
A Core i9-10900K, for example, runs continuously at 125 watts, but can also absorb 250 watts for up to 56 seconds. A Core i5-10400, on the other hand, is designed for 65 watts, for example, but Intel allows 134 watts for up to 28 seconds. In the case of the T models with 35 watts, however, the manufacturer provides peaks of sometimes 92 watts up to 123 watts, which can lead to smaller CPU coolers causing their fans to turn up and become (un) loud. In the worst case, the power supply’s performance is not sufficient for the peak loads.
Cores / threads | Clock | PL1 | PL2 | DEW | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Core i9-10900K (F) | 10C / 20T | 3.7 to 5.3 GHz | 125 watts | 250 watts | 56 sec |
Core i9-10900 (F) | 10C / 20T | 2.8 to 5.2 GHz | 65 watts | 224 watts | 28 sec |
Core i9-10900T | 10C / 20T | 1.9 to 4.6 GHz | 35 watts | 123 watts | 28 sec |
Core i7-10700K (F) | 8C / 16T | 3.8 to 5.1 GHz | 125 watts | 229 watts | 56 sec |
Core i7-10700 (F) | 8C / 16T | 2.9 to 4.8 GHz | 65 watts | 224 watts | 28 sec |
Core i7-10700T | 8C / 16T | 2.0 to 4.5 GHz | 35 watts | 123 watts | 28 sec |
Core i5-10600K (F) | 6C / 12T | 4.1 to 4.8 GHz | 125 watts | 182 watts | 56 sec |
Core i5-10600 | 6C / 12T | 3.3 to 4.8 GHz | 65 watts | 134 watts | 28 sec |
Core i5-10600T | 6C / 12T | 2.4 to 4.0 GHz | 35 watts | 92 watts | 28 sec |
Core i5-10500 | 6C / 12T | 3.1 to 4.5 GHz | 65 watts | 134 watts | 28 sec |
Core i5-10500T | 6C / 12T | 2.3 to 3.8 GHz | 35 watts | 92 watts | 28 sec |
Core i5-10400 (F) | 6C / 12T | 2.9 to 4.3 GHz | 65 watts | 134 watts | 28 sec |
Core i5-10400T | 6C / 12T | 2.0 to 3.6 GHz | 35 watts | 92 watts | 28 sec |
Core i3-10320 | 4C / 8T | 3.8 to 4.6 GHz | 65 watts | 90 watts | 28 sec |
Core i3-10300 | 4C / 8T | 3.7 to 4.4 GHz | 65 watts | 90 watts | 28 sec |
Core i3-10300T | 4C / 8T | 3.0 to 3.9 GHz | 35 watts | 55 watts | 28 sec |
Core i3-10100 | 4C / 8T | 3.6 to 4.3 GHz | 65 watts | 90 watts | 28 sec |
Core i3-10100T | 4C / 8T | 3.0 to 3.8 GHz | 35 watts | 55 watts | 28 sec |
Comet Lake S – PL1, PL2, TAU according to Intel
–
According to Intel, the values for PL1, PL2 and TAU are only recommendations. Mainboard partners are free to adjust their boards differently and, for example, open the PL1 upwards. For example, a 65-watt chip becomes a 125-watt or even 255-watt model, which in the Core i7-10700 without K brings the processor’s clock rates close to that of a Core i7-10700K. Even with models such as the Core i5-10400F, the power consumption without a corresponding PL1 is significantly higher than 65 watts, because it rises far under render load over 100 watts. With the T models, manufacturers seem to adhere to Intel’s suggestions, but we have not yet been able to check this.
Some boards do not explain what is hidden in automatic settings – others do. With tools like Aida64 or HW info However, it can be shown which values for PL1, PL2 and TAU the respective mainboard has preset.
–