OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Intel Core i9-10850K review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£440PassMark multi-core score:21911N. of physical cores:10CPU boost clock speed:5.2 GHzCPU socket:LGA1200TDP (Thermal design power):125 W

Intel Core i9-10850K Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 18 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

Intel Core i9-10850K
7.2/10

Overall score

Score
7.2/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 65% of models
Score components

40%

6.6

Technical score

25%

8.0

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

6.6

Sentiment score

â–²Better than 65% of processors
7.5

Value for money

Value for money
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 60% of models
Score components

70%

7.2

Overall score

30%

8.2

Price

â–²Better than 60%
6.6

Technical score

Technical score
6.6/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 62% of models
Score components

60%

7.5

Performance

18%

4.2

Architecture

10%

6.0

Memory & PCIe

7%

4.2

Power & Thermal

4%

8.3

Platform

1%

7.1

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 62%
8.0

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 72% of models

80%

7.7

Average grade

20%

9.1

Popularity

Grades by review (18)
11 reviews: 4 with a printed score, 7 estimated from the review. 7 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–²Better than 72%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • intel-core-i9-10850k
  • intel-core-i9-10850k
  • intel-core-i9-10850k
  • intel-core-i9-10850k
intel-core-i9-10850k
intel-core-i9-10850k
intel-core-i9-10850k
intel-core-i9-10850k
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the Intel Core i9-10850K

Based on 10 · 7

Strong application and gaming performance win praise, while high power draw and demanding cooling needs draw the most complaints.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the Intel Core i9-10850K

Based on 68 owners sharing their experience in online comments

50%positive7%mixed43%negative

Owners like its speed and value, but high temperatures and cooling demands remain their biggest frustration.

What owners dislike

  • Owners report 85–100°C in games and Cinebench, especially on stock settings, with air coolers or weaker liquid coolers.17
  • Owners on H470 boards cannot overclock, some cannot lower the multiplier below 48, and some chips crash above 5.3 GHz.7
  • Default voltage around 1.4 V can push idle and gaming heat to 90–100°C, while lowering it too far causes freezes.4
  • Some owners on Z490 boards got no display or no boot, with the CPU not detected and Windows install stalling at the logo.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i9-10850K

Technical score
Technical score
6.6/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 62% of models
Score components:

60%

7.5

Performance

18%

4.2

Architecture

10%

6.0

Memory & PCIe

7%

4.2

Power & Thermal

4%

8.3

Platform

1%

7.1

Integrated graphics

6.6
Reviews score
8.0
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 60% of models
Score components:

70%

7.2

Overall score

30%

8.2

Price

7.5
Processor type
desktop
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 54.7% of processors and equal to that of 39.5% of processors.
CPU socket
LGA1200
This processor uses the LGA1200 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 68.1% of processors and equal to that of 5.2% of processors.
Chipset
?
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES instruction sets, which is narrower support than 54.4% of processors and equal to that of 3.4% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
N. of physical cores
10
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 10 CPU cores, which is more than 75.2% of processors and equal to 4.6% of processors.
CPU threads
20
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 20 CPU threads, which is more than 84.3% of processors and equal to 5% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
5.2 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 5.2 GHz which is higher than that of 88.9% of processors and equal to that of 3% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
10x 3.6 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 10x3.6 GHz which is higher than that of 89.5% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
21,911
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 21,911 in PassMark, which is higher than 73.6% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Semiconductor size
14 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 14 nm process node, which is older than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 32.9% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 14 nm
This processor is built on the Intel 14 nm foundry process, which is less advanced than that of 55.9% of processors and equal to that of 29% of processors.
L3 cache
20 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 20 MB which is larger than that of 78.1% of processors and equal to that of 1.7% of processors.
L2 cache
2.5 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 2.5 MB which is smaller than that of 51.5% of processors and equal to that of 1.4% of processors.
L1 cache
640 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 640 KB which is larger than that of 73.6% of processors and equal to that of 3.1% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
DDR memory version
DDR4
This processor supports DDR DDR4, which is newer than that of 25.2% of processors and equal to that of 31.1% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
2,933 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 2,933 MHz, which is lower than that of 50.3% of processors and equal to 5.1% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-2933 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR4-2933 MHz, which is lower than that of 54% of processors and equal to 4.5% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
?
Maximum memory capacity
128 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 128 GB of memory, which is more than 59.3% of processors and equal to 22.8% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 630
This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 630 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 45.6% of processors and equal to that in 8% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
24
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 24 GPU execution units, which is more than 49.1% of processors and equal to 20.8% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
350 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 350 MHz which is higher than that of 42.7% of processors and equal to that of 25.4% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode)
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
125 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 125 W which is higher than that of 91.7% of processors and equal to that of 2.9% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
125 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 125 W which is higher than that of 91.7% of processors and equal to that of 2.9% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
250 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 250 W which is higher than that of 96.6% of processors and equal to that of 0.9% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
56 seconds
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 56 seconds which is shorter than that of 96.1% of processors and equal to that of 3.9% of processors.
Configurable TDP
yes
This processor supports configurable TDP. 46.4% of processors offer this.
cTDP: 95 W
Show more
What reviewers say

