Alphacool EISBAER Ex BLACK LCS review
Netgear Nighthawk AX12 Wi-Fi 6 router review
Corsair HS60 PRO Surround Headset Review
MSI Radeon RX 5700 Gaming X review
Team Group Cardea II NVMe 1 TB SSD Review
ASRock X570 Phantom Gaming ITX/TB3 review
Promo: URCDKey Autumn Sale Windows 10 Pro for $11
Patriot P200 1TB SATA3 SSD Review
ASRock Radeon RX 5700 XT Taichi OC+ review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - September 2019
Intel Announces Core i9 9900K Processor
During a live stream intel, today announced a Coffee lake-S refresh processor. Coffee Lake started as 8th gen six-core processors and now this is expanding towards eight-core processors. They have a TDP at 95W.
While not mandatory, the Z390 chipset based motherboards are recommended for the 8-core parts. The Coffee Lake 9000 are also based on a 14nm fabrication node, now with desktop in a 6-core and 8-core models. The Coffee Lake series processors are a refresh of the existing architecture and as such, the core basis is the same (as well as IPC). If we look back a little further, Coffee Lake-S shares design elements found in the Kaby lake and Skylake architecture, but now scaled upwards to 8-cores. The processor series is fabbed at 14nm.
- 9900K - 8c/16t has 16MB L3
In the initial release, you will see three primary procs, but that does not mean you'll only see a couple of processors in the Core 9000 range, word out on the street is that models like 9100, 9400 and 9500 Core series processors will be released as well. Next week the performance reviews on the newly announced products will go live. The presentation was a bit confusing for the Core 9000 series, Intel only talked about the Core i9 9900K, and nothing else. We'll add what we think we know.
| Core i9-9900K | Core i7-9700K | Core i5-9600K | |
| Cores / Threads | 8/16 | 8/8 | 6/6 |
| Speed | 3.6GHz | 3.6GHz | 3.7GHz |
| Maximum turbo | 5GHz | 4.9 GHz | 4.6 GHz |
| L2 cache per core | 256KB | 256KB | 256KB |
| L3 cache | 16MB | 12MB | 9MB |
| Memory channels | Dual-channel | Dual-channel | Dual-channel |
| Tdp | 95W | 95W | 95W |
| price | $488 | $374 | $262 |
Intel Announces 8th Gen Core (Whiskey Lake) Processors for Ultrabooks and Notebooks - 08/29/2018 08:34 AM
Intel announced additions to the 8th Gen Intel Core processor family: The U-series (formerly code-named Whiskey Lake) and Y-series (formerly code-named Amber Lake) are optimized for connectivity in th...
Micron and Intel Announce Update to 3D XPoint Joint Development Program - 07/17/2018 08:09 AM
Micron and Intel today announced an update to their 3D XPoint joint development partnership, which has resulted in the development of an entirely new class of non-volatile memory with dramatically low...
Martin Ashton leaves Intel and joins AMD Radeon team - 07/09/2018 06:02 PM
It's a bit of a freak-fest of transitions for both Intel and AMD with people moving. Several folks from AMD's Radeon Technologies Group moved towards Intel. This round, however, it's reversed, Mart...
Intel and Micron Announces Industry First QLC 3D NAND - 05/22/2018 07:48 AM
Today Intel and Micron announced the production and shipment of the industry’s first 4 bits per cell, or QLC, 3D NAND technology. Intel has begun sampling QLC 3D NAND with select customers a...
Intel and Microsoft release final Spectre Patches up to and including Sandy Bridge - 03/15/2018 04:24 PM
As Intel finalizes them, Microsoft started distributing Microcode updates for the Spectre variant 2, the updates now have a reach from the latest Coffee Lake processors, Kaby Lake (Core iX-7xxx and iX...
Loobyluggs
Senior Member
Posts: 3097
Joined: 2008-09-07
Senior Member
Posts: 3097
Joined: 2008-09-07
#5594178 Posted on: 10/09/2018 11:09 AM
I think, genuinely that; CPU focus for gaming is deader than dead. Hilbert ran a test for the sandybridge a few months ago and it showed the power for that CPU is more than enough for gaming.
