Asrock B550 PG Riptide review
be quiet! Dark Rock TF2 review
Basemark GPU v1.2 benchmarks with 36 GPUs
Corsair MP600 Pro XT PCIe 4.0 M.2 NVMe review
Teamgroup MP34Q 2TB NVMe SSD review
Lian Li SP750 (750W PSU) review
Teamgroup Cardea Z44Q 4TB NVMe SSD review
Asus ROG Swift PG32UQX monitor review
Plextor M10P 2TB NVMe PCIe 4.0 SSD review
ASRock RX 6600 XT Phantom Gaming D 8GB OC review
Intel Core i9 9900KS processor review
Posted by: on: 11/15/2019 03:40 PM [
88 comment(s) ]
Intel has released its flagship desktop processor in the non-HEDT segment. The 9900KS is their most premium Coffee Lake-S eight-core processor that has been discussed so abundantly. This little beast has eight cores, sixteen threads and gets an all-core turbo bin that reaches 5.0 GHz. For many that is gaming nirvana whilst offering a balance of good performance and being a downright excellent gaming processor.
Read article
Advertisement
Tagged as:
intel,
Core i9 9900KS processor review
pages 1 2 3 4 > »
fry178
Senior Member
Posts: 1729
Senior Member
Posts: 1729
Posted on: 11/15/2019 02:44 PM
Yeah, and seeing what you cant get for similar price from amd, anyone doing more than gaming @720 will be better off with ryzen.
Yeah, and seeing what you cant get for similar price from amd, anyone doing more than gaming @720 will be better off with ryzen.
mohiuddin
Senior Member
Posts: 869
Senior Member
Posts: 869
Posted on: 11/15/2019 02:57 PM
While scrolling down through the power consumption chart , i was quite fascinated by the 3950x's numbers. While populating 4 more cores under the hood , it consumes less than 3900x. Quite intriguing....
While scrolling down through the power consumption chart , i was quite fascinated by the 3950x's numbers. While populating 4 more cores under the hood , it consumes less than 3900x. Quite intriguing....
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 41856
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 41856
Posted on: 11/15/2019 03:03 PM
That discussion doesn't belong in this thread, but I have been wondering about it as well. Both CPUs are physically the same (both two 8-core dies) with the same TDP even. It happens under multi-threaded stress, the 3900X has a 3800 MHz all core base-clock, the 3950X @ 3500 MHz. That could account for the 7-watt difference. Then again it can also be an instrument error.
While scrolling down through the power consumption chart , i was quite fascinated by the 3950x's numbers. While populating 4 more cores under the hood , it consumes less than 3900x. Quite intriguing....
That discussion doesn't belong in this thread, but I have been wondering about it as well. Both CPUs are physically the same (both two 8-core dies) with the same TDP even. It happens under multi-threaded stress, the 3900X has a 3800 MHz all core base-clock, the 3950X @ 3500 MHz. That could account for the 7-watt difference. Then again it can also be an instrument error.
IceVip
Senior Member
Posts: 801
Senior Member
Posts: 801
Posted on: 11/15/2019 03:21 PM
Hilbert it ain't my place to say this but if i were you i'd get this article off the front page big thumb nail and bring back the 3950x. You're doing Intel a favor but not yourself, I'm just saying.
Hilbert it ain't my place to say this but if i were you i'd get this article off the front page big thumb nail and bring back the 3950x. You're doing Intel a favor but not yourself, I'm just saying.
pages 1 2 3 4 > »
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 1608
It would be a great processor if not for the fact that next year you'll need a new motherboard (again) to be able to upgrade.
Intel can't beat AMD offerings with performance alone, as the gap is not what it was pre 2017, let alone with Ryzen 3000.
In August I bought a B450 motherboard and a Ryzen 2600 for cheap, knowing I'll upgrade in two years for Ryzen 4000 or at least the best I can afford of Ryzen 3000.
With Intel, you have no upgrade options. For me that's inexcusable.