Clock Speed and Memory Bandwidth

Before we dive into performance, let’s start by looking at the clock frequencies we experienced with the CPU.  We will also look at the memory bandwidth here.

Clock Speed

The all-core boost frequency on the Intel Core i5-10600K is supposed to be 4.5GHz.  It can Turbo Boost, on single-core, up to 4.8GHz. 

Intel Core i5-10600K HWiNFO All-Core CPU Frequency

In the screenshot above you will see the CPU running in Cinebench R20 showing the all-core frequency.  This shows that the CPU is indeed hitting its maximum all-core that it should be.  It reaches 4.496GHz running all the cores at once. 

Intel Core i5-10600K HWiNFO Single-Core CPU Frequency

In this second screenshot above you will see the CPU running a single-core in Cinebench R20.  This shows that we do see a single-core hitting 4.8GHz at a given time.  The cores switch to which one hits the 4.8, eventually, all of them do, but not at the same time.  Therefore the maximum Turbo Boost at 4.8GHz is working.

Memory Bandwidth

Now we will look at memory bandwidth between the systems.  Keep in mind that the memory is running at 3600MHz on all three CPUs here.  The timings are also the same, except for the Command Rate, which is 1T on the AMD system and 2T on Intel, we are using XMP II and DOCP settings.

Intel Core i5-10600K Aida64 Memory Read

In the first graph above is the memory read performance.  We see all the CPUs very close together on memory read.  Technically the Ryzen 5 3600X is just slightly faster at 50GB/s versus 49GB/s on the Intel CPUs, but they are so close you can call them all similar.  Both platforms have a lot of memory bandwidth on read.

Intel Core i5-10600K Aida64 Memory Write

In this graph, we are showing the memory write performance.  Now on this one, we really see a big difference.  The two Intel CPU platforms take off on memory writes with 52GB/s and 50GB/s versus the Ryzen 5 3600X on X570 at a much lower 28GB/s.  This is consistent with past tests.  For whatever reason, Intel exceeds greatly on memory writes. The Intel Core i5-10600K even seems to be faster than the Intel Core i5-9600K at 52GB/s versus 50GB/s. 

Join the Conversation

9 Comments

  1. There are several sites like B&H listing prices for them, but availability is unknown. B&H does list the 10700 for sale. If you go to the drop down, it shows "coming soon" for most of the CPU’s. So, availability may be there but its spotty at best.
  2. Nicely written article as well. I preferred the order of presentation and including the overclocked results of the bigger chip. But this was all there as well.

    I do kinda sorta miss a pull down to hop to the testing results, sometimes reading the methodology is nice, but when it is a site and testers I trust I just want to see some numbers! ;)

  3. We may create a unified CPU review format at some point in the future. Unfortunately, this was the least amount of lead time we’ve ever had so Brent and I worked entirely independently to get these done.
  4. We may create a unified CPU review format at some point in the future. Unfortunately, this was the least amount of lead time we’ve ever had so Brent and I worked entirely independently to get these done.

    Naaa it’s all good. I enjoyed reading both reviews. Good on both of you on cranking these out in the short window you had!

  5. I do kinda sorta miss a pull down to hop to the testing results

    Table of Contents is at the top of both articles for me – is it missing for you?

    If it’s there now and was missing, it was likely when Brent was fixing some internal links as the plugin for it will randomly turn off the ToC when making edits.

    If it’s not there now, then you’re blocking that javascript.

    If you’re missing something else… please describe?

  6. Table of Contents is at the top of both articles for me – is it missing for you?

    If it’s there now and was missing, it was likely when Brent was fixing some internal links as the plugin for it will randomly turn off the ToC when making edits.

    If it’s not there now, then you’re blocking that javascript.

    If you’re missing something else… please describe?

    I may have grown accustomed to looking for the jump pages at the bottom of the screen in a pull down and never thought to check the top… maybe…. damnit.

  7. I may have grown accustomed to looking for the jump pages at the bottom of the screen in a pull down and never thought to check the top… maybe…. damnit.

    You inspired me to see if my WordPress/wizardry has grown enough to figure out how to put it back at the bottom. Looks like it worked. Enjoy the ToC at top and bottom of content and let me know if I broke something by doing that…

  8. You inspired me to see if my WordPress/wizardry has grown enough to figure out how to put it back at the bottom. Looks like it worked. Enjoy the ToC at top and bottom of content and let me know if I broke something by doing that…

    That works!

Leave a comment