Intel’s 10th-gen “Comet Lake-H” mobile processors for gaming laptops aspire to something that, so far, AMD’s Ryzen hasn’t emphasized: pure clock speed.
The single-core turbo frequency reflects what Intel calls Intel Thermal Velocity Boost (TVB), which typically provides two “speed bins” worth of overclocking ability–200MHz, in real-world terms. Intel has improved Thermal Velocity Boost in this generation to allow overclocking the chip to 65W, far higher than its 45W rating. Thermal Velocity Boost works hand in hand with on-die and in-system temperature sensors, pushing the speeds up higher until they reach unsafe or uncomfortable levels. In the case of the Core i9-10980HK, that equates to 5.3GHz up to 65 degrees Celsius, 5.2GHz at 85 degrees Celsius, and 5.1GHz at 100 degrees Celsius, Intel executives said.
Intel’s TVB works with Speed Optimizer, a one-click overclocking feature built into Intel’s Extreme Tuning Utility. The related Intel Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0 also identifies the two fastest-performing cores on the chip and pushes lightly-threaded apps like games to them.
Another generational improvement is the memory. While the 9th-gen mobile Core chips used DDR4-2666 memory, the Comet Lake-H series bumps that to DDR4-2933.
How fast is Intel’s Comet Lake-H, exactly?
So we know how fast these chips are, in terms of clock speed. But exactly how much performance are they expected to deliver?
Recall Intel’s newfound love of real-world benchmarks: great for indicating what sort of performance you’ll expect running real-world applications, but lousy for comparing Intel’s offerings against the competition. PCWorld asked Intel for Cinebench numbers to provide more context, and was politely refused. So we have to use what Intel provided us, in terms of comparisons against its own chips.
Intel claims that its new Core i9 is 44 percent faster in overall performance (measured in SysMark 2018) than a three-year-old PC powered by a Core i7-7820HK. It’s twice as fast in Blender video rendering, using the same two systems. Intel claims that the overall performance of the Core i7-10750H is 33 percent faster (in SysMark) than a three-year-old PC powered by a Core i7-7700HQ, 44 percent faster in gaming (Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey), and 70 percent faster in exporting a 4K video file in Power Director 4K. (Intel’s Core i9-10980K system was accompanied by a Nvidia RTX Super GPU, while the Core i7-7800HQ system was powered by a Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080.)
Intel’s gen-over-gen gaming tests provide a bit more clarity. Here, the Intel Core i7 is compared against the older 7th-gen Core i7-7700HQ, with significant increases in terms of gaming performance: from 31 percent in World of Tanks to 44 percent in Assassin’s Creed Odyssey.
Intel also compared the Core i9-10980HK to the Core i7-7820HK, generating performance increases of between 23 percent and 54 percent in games, with the most gains coming in Red Dead Redemption 2. However, Intel didn’t manufacture a mobile 7th-gen Core i9, skewing the comparison.
Hamberger said he expects “double-digit” performance improvements up and down the new Comet Lake-H chips over the previous, 9th-gen parts. The exception may be the new “step-up” Core i7-10875H, where Hamberger said Intel expects up to a 20-percent improvement. He called that just an estimate, however; because of the limitations placed on Intel by the coronavirus, Intel hasn’t actually tested the Core i7-10875H yet. “We expect it soon, and we’ll run those system tests as soon as we have it,” Hamberger said.
None of this gets us as close as we’d like for comparing the Core i7-10875H or any of the other new chips against AMD’s Ryzen 9 4900HS. But you can take our tests of the older Core i9-9980HK or similar parts and tack on 10 percent or more to their scores, just for fun.
One aspect that Intel hasn’t said much about is battery life, a critical element in notebooks though less so in gaming models, where they’re almost always plugged in. Hamberger said the best-performing system that Intel has seen in its labs has delivered between 20 and 22 hours of battery life, based on a video rundown test.
Platform improvements help round out CPU performance
Intel’s latest 10th-gen mobile chips have a new chipset, too: the follow-up to the existing HM370, known as the HM470. On board are 40 PCI 3.0 lanes, 16 of them sitting off of the CPU.
One of its more interesting features of the HM470 is the addition of two Thunderbolt 3.0 controllers, each of which supports two ports. That means Comet Lake-H laptops could support up to four Thunderbolt ports, potentially replacing the more generic USB-C ports found in some laptops.
While Thunderbolt 3 ports allow for exotic I/O solutions such as external GPUs, the real difference between a regular USB-C port and a true Thunderbolt connection comes down to displays. USB-C allows for a pair of external 4K displays running at 30Hz, good mainly for static images. Thunderbolt 3 can power two 4K displays running at 60Hz, much more comfortable for gaming and intensive use. In general, the implementation of Thunderbolt technology within chipsets has been exclusive to Intel.
The HM370 chipset is also expected to support Intel’s Wi-Fi 6 (Gig+) wireless technology, which first accompanied Ice Lake. Wi-Fi 6’s chief benefit is what’s known as “Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access,” or OFDM, divvying up the bandwidth to let devices communicate without waiting. “Wi-Fi 6 Gig+” is an optional feature which increases the size of the available channels to 160MHz, allowing a total bandwidth of 1.68Gbps. Laptop makers have the option of using older radios as an alternative to WI-Fi 6, but Intel executives said they doubted that would happen.
With Comet Lake-H closely following Ryzen 4000, we have hot competition and renewed excitement in the gaming laptop market. AMD is now just as potent in mobile as it already is on desktop, where it swaggered in and, depending on the workload, cleaned Intel’s clock. Will it be the same result in laptops? We shouldn’t have to wait long to tell.
Updated at 9:15 AM PT with more details on the system configurations used in both tests.
Comments