Intel Core i9-9900K 9th Generation CPU Review @ [H]

Meeho said:
Yeah, 24 lanes that bottleneck into 4.
Click to expand...

Intel uses DMI3 which equals PCIe3 x8 to the chipset. AMD uses 4 of the 24 PCIe lanes to connect to their chipset. So assuming you're running a GPU at x16: you get 4 extra lanes from the CPU on AMD but twice the thruput between the CPU and Chipset on Intel. Seems like a wash.
 
Elmy said:
Holy crap... Looks like I will have to delid my 9900K even though its soldered and then lap it down .20mm

This is a very good video talking about thermals of the 9900K

Skip to 11:15 .... the most important chart in the video.

Click to expand...

Hehe, couple of pages behind the rest of us?
 
Sulphademus said:
Intel uses DMI3 which equals PCIe3 x8 to the chipset. AMD uses 4 of the 24 PCIe lanes to connect to their chipset. So assuming you're running a GPU at x16: you get 4 extra lanes from the CPU on AMD but twice the thruput between the CPU and Chipset on Intel. Seems like a wash.
Click to expand...
No, DMI 3.0 also equals PCIE 3.0 x4.
 
The problem I have with these reviews is that they ignore those of us who don't want to use a separate graphics card. I've always felt that these reviews should include an AMD G processor like the 2400G when comparing to an Intel cpu which includes graphics. A graphics to graphics comparison would be more helpful.
 
dwd999 said:
The problem I have with these reviews is that they ignore those of us who don't want to use a separate graphics card. I've always felt that these reviews should include an AMD G processor like the 2400G when comparing to an Intel cpu which includes graphics. A graphics to graphics comparison would be more helpful.
Click to expand...

-1 e-peen points for lack of [H]ard.
 
Not sure how much Mr relevant it will keep you, I'm fairly certain that by the time Nvidia takes a significant leap over the 2080ti we'll be seeing 10nm from Intel and Zen2 well ahead of that timing...


psyclist said:
Good review guys, Glad to see the real numbers, and for me its a hard pass...They are right on the ragged edge to claim these ~16% performance numbers all while pushing that 60-70% price premium. I like bang for your buck, not throwing my money down on whatever they feed us.

One thing I will say is that the 9900k will keep your system more relevant than say the 2700X as GPU's get faster, so you should be able to squeeze another year out of a rig built with the 9900K vs the 2700X before bottlenecking the GPU too bad (yay frequency!)

But im still resolute in waiting for 7nm and PCIe 4.0, before upgrading...as I like to live on the 5-6 year upgrade path, i've also seen DDR5 articles popping up more, maybe thats where to jump in again. Great times to be a PC enthusiast again, reminds me of the 2003-2006 era. Thanks again guys, keep up the good work!
Click to expand...
 
Who in God's name buys a $500 Cpu without a discreet graphics card? This makes zero sense as a test scenario...

dwd999 said:
The problem I have with these reviews is that they ignore those of us who don't want to use a separate graphics card. I've always felt that these reviews should include an AMD G processor like the 2400G when comparing to an Intel cpu which includes graphics. A graphics to graphics comparison would be more helpful.
Click to expand...
 
Damn, I see there are not i3 K models planned for 9-series. I would've loved a 5ghz i3.
i3-8350k is a fantastic 4k gaming cpu.
 
Nebell said:
Damn, I see there are not i3 K models planned for 9-series. I would've loved a 5ghz i3.
i3-8350k is a fantastic 4k gaming cpu.
Click to expand...

Just about anything north of a quad core Bulldozer makes a fantastic 4k gaming CPU. The 8350k was never a good buy when the 8400 offered so much more.
 
GabeS said:
Who in God's name buys a $500 Cpu without a discreet graphics card?
Click to expand...

Someone who doesn't need gaming performance?

