OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v1.0
Processors Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are evaluated mathematically under Frontumo Processors Methodology v1.0 using verified laboratory benchmarks, technical specifications, and authentic consumer ratings with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Processors Methodology v1.0

Intel Core i9 10900X Review | 78 Data compared

Avg. price:~£320PassMark benchmark result:22335N. of physical cores:10CPU boost clock speed:4.7 GHzCPU socket:LGA2066TDP (Thermal design power):165 W

Intel Core i9 10900X Review: Compare 78 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

6.9

Overall score

Score
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the processor's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best processors on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 69% of models
Score components

90%

6.7

Technical score

10%

9.0

User score

â–²Better than 69% of processors
6.7

Technical score

Technical score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 66% of models
Score components

60%

6.9

Performance

18%

6.1

Cache & Architecture

10%

7.8

Memory & PCIe

7%

4.4

Power & Thermal

4%

7.9

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated Graphics

â–²Better than 66% of processors
9.0

User score

User score
9.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 89% of models
Score components

70%

9.1

User ratings

30%

8.7

Number of reviews

Based on 352 buyer reviews from online shops.
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →
How we calculate this
User ratings – average star rating across all shop listings, weighted by how many reviews each has, on a 1–10 scale.
Number of reviews – how many buyer reviews the product has, on a logarithmic scale; the 8% most-reviewed models in the category get 10.
â–²Better than 89% of processors
  • intel-core-i9-10900x
  • intel-core-i9-10900x
  • intel-core-i9-10900x
  • intel-core-i9-10900x
  • intel-core-i9-10900x
intel-core-i9-10900x
intel-core-i9-10900x
intel-core-i9-10900x
intel-core-i9-10900x
intel-core-i9-10900x

Best prices

*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.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i9 10900X

Technical score
Technical score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 66% of models
Score components:

60%

6.9

Performance

18%

6.1

Cache & Architecture

10%

7.8

Memory & PCIe

7%

4.4

Power & Thermal

4%

7.9

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated Graphics

6.7
User score
User score
9.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 89% of models
Score components

70%

9.1

User ratings

30%

8.7

Number of reviews

Based on 352 buyer reviews from online shops.
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →
How we calculate this
User ratings – average star rating across all shop listings, weighted by how many reviews each has, on a 1–10 scale.
Number of reviews – how many buyer reviews the product has, on a logarithmic scale; the 8% most-reviewed models in the category get 10.
9.0
Popularity
Popularity
8.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you prefer to choose a processor reviewed and selected by many other buyers.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 89% of models
Popularity:
Intel Core i9 10900X has a popularity score of 8.7 points, which is higher than that of 88.8% of products in this category.
8.7
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 75% of models
Score components:

