As the system loads up at the 3 minute mark, both settings will settle at 217 W during an all-core turbo load. This is an excellent result which ranks the Intel Core i7-10700 near the top of the comparison list. Intel is committed to respecting human rights and avoiding causing or contributing to adverse impacts on human rights.

Part of it would be explained with turbo values on the box, but the essence gets lost when this sort of data starts being hidden. When combined with the Intel Rapid Storage Technology Driver, it seamlessly manages multiple tiers of storage ensuring data frequently used resides on the fastest tier. This requires more voltage and power efficiency at that end of the spectrum is quite poor, meaning a lot of power is needed for that last extra bit of frequency.

As our testing results came into focus, it was clear that we had an interesting comparison on our hands against the Core i7-10700K, which we have also tested. For the turbo, as mentioned, Intel has recommendations for power levels and turbo time in its documentation, however OEMs and motherboard manufacturers are free to routinely ignore it. Processors that support 64-bit computing on Intel® architecture require an Intel 64 architecture-enabled BIOS. I have been out of the game for a few years and not really sure how much of an affect that lower performance will have on gaming.

The difference comes to turbo modes, turbo limits, turbo budgets, and how the processors manage that power balance. The bulk of the lineup however are still the versions without a suffix, the ‘nones’, like the Core i7-10700 in this review. Intel’s stance here is quite clear: Intel is fully supportive of motherboard vendors changing these values.

Finance is only available to permanent UK residents aged 18+, subject to status, terms and conditions apply. We also benchmark much more data than is shown in a typical review, all of which you can see in our benchmark database.

The benchmark score for a component shown on this page is the median of all the results submitted by users with the same hardware.What that 65 W does do is tell system integrators, especially those that design custom chassis like MSI, ASUS, and GIGABYTE, is that they can design chassis for a 65 W processor and this will work as long as they completely disable turbo. Intel, the Intel Logo, Intel Inside, Intel Core, and Core Inside are trademarks of Intel Corporation in the U.

Credit is provided by Novuna Personal Finance, a trading style of Mitsubishi HC Capital (UK) PLC, authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Functionality, performance, and other benefits of this feature may vary depending on system configuration. Samus - Friday, January 22, 2021 - link Intel is just lying at this point as they are 'effectively' ~215w parts if you put them in a motherboard from Asus, Asrock, MSI, Gigabyte, etc.Intel’s specifications for these processors are DDR4-2933, but motherboard vendors obviously create boards to support DDR4-3600+. Even though the TDP is 125 W vs 65 W, the peak turbo frequency difference is only +300 MHz, and the all-core turbo difference is only +100 MHz.