There is no reason to spend huge $ on CPU's for gaming. There just isn't.
I think, genuinely that; CPU focus for gaming is deader than dead. Hilbert ran a test for the sandybridge a few months ago and it showed the power for that CPU is more than enough for gaming.
There is no reason to spend huge $ on CPU's for gaming. There just isn't.
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 9736
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 9736
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5594180 Posted on: 10/09/2018 11:22 AM
I think, genuinely that; CPU focus for gaming is deader than dead. Hilbert ran a test for the sandybridge a few months ago and it showed the power for that CPU is more than enough for gaming.
There is no reason to spend huge $ on CPU's for gaming. There just isn't.
Hilbert's testing was as flawed as all other tests I saw for it. Generally all use resource light benchmarks. Be it stand alone or in-game.
How does benchmark requiring 500MB of ram and 1,5GB of VRAM shows that Sandy with regular 1333/1600MHz memory stutters? And that PCIe 2.0 in those cases performs bit worse than Ivy w/ PCIe 3.0?
It simply does not, there is no sudden caching/swap of resources. Benchmarks preload all data required because they bench GPU, not CPU, memory and disk subsystem.
And those Game benchmarks. TR benchmark requires almost no resources and has no sudden moves, there camera moves so slowly that you can die of boredom.
BF1 bench with tank moving forward... No sudden turning of camera...
Even playing one BF1 match and recording frametimes and then playing on other CPU on same map... that's what will show perfectly clear wild frametimes as you look around, turn. Clear framerate dips, lower minimum fps, stutter.
Yes, you can't compare those data on time line, but statistically, it tells story well.
Same thing goes for SLI in PCIe 2.0 x4/x8/x16 mode vs. PCIe 3.0 x16 mode. Difference in benchamarks is tiny, because those simply do not have need to move resources around. Take one of those "bit crazy" games which have unique texture in every object and you'll see much bigger variance in frametime dips as so many resources need to be cycled on random. (Yes, game can't know if you are going to take sharp turn left/right and which 1GB of textures has to be ready, so it precaches a lot more than is actually needed.)
I think, genuinely that; CPU focus for gaming is deader than dead. Hilbert ran a test for the sandybridge a few months ago and it showed the power for that CPU is more than enough for gaming.
There is no reason to spend huge $ on CPU's for gaming. There just isn't.
Hilbert's testing was as flawed as all other tests I saw for it. Generally all use resource light benchmarks. Be it stand alone or in-game.
How does benchmark requiring 500MB of ram and 1,5GB of VRAM shows that Sandy with regular 1333/1600MHz memory stutters? And that PCIe 2.0 in those cases performs bit worse than Ivy w/ PCIe 3.0?
It simply does not, there is no sudden caching/swap of resources. Benchmarks preload all data required because they bench GPU, not CPU, memory and disk subsystem.
And those Game benchmarks. TR benchmark requires almost no resources and has no sudden moves, there camera moves so slowly that you can die of boredom.
BF1 bench with tank moving forward... No sudden turning of camera...
Even playing one BF1 match and recording frametimes and then playing on other CPU on same map... that's what will show perfectly clear wild frametimes as you look around, turn. Clear framerate dips, lower minimum fps, stutter.
Yes, you can't compare those data on time line, but statistically, it tells story well.
Same thing goes for SLI in PCIe 2.0 x4/x8/x16 mode vs. PCIe 3.0 x16 mode. Difference in benchamarks is tiny, because those simply do not have need to move resources around. Take one of those "bit crazy" games which have unique texture in every object and you'll see much bigger variance in frametime dips as so many resources need to be cycled on random. (Yes, game can't know if you are going to take sharp turn left/right and which 1GB of textures has to be ready, so it precaches a lot more than is actually needed.)
Aura89
Senior Member
Posts: 7626
Joined: 2008-07-31
Senior Member
Posts: 7626
Joined: 2008-07-31
#5594193 Posted on: 10/09/2018 12:01 PM
So everyone is wrong but you. Got it.
Hilbert's testing was as flawed as all other tests I saw for it.