Eric Raymond wrote a tool to convert source code control repositories from CVS to Git. He's running it on a 6-core machine with 64GB of RAM. It's all text manipulation and graph theory, where single-core CPU performance is all that matters; he's busy working on the GCC repository, which is several hundred thousand commits over a couple of decades. A single run of his tool takes 9 hours on that repository. I went back and checked; he's using a Xeon E5-1650 v3, with a max 3.8GHz turbo. Getting a 1.1GHz single-core speed boost would probably be really helpful, but from what he's said, GPU compute wouldn't really help.

Yeah, it's definitely an edge case, but to a lesser extent, anyone with a work computer who does things that would benefit from faster CPU, but GPU wouldn't matter is in the same boat.
 
was this just a paper launch? ive been on amazons pre order for 10days now and today was release day and still nothing... Sooooooo paper launch? when can we get availability?
 
Maybe Intel sent you their shittiest binned 9900K to lull AMD into a false sense of security. ;)

I should start thinking about upgrading my office breaker to 30A at this rate.
 
the biggest factor is the 700-1ghz clock advantage over Ryzen in most of these tests on a pure clock vs clock the numbers are less impressive, it will be around a 10% clock vs clock advantage.
 
I was looking forward to adding the 9900K to my list of possibilities for upgrade time. After this (outstanding) review, I think I'm still going to put it in my list, but it won't be at the #1 spot. $100 less and it would be, but the 2700X is taking that honor as the price tags sit today.
 
The upgrade-itis is getting stronger, coming from a 2600K still.

Either this or Zen2. Good thing I'm not in a hurry.
 
I think instead of putting another $300+ in the 9900K and Asus Hero VI Black Ops board I may just put it into the AOC 31.5" 144hz monitor.
 
VoodooRufus said:
The upgrade-itis is getting stronger, coming from a 2600K still.

Either this or Zen2. Good thing I'm not in a hurry.
Click to expand...

Id say wait on Zen2 release and then make your decision. Shes gonna be a real close race at that point I think.

Sitting on my Xeon 1660v2 (4960X) for another gen, 5 years and going strong. Lets see what 2019 brings, looking forward to CES
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
The fact that it only has a gimped number of PCIe lanes (16) takes this from a "must buy immediately" product to a "no interest under any circumstance" product.

I just can't bring myself to buy any CPU/motherboard combo with fewer than 40 lanes. I currently have 40 lanes on my i7-3930k and Asus P9X79 WS, and I actually use most of them.

Slot 1: GPU (16x)
Slot 2: No slot, and covered by GPU
Slot 3: Empty (if populated, slot 1 would drop to 8x)
Slot 4: 10G Base T NIC (4x)
Slot 5: Creative Titanium HD Sound Card (1x)
Slot 6: 1TB Samsung 970 EVO with PCIe Adapter(4x)
Slot 7: 400GB Intel SSD 750 (because it is has a boot ROM) (4x)

Well, I at least I use 29 of them.
Click to expand...

Running a GPU at 16x, got a 10Gbase-T card, using an external DAC, have NVMe drives...

Z390 can handle your use-case. If you've got to upgrade the motherboard for the new platform, you can get an AQ-107 built in, assuming you can make use of 10Gbase-T. And you'd still probably have options ;).
 
Hopefully this will free up some 6900k/6950x's finally, an extra couple cores would be nice over my 6850k.

The skylake-x refresh is going to be interesting after seeing this. Maybe they'll even give the 8 core 40 lanes again
 
Last edited:
Brahmzy said:
Given the 9900Ks lackluster OC headroom, I’m starting to think the 9700K is the CPU to have this go-around, if you’re an overclocker.
You’ll get better performance with an easy all-core 5.0+ OC that the 9900K can’t touch. Seriously contemplating cancelling my preorder and going with a 9700K...
Click to expand...
Probably why Intel didn't sample the 9700x for Hardocp
 
Randall Stephens said:
Hoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooly shit, AMD beating Intel on performance per watt. 37 more watts at full thread load? Shit, the world is over
Click to expand...
It's been like this since the 7900x or k or whatever it is. Was even worse deltas too like 60% more power for 30% gain, stock or oc even worse lol. Intel also busting tdp on server sockets too and getting smacked in performance. 14nm beyond 6 cores with Intel is looking very strung out..
 
