Intel - Core i7-10700K 10th Generation 8-Core - 16-Thread - 3.8 GHz (5.1 GHz Turbo) Socket LGA1200 Unlocked Desktop Processor

If you read the pre-release reviews you will hear a lot of talk about this processor running very hot and not being much of a performance bump from the i7 9700k. I can unequivocally tell you this was misinformation in my experience. I am very please with the temps and performance I’ve seen with mine.

Upgraded from an i5-7600K (4C/4T); no question about the increased processing power of 8C/16T. It's mated to a Gigabyte Vision D board, paired with 4x8GB of Corsair DDR4/3000 C15 RAM (purchased from BB) that I had leftover from my Z170 setup. Depending on ambient temp in my house, so far during the summer, the processor idles between 28C-32C. I'm using a Hyper 212 EVO Black RGB (also sold here). If you want to overclock, I would recommend a beefier air cooler, like Noctua, or go AIO. CPU-Z benchmarks at stock get me 579/single with 5756/multi. If I push the processor to 5ghz on all cores, I can get to 598 and 6073, respectively, but the temps get a little high for my liking -- upper-80s when running Handbrake encoding and Prime95 26.6... still either need to continue tinkering with BIOS temps and settings or beef up the cooler. In contrast, at stock settings, the cores vary but never exceed upper 70's when doing the same tests. As for the i7-10700K vs. Ryzen 7 vs. Ryzen 9, yes, no question AMD is the better bang for the buck. With Ryzen 7, it's quite a substantial savings; however, for a few bucks more, you can get more cores/threads with Ryzen 9... Regardless, even this processor, is likely overkill for most users. I've been using Intel for years, so I stuck with it, plus I wanted 5.0+ stock for the sake of it. I expect this build to last me >3 years. It's a shame that the KF chips are nowhere to be found in the US. I was wanting to buy it to save a few bucks, but I got tired of waiting.

The i7-10700K is Intel's latest Core i7 offering, filling that niche in the new 10th gen "Comet Lake" series of desktop processors. It performs exceptionally well in gaming, which favors single-threaded performance and high frequency, both of which the 10700K offers in spades, while lagging behind AMD's 3900X and 3950X in productivity workloads due to those chips having 50% and 100% more cores + threads, respectively. Intel seems to have solved the glaring thermal issues that plagued the 8th and 9th gen CPUs by thinning out the IHS material, so the dies have closer contact with the cold plate on the cooling solution. On its own, the 10700K is a 5-star chip, but in the broader context of the other 10th-gen Intel processors, it loses a star because its position amidst the rest of the 10th gen lineup essentially serves no purpose, as I'll discuss. Why do I say this? Well, the i5-10600K can easily be OC'ed to exceed the stock frequencies that the 10700K brings to the table. This means you can get essentially equal gaming performance compared to a stock 10700K, from a chip that costs half as much, because the reduction in core count has basically zero impact on FPS. I'm not saying the 10700K clock speeds can't be tuned up as well, but I'm stressing that its intended place in the gaming performance hierarchy can be usurped by a chip that retails for less than 250 bucks. The 10600K is also a more OC'able CPU in its own right, and can be pushed harder relative to its base specs than the 10700K can relative to its own stock speeds. On the other side of the equation, the i9-10900K represents peak Comet Lake, offering the best performance for any type of workload that 10th gen has to offer, while only retailing for ~$100 more than the 10700K. The 10900K is the undisputed performance king of this generation, beating the 10700K soundly both in terms of gaming (both single-core and all-core turbo are significantly faster) and productivity (aforementioned frequency advantage + an additional 2 cores / 4 threads to play with). Does my criticism become slightly clearer in light of the role that the 10600K and the 10900K play? The 10700k is either a slightly better 10600K that costs ~100% more, or a much worse 10900K that costs only ~$100 less. The 10700K doesn't know what it wants to be, and the rest of 10th gen definitely does, which is why this chip is not the best purchase in the context of its generation.

I wasn't inclined on purchasing a 10900K. My motherboard keeps this CPU running without time limits. Speeds are sustained at around 5 GHz even when not under load. Using a Noctua cooler really helps keeps this CPU temps to minimum at idle, 29-33 degrees Celsius. Only complaint is that its too expensive.

I use to be an AMD user for quite a while. Build new system. This is the best processor I have had. Dropped this in a MSI board with Samsung EVO 970 vnand. From the time I hit the power button to the windows pass code I'm up and running online in about 15 seconds. I have seen improved surfing speeds and no problems running multiple applications.

This is one of the newest CPU's out, and I was surprised when it was ready for pick up 4 days early. I still didn't even have the power supply or video card. Good job Best Buy! I picked out the 10700k for being about the best bang for the buck in my opinion, so hopefully it works out in reality as well as it looks on paper! lol I'll update this review in the future if the CPU doesn't meet or exceed my expectations ;)

Pros: - This is one of the best cpu for gaming there is right now only second to the i9 10900k but with less heat and power consumption. - This is the first time I don't feel the need to overclock Cons: - Go with the i5 10600k if you want your pc for gaming only and use the +$100 you saved to buy more memory or storage.

This CPU is supported with so many tools for over clocking customization. With the right configuration, you are getting i9 power from an i7.