60%

6.9

Overall score

40%

8.8

Price

7.5
Brand name
Intel
Processor type
workstation
Processor type
workstation
★ Better than 95% of models
This processor belongs to the workstation processor class, which is more advanced than that of 95.1% of processors and equal to that of 4.9% of processors.
CPU socket
LGA2066
CPU socket
LGA2066
â–² Better than 75% of models
This processor uses the LGA2066 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 74.7% of processors and equal to that of 1.5% of processors.
Chipset
X299
Chipset
X299
★ Better than 95% of models
This processor supports X299 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 95.3% of processors and equal to that of 1.6% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
CPU architecture
x86-64
â–² Better than 2% of models
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.7% of processors and equal to that of 98.3% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
10
N. of physical cores
10
â–² Better than 77% of models
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 10 CPU cores, which is more than 77.1% of processors and equal to 4.3% of processors.
CPU threads
20
CPU threads
20
â–² Better than 85% of models
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 20 CPU threads, which is more than 85.3% of processors and equal to 4.5% of processors.
Threads per core
2
Threads per core
2
â–² Better than 30% of models
Market range: <0 – >2.5
This processor offers 2 threads per core, which is more than 30.3% of processors and equal to 69.7% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.7 GHz
CPU boost clock speed
4.7 GHz
â–² Better than 67% of models
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.7 GHz which is higher than that of 67.1% of processors and equal to that of 3.7% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
10x 3.7 GHz
CPU base clock speed
10x 3.7 GHz
★ Better than 91% of models
This processor has a base clock of 10x3.7 GHz which is higher than that of 90.6% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
14 nm
Semiconductor size
14 nm
â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 14 nm process node, which is older than that of 50.6% of processors and equal to that of 33.9% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 14 nm
Foundry
Intel 14 nm
â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
This processor is built on the Intel 14 nm foundry process, which is less advanced than that of 55.2% of processors and equal to that of 29.3% of processors.
L3 cache
19.25 MB
L3 cache
19.25 MB
â–² Better than 79% of models
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 19.25 MB which is larger than that of 79.3% of processors and equal to that of 0.5% of processors.
L2 cache
10 MB
L2 cache
10 MB
â–² Better than 81% of models
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 10 MB which is larger than that of 80.5% of processors and equal to that of 1.8% of processors.
L1 cache
640 KB
L1 cache
640 KB
â–² Better than 75% of models
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 640 KB which is larger than that of 74.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.5% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4
DDR memory version
DDR4
â–¼ Worse than 42% of models
This processor supports DDR DDR4, which is newer than that of 26.3% of processors and equal to that of 31.7% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
2,933 MHz
Maximum memory speed
2,933 MHz
â–¼ Worse than 48% of models
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 2,933 MHz, which is higher than that of 46.6% of processors and equal to 5.1% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-2933 MHz
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-2933 MHz
â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR4-2933 MHz, which is lower than that of 52.5% of processors and equal to 4.4% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
?
Maximum memory capacity
256 GB
Maximum memory capacity
256 GB
â–² Better than 89% of models
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 256 GB of memory, which is more than 89.5% of processors and equal to 8.2% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
no
Integrated graphics
no
â–¼ Worse than 88% of models
This processor does not include integrated graphics. 87.6% of processors include integrated graphics.
Integrated GPU model
N/A
Integrated GPU execution units
N/A
Integrated GPU base frequency
N/A
Integrated media encoders/decoders
N/A
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
165 W
TDP (Thermal design power)
165 W
â–¼ Worse than 96% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 165 W which is higher than that of 95.9% of processors and equal to that of 1% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
165 W
Base power (PL1)
165 W
â–¼ Worse than 96% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 165 W which is higher than that of 95.9% of processors and equal to that of 1% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
â–¼ Worse than 10% of models
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 28 seconds which is longer than that of 3.4% of processors and equal to that of 86.1% of processors.
Configurable TDP
no
Configurable TDP
no
â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 52.8% of processors support configurable TDP.
Show more