Intel Core i9-10850K vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 6 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (10 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    10 vs 4
  • 12 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (20 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    20 vs 8
  • 2.27x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (6,377 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    6,377 vs 2,804.5
  • 91% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (21,911 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    21,911 vs 11,469
  • 18.2% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 73.2% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (9,022 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    9,022 vs 5,209
  • 4 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (10 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    10 vs 6
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 19.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.0/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 72% of models

    80%

    7.7

    Average grade

    20%

    9.1

    Popularity

    Grades by review (18)
    11 reviews: 4 with a printed score, 7 estimated from the review. 7 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.0 vs 6.7
  • More extensive crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA).
    AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1200 vs FP5).
    LGA1200 vs FP5
  • 6 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (10 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    10 vs 4
  • 12 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (20 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    20 vs 8
  • 2.27x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (6,377 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    6,377 vs 2,804.5
  • 91% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (21,911 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    21,911 vs 11,469
  • 18.2% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 73.2% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (9,022 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    9,022 vs 5,209
  • 4 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (10 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    10 vs 6
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (10x3.6 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    10x3.6 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 19.9% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,067 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,067 vs 2,558
  • 14.5% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,758 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,758 vs 1,535
  • More advanced Turbo Core
    This processor has a more advanced Turbo Core version than the average processor (3 vs 2).
    Intel Turbo Boost Max 3
    3 vs 2
  • 2.22x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (20 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    20 MB vs 9 MB
  • 66.7% larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (640 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    640 KB vs 384 KB
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 2x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • Less advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Comet Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Comet Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 3.91x higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (250 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    250 W vs 64 W
  • 2.78x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (125 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    125 W vs 45 W
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 16.7% larger process node
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (14 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    14 nm vs 12 nm
  • 50% less L2 per core
    This processor has less L2 cache per core than the average processor (0.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    0.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 2.78x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (125 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    125 W vs 45 W
  • 76% more expensive
    Intel Core i9-10850K is more expensive than the average processor (£440 vs £250).
    £440 vs £250
  • 8.3% lower sentiment score
    6.6 vs 7.2
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Less advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Comet Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Comet Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 16.7% larger process node
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (14 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    14 nm vs 12 nm
  • 50% less L2 per core
    This processor has less L2 cache per core than the average processor (0.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    0.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 16.4% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (206 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    206 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 3.91x higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (250 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    250 W vs 64 W
  • 2.78x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (125 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    125 W vs 45 W
  • 2.78x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (125 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    125 W vs 45 W
  • 28 seconds shorter turbo duration
    This processor has a lower turbo duration limit than the average processor (56 seconds vs 28 seconds). The average processor maintains turbo for 28 seconds.
    56 seconds vs 28 seconds