Microcenter is now saying that the 9900K has been pushed back to mid to late November. I'm sure this has already been reported here / elsewhere but regardless, here is another posting.

I'm totally happy with 5ghz across all 8 cores / 16 threads.

I wonder if they are going to rework the die thickness? And, or work on the heat issues.
 
Randall Stephens said:
I'll be curious what Intel will do if ryzen 3xxx brings even more cores to the desktop. How big can they make these chips without yields driving the price to 1k for a "desktop" processor?
Click to expand...

Bigger issue is making it feasible from a product stack perspective. Right now, AMD is rolling four-core CCXs, which in all cases except the APUs, are on twin-CCX dies. They could very likely move to six-CCX dies next, which would put the APUs at 6C/8T, and the R7 at 12C/24T tops.

Another solution- or perhaps an additional solution- would be to use the active interposer technology they are developing to stitch dies together while eliminating most of the non-local memory penalties we're seeing with Threadripper.

The question AMD (and Intel!) will have to answer going forward is where to draw the line between desktop and HEDT. Memory bandwidth is a good delimiter, but few CPU tasks are really bandwidth limited, especially consumer tasks that matter.
 
ChefJoe said:
If you want a 4.5 GHz non-HT 2500k Sandy Bridge benchmark, let me know which one and I'll be happy to oblige. The PassMark/CPU Mark score for that is low 8700s. A year and a half ago, Kyle had to borrow a 2600k to do a retrospective because the SB parts had all filtered away.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the offer, I have an i7-2700K and so would be more interested to see comparisons with a HT enabled Sandy Bridge.

oldmanbal said:
Parity @ 4k gaming, falls off cliff at 1080p
Click to expand...

Which is what I was expecting at such a high resolution, but I thought minimum and average gaming frame rates might be noticeably higher by now.
 
Last edited:
I remember many moons ago when cpus were exciting. You’d have to build a new rig every year because things were growing by leaps and bounds. Now it’s so meh. I want to build a new rig with a 9900k, not because it offers performance or any value to me over my 3 year old 6700k but simply because I want to relive those glory days. But even then it’s probably still not worth it. What depths have we fallen to?
 
bildad said:
I remember many moons ago when cpus were exciting. You’d have to build a new rig every year because things were growing by leaps and bounds. Now it’s so meh. I want to build a new rig with a 9900k, not because it offers performance or any value to me over my 3 year old 6700k but simply because I want to relive those glory days. But even then it’s probably still not worth it. What depths have we fallen to?
Click to expand...

Moore’s Law
 
Is it the fastest on the market? Yes. Is it worth it? Not for me. I picked up a Ryzen 2700X for $289.99 shipped for my backup (non-workstation) box. I'll take saving over $300 (9900K + decent cooler) any day over small gains.
 
SixFootDuo said:
I wonder if they are going to rework the die thickness? And, or work on the heat issues.
Click to expand...
Remember the microfracture stim report? Intel showed indium caused cracking on their initial designs so this is why it's thicker. Also higher thermal stress, these things don't run cool, large operation range... So I'm curious to see if any lifetime issues arise from thinning the die up.
 
Blade-Runner said:
Thanks for the offer, I have an i7-2700K and so would be more interested to see comparisons with a HT enabled Sandy Bridge.
Click to expand...


Then you're in luck because that 2017 look-back is still going to get you most of the way there with the CPU portion of the tests being largely run the same as this review and comparing a 2600k and a 7700k at 4.5 ghz with hyperthreading. The numbers should be illustrative.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top