Intel Core i9 10900X vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceCache & ArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated GraphicsPower & Thermal
  • 2.11x higher PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    22,335
    â–² Better than 77% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (22,335 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    22,335 vs 10,572.5
  • 2.42x better multi-core performance
    Cinebench R20 multi-core benchmark score
    6,762
    â–² Better than 82% of models
    Market range: <702 – >10.8k
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (6,762 vs 2,791). The average processor scores 2,791 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    6,762 vs 2,791
  • 12 more CPU threads
    CPU threads
    20
    â–² Better than 85% of models
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (20 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    20 vs 8
  • 96.3% higher multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    9,479
    â–² Better than 75% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (9,479 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    9,479 vs 4,829
  • 32 more PCIe lanes
    PCIe lane count
    48
    ★ Better than 97% of models
    Market range: <10 – >30
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (48 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    48 vs 16
  • 4 more CPU cores
    N. of physical cores
    10
    â–² Better than 77% of models
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (10 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    10 vs 6
  • 4x larger L2 cache
    L2 cache
    10 MB
    â–² Better than 81% of models
    Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (10 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
    10 MB vs 2.5 MB
  • Higher base clock
    CPU base clock speed
    10 x 3.7 GHz
    ★ Better than 91% of models
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (10x3.7 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz).
    10x3.7 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz
  • 8.69x more popular
    Intel Core i9 10900X is more popular than the average processor (8.69 vs 1).
    8.69 vs 1
  • 12.5% higher user score
    User score
    9.0/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
    When it matters
    When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    Intel Core i9 10900X
    the average processor
    Intel Core i9 10900X has a higher user score than the average processor (9.00 vs 8.000).
    9 vs 8
  • Advanced security extensions
    Security extensions
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, MBEC
    â–² Better than 63% of models
    This processor provides more advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor
  • Modern CPU socket
    CPU socket
    LGA2066
    â–² Better than 75% of models
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA2066 vs FP4).
    LGA2066 vs FP4
  • Higher-end processor class
    Processor type
    workstation
    ★ Better than 95% of models
    This processor belongs to a higher-end processor class than the average processor (workstation vs mobile).
    workstation vs mobile
  • 2.11x higher PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    22,335
    â–² Better than 77% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (22,335 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    22,335 vs 10,572.5
  • 2.42x better multi-core performance
    Cinebench R20 multi-core benchmark score
    6,762
    â–² Better than 82% of models
    Market range: <702 – >10.8k
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (6,762 vs 2,791). The average processor scores 2,791 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    6,762 vs 2,791
  • 12 more CPU threads
    CPU threads
    20
    â–² Better than 85% of models
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (20 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    20 vs 8
  • 96.3% higher multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    9,479
    â–² Better than 75% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (9,479 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    9,479 vs 4,829
  • 4 more CPU cores
    N. of physical cores
    10
    â–² Better than 77% of models
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (10 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    10 vs 6
  • Higher base clock
    CPU base clock speed
    10 x 3.7 GHz
    ★ Better than 91% of models
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (10x3.7 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz).
    10x3.7 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    Unlocked multiplier
    yes
    â–² Better than 78% of models
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, the average processor does not. 21.7% of processors have an unlocked multiplier.
  • 9.3% higher boost clock
    CPU boost clock speed
    4.7 GHz
    â–² Better than 67% of models
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.7 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
    4.7 GHz vs 4.3 GHz
  • 6.7% better single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    2,668
    â–² Better than 56% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (2,668 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    2,668 vs 2,500
  • 4x larger L2 cache
    L2 cache
    10 MB
    â–² Better than 81% of models
    Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (10 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
    10 MB vs 2.5 MB
  • 2x more L2 per core
    L2 per core
    1 MB/core
    â–² Better than 63% of models
    Market range: <0.25 MB/core – >2 MB/core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 2.41x larger L3 cache
    L3 cache
    19.25 MB
    â–² Better than 79% of models
    Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (19.3 MB vs 8 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 8 MB.
    19.25 MB vs 8 MB
  • 66.7% larger L1 cache
    L1 cache
    640 KB
    â–² Better than 75% of models
    Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
    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
  • 32 more PCIe lanes
    PCIe lane count
    48
    ★ Better than 97% of models
    Market range: <10 – >30
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (48 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    48 vs 16
  • 4x more memory capacity
    Maximum memory capacity
    256 GB
    â–² Better than 89% of models
    Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (256 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    256 GB vs 64 GB
  • 2.05x higher memory bandwidth
    Maximum memory bandwidth
    94 GB/s
    ★ Better than 92% of models
    Market range: <25 GB/s – >100 GB/s
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (94 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 45.8 GB/s.
    94 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s
  • Supports memory overclocking
    Memory overclocking
    yes
    â–² Better than 56% of models
    This processor supports memory overclocking, the average processor does not. 43.6% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 6 °C lower CPU temperature
    CPU temperature
    94 °C
    ★ Better than 90% of models
    Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
    This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (94 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    94 °C vs 100 °C
  • No configurable TDP
    Configurable TDP
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, the average processor does. 52.8% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • Less advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Cascade Lake
    â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
    This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Cascade Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Cascade Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 3.67x higher base power
    Base power (PL1)
    165 W
    â–¼ Worse than 96% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (165 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    165 W vs 45 W
  • 64.8% slower Blender rendering
    Blender (bmw27) benchmark result
    136.4
    â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
    Market range: <97 – >1.3k
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (136.4 vs 387.66). The average processor needs 387.66 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    136.4 vs 387.66
  • Narrower instruction support
    Instruction sets
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512
    â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
  • 72.3% larger die size
    Die size
    305 mm²
    â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
    Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (305 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    305 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 16.7% larger process node
    Semiconductor size
    14 nm
    â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    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
  • 6 °C lower TJ Max
    Maximum operating temperature (TJ Max)
    94 °C
    â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
    Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
    This processor has a lower TJ Max than the average processor (94 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor has a TJ Max of 100 °C.
    94 °C vs 100 °C
  • 28% more expensive
    Intel Core i9 10900X is more expensive than the average processor (£320 vs £250).
    £320 vs £250
  • Narrower instruction support
    Instruction sets
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512
    â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
  • No crypto acceleration
    Cryptographic acceleration
    AES
    â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
    This processor does not include crypto acceleration, the average processor does. 0.00% of processors include crypto acceleration.
    AES vs AES, SHA
  • 64.8% slower Blender rendering
    Blender (bmw27) benchmark result
    136.4
    â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
    Market range: <97 – >1.3k
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (136.4 vs 387.66). The average processor needs 387.66 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    136.4 vs 387.66
  • Less advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Cascade Lake
    â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
    This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Cascade Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Cascade Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 72.3% larger die size
    Die size
    305 mm²
    â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
    Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (305 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    305 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 16.7% larger process node
    Semiconductor size
    14 nm
    â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    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
  • 2 fewer memory channels
    Memory channels
    4
    ★ Better than 93% of models
    Market range: <1 – >6
    This processor has fewer memory channels than the average processor (4 vs 2). The average processor supports 2 memory channels.
    4 vs 2
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    PCIe bifurcation modes
    x16, x8/x8
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8 vs x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8 vs x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4
  • No integrated graphics
    Integrated graphics
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 88% of models
    This processor does not include integrated graphics, the average processor does. 87.6% of processors include integrated graphics.
  • No configurable TDP
    Configurable TDP
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, the average processor does. 52.8% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 3.67x higher base power
    Base power (PL1)
    165 W
    â–¼ Worse than 96% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (165 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    165 W vs 45 W
  • 3.67x higher TDP
    TDP (Thermal design power)
    165 W
    â–¼ Worse than 96% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (165 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    165 W vs 45 W
  • 6 °C lower TJ Max
    Maximum operating temperature (TJ Max)
    94 °C
    â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
    Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
    This processor has a lower TJ Max than the average processor (94 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor has a TJ Max of 100 °C.
    94 °C vs 100 °C

