ASRock X670E Steel Legend review
Solidigm P44 Pro (1TB/2TB) M.2 NVMe SSD Review
EnGenius ECW336 WIFI6E Access Point review
MSI MEG Z790 ACE review
Deepcool LT720 LCS Cooler Review
Arctic A35/I35 A-RGB air coolers review
Minisforum HX90G (Ryzen 9 5900HX + RX 6600M) mini PC review
MSI MPG Z790 Edge (DDR4) review
MSI GeForce RTX 4080 Gaming X TRIO review
Deepcool CH510 chassis 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: 1899
Senior Member
Posts: 1899
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: 950
Senior Member
Posts: 950
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: 45179
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 45179
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: 868
Senior Member
Posts: 868
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: 1935
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.