Price/performance ratio still leans heavily in AMD’s favor too, even if these chips are for different form factors. The TDP for the latter part is 35 W while the i9-10900F is listed at 65 W, but being an Intel desktop processor that just reflects the TDP for the base clock, with much higher energy demands required for higher clocks (e.g. Secondly, the Intel CPU is for desktop use while the AMD APU is targeted for mobile use. Firstly, the Comet Lake chip has two more cores to rely upon compared to the 8-core Renoir part. It’s worth taking a moment to point out the glaring differences here between the Intel Core i9-10900F and the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS. In our Geekbench 4.4 test, with the Ryzen 9 4900HS powering a brand-new Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV, we recorded a single-core score of 5,372 points and a multi-core score of 30,230 points. The two chips are not particularly direct competitors, but it does demonstrate what a performance beast the Ryzen 4000 chip is. With 10 cores, 20 threads, and a TDP of 65 W (based on base clock rate), the desktop CPU should be rewarding future users with high levels of multi-core performance.īut as has been immediately pointed out after the Intel Core i9-10900F’s result was shared, this Comet Lake desktop CPU still falls behind a Renoir mobile APU, in this case in the form of the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS. The Intel Core i9-10900F was tested on Geekbench 4.4 and managed a single-core score of 5,747 points and a good multi-core score of 29,363 points. Renoir comparisons, especially in regard to synthetic benchmarks.
It seems Intel just can't catch a break at the moment when it comes to Comet Lake vs.
0 kommentar(er)