Video reviews

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

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

F
forbes.com
26/02/2020
Summary of the review
Intel Cascade Lake-X Core i9-10900X, 10920X And 10940X Reviews Would you like to see performance comparisons between this model and its predecessor, t...
B
bit-tech.net
23/01/2020
Summary of the review
Intel Core i9-10900X Review | bit-tech.net
T
tweakreviews.com
17/01/2020
Summary of the review
Intel Core i9-10900X - TWEAK(www.eteknix.com) | November 25 2019 | Intel Core i9-10900X & i9-10940X Processor Review
E
eteknix.com
26/11/2019
Summary of the review
Intel Core i9-10900X & i9-10940X Processor Review
P
pcgameshardware.de
25/11/2019
Summary of the review
Intel Core i9-10980XE Review: Cascade Lake-X Benchmarks (Detailed benchmarks including i9-10900X)
(Translated)Show original
V
valid.x86.fr
01/03/2026
Summary of the review
CPU-Z Single-Thread Benchmark for Intel Core i9-10900X
(Translated)Show original
T
tomshw.it
28/11/2019
Summary of the review
Intel Core i9-10980XE Review (Including i9-10900X Benchmarks)
(Translated)Show original
H
hardware.info
25/11/2019
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X & 3970X vs. Intel Core i9 10900X & 10980XE Review
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

Based on 352 buyer reviews from online shops.
Reviews last updated: May 2026 · How we calculate this
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →

What we like about Intel Core i9 10900X

  • High PCIe lane count (48 lanes) supports multiple NVMe drives and multi-GPU setups
  • Supports high memory capacity up to 256 GB of quad-channel DDR4 RAM
  • Solid performance in workstation tasks like CAD, audio creation, and video transcoding
  • Compatible with existing X299 motherboards, allowing for an easier upgrade path for older HEDT systems
  • Features AVX-512 instruction set support for specific professional workloads
  • Unlocked multiplier allows for overclocking to improve performance

What we don't like about Intel Core i9 10900X

  • Weak price-to-performance ratio compared to mainstream alternatives like the Ryzen 3900X
  • Underwhelming IPC gains as it is a refresh of older Skylake-X architecture
  • High power consumption, especially when overclocked, reaching significant wattage draws
  • Runs hot under load, requiring high-end cooling solutions (AIO or premium air coolers)
  • Mediocre gaming performance compared to cheaper mainstream processors like the i9-9900K or newer generations
  • Lacks support for modern standards like PCIe 4.0

Verdict

The Intel Core i9-10900X is a 10th Gen X-Series High-End Desktop (HEDT) processor featuring 10 cores and 20 threads with a base clock speed of 3.7 GHz and a Turbo Boost Max 3.0 frequency of up to 4.7 GHz. Built on a 14nm process for the LGA 2066 socket, it offers 48 PCIe 3.0 lanes, supports up to 256 GB of quad-channel DDR4-2933 RAM, and includes a 19.25 MB Intel Smart Cache. Main pros include its unlocked multiplier for enthusiast overclocking, high memory capacity support for workstation tasks, and strong multi-threaded performance in creative workloads like video editing. However, it suffers from a high 165W TDP that requires significant cooling, lacks integrated graphics, and faces stiff competition from mainstream CPUs that often offer better gaming performance and power efficiency for the price.

Compare Intel Core i9 10900X 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 10900X and other processors

No results found