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

9.0
Observe Jeremiah
≈ estimated
30/04/2021
Long-term review · six months of daily use
Verdict
Intel Core i9-10850K is a sweet spot CPU that can last years if you pair it with a decent cooler.
6.0
PC H/W and Tech Unboxings 🔥
≈ estimated
27/02/2021
Benchmark test · XTU, Cinebench and UserBenchmark scores
Verdict
Intel Core i9-10850K is not much faster than the 10900F, and overclocking gave no real gain.
8.0
SkatterBencher
≈ estimated
11/01/2021
Overclocking test · stability and temperature measurements
Verdict
Intel Core i9-10850K has strong overclocking headroom, though it runs very hot and one core could not reach 5.5 GHz.
7.0
Talon's Tech
≈ estimated
10/08/2020
Hands-on review · overclocking, benchmarks and value
Verdict
Intel Core i9-10850K is a decent buy at its price, but only for buyers with strong cooling who accept higher power use.
Not graded
Overview video
Not graded
Hands-on video, no verdict
Shop video
Hands-on video, no verdict
Not graded
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.0
tomshardware.com
✓ explicit
04/09/2020
Benchmark test · Desktop processor
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-10850K matches the Core i9-10900K in gaming and handles single- and multi-threaded work well, but it runs hot and has little overclocking room.
9.1
tweaktown.com
✓ explicit
13/10/2020
Gaming benchmark · Desktop processor
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-10850K performs almost identically to the 10900K in games, but it's still a 14nm design with little headroom for big gains.
6.0
m.hexus.net
≈ estimated
14/10/2020
Spec comparison · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-10850K matches the 10900K under full load and falls slightly behind in light use, but it needs a Z490 board and your own cooler.
8.0
computerbase.de
≈ estimated
27/08/2020
Benchmark test · Chip comparison
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-10850K is about 1 percent slower than the Core i9-10900K in tests, but it still draws a lot of power.
5.0
computerbild.de
✓ explicit
12/12/2020
Benchmark test · Desktop processor
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-10850K is a fast 10-core chip that trails AMD's Ryzen 9 5900X, but it needs a separate graphics card for demanding games.
8.0
digitec.ch
≈ estimated
14/10/2020
Benchmark test · Desktop processor
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-10850K nearly matches the 10900K, but it runs hotter and trails AMD in multi-core tests.
6.0
hardwarecooking.fr
≈ estimated
12/09/2020
Lab test · Desktop processor
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-10850K nearly matches the 10900K with 100 MHz lower clocks, so it suits Intel fans ready for a new motherboard.
9.5
gameit.es
≈ estimated
06/11/2020
Hands-on test · Desktop processor
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-10850K is a 10-core chip for heavy gaming and multitasking that needs a Z490 board to overclock.
9.2
profesionalreview.com
✓ explicit
05/10/2020
Hands-on review · Desktop processor
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-10850K nearly matches the 10900K for gaming with 10 cores, but it needs a strong cooler and still trails AMD in raw power.
6.0
ct.nl
≈ estimated
25/02/2021
Benchmark test · Desktop processor
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-10850K nearly matches the Core i9-10900K, but AMD's Ryzen 9 3900X is faster in most tests.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i9-10850K

  • Excellent value for money, often described as a 'better buy' than the i9-10900K
  • Performance is nearly identical to the flagship i9-10900K in real-world gaming and productivity
  • Strong 10-core/20-thread multitasking capabilities for streaming, video editing, and virtual machines
  • High overclocking potential, with many users easily reaching 5.0GHz or 5.1GHz across all cores
  • Better availability at retail compared to other high-end 10th Gen models during its launch period

What customers don't like about Intel Core i9-10850K

  • High power consumption, especially when power limits are removed or when overclocked
  • Significant heat generation requiring a robust cooling solution, such as a 280mm or 360mm AIO liquid cooler
  • Lack of PCIe 4.0 support, which may limit future-proofing for high-speed SSDs compared to newer generations
  • Does not include a stock CPU cooler, adding to the total system cost
  • Requires a high-quality Z490 or Z590 motherboard with strong power delivery for optimal performance

Verdict

The Intel Core i9-10850K is a high-performance desktop processor from the Comet Lake-S generation, featuring 10 cores and 20 threads with a base frequency of 3.6 GHz and a Thermal Velocity Boost frequency of up to 5.2 GHz. Built on a 14nm process for the LGA 1200 socket, it includes 20 MB of Intel Smart Cache, supports up to 128 GB of DDR4-2933 RAM, and features integrated Intel UHD Graphics 630. Its main advantages are its exceptional gaming and multi-threaded performance, being nearly identical to the flagship i9-10900K but at a more accessible price point, and its unlocked multiplier for easy overclocking. However, it suffers from high power consumption with a 125W TDP that can peak at 250W under load, significant heat generation that requires a robust cooling solution (not included in the box), and a lack of support for newer standards like PCIe 4.0.

Compare Intel Core i9-10850K with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel Core i9-10850K and other processors

No results found