So everyone is wrong but you. Got it.
sverek
Senior Member
Posts: 5294
Joined: 2011-01-02
Senior Member
Posts: 5294
Joined: 2011-01-02
#5594194 Posted on: 10/09/2018 12:04 PM
Sandy bridge does show age. and its harder to stabily overclock 7 years old CPU without messing things up.
For gpu bound games or 60fps target, Sandy might still cut it, but not for 100+fps gaming.
Sandy bridge does show age. and its harder to stabily overclock 7 years old CPU without messing things up.
For gpu bound games or 60fps target, Sandy might still cut it, but not for 100+fps gaming.
kings
Member
Posts: 98
Joined: 2018-09-18
Member
Posts: 98
Joined: 2018-09-18
#5594199 Posted on: 10/09/2018 12:17 PM
The 9900K will stomp everything in the mainstream, many cores/threads and excellent clocks. The problem is that it will reach in EU 600€ or close to that.
It will not be easy to recommend when a 2700X costs basically half and although it´s not the best CPU in absolute performance, it offers more than enough for most people.
I think the i9 will end up being a niche CPU, the sales champion should be the 9700K, now also with 8 cores (but lacking HT). I'm curious to see how it will behave compared to the 6C/12T of the 8700K.
The 9900K will stomp everything in the mainstream, many cores/threads and excellent clocks. The problem is that it will reach in EU 600€ or close to that.
It will not be easy to recommend when a 2700X costs basically half and although it´s not the best CPU in absolute performance, it offers more than enough for most people.
I think the i9 will end up being a niche CPU, the sales champion should be the 9700K, now also with 8 cores (but lacking HT). I'm curious to see how it will behave compared to the 6C/12T of the 8700K.
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 9736
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 9736
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5594200 Posted on: 10/09/2018 12:17 PM
Well, you do not show limitation of slow memory subsystem without actually putting load on it.
Right tool for the right job...
So everyone is wrong but you. Got it.
Well, you do not show limitation of slow memory subsystem without actually putting load on it.
Right tool for the right job...
Loobyluggs
Senior Member
Posts: 3097
Joined: 2008-09-07
Senior Member
Posts: 3097
Joined: 2008-09-07
#5594201 Posted on: 10/09/2018 12:18 PM
Sandy bridge does show age. and its harder to stabily overclock 7 years old CPU without messing things up.
For gpu bound games or 60fps target, Sandy might still cut it, but not for 100+fps gaming.
So - which games require 100fps+ and are CPU bound anno 2018? Surely the focus for developers is GPU using VRAM?
Sandy bridge does show age. and its harder to stabily overclock 7 years old CPU without messing things up.
For gpu bound games or 60fps target, Sandy might still cut it, but not for 100+fps gaming.
So - which games require 100fps+ and are CPU bound anno 2018? Surely the focus for developers is GPU using VRAM?
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 9736
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 9736
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5594203 Posted on: 10/09/2018 12:22 PM
The 9900K will stomp everything in the mainstream, many cores/threads and excellent clocks. The problem is that it will reach in EU 600€ or close to that.
It will not be easy to recommend when a 2700X costs basically half and although it´s not the best CPU in absolute performance, it offers more than enough for most people.
I think the i9 will end up being a niche CPU, the sales champion should be the 9700K, now also with 8 cores (but lacking HT). I'm curious to see how it will behave compared to the 6C/12T of the 8700K.
Years ago when intel came with iP4 HT there was not that many games/programs benefiting. But those which did (unreal engine) shown great difference. That specific HT code did not benefit from real cores, so 1C/2T chip won against 2C/2T.
Today with many cores, it is not that easy to say how much HT helps in each case. But disabling SMT on Zen CPUs has quite some negative impact on well threaded applications.
The 9900K will stomp everything in the mainstream, many cores/threads and excellent clocks. The problem is that it will reach in EU 600€ or close to that.
It will not be easy to recommend when a 2700X costs basically half and although it´s not the best CPU in absolute performance, it offers more than enough for most people.
I think the i9 will end up being a niche CPU, the sales champion should be the 9700K, now also with 8 cores (but lacking HT). I'm curious to see how it will behave compared to the 6C/12T of the 8700K.
Years ago when intel came with iP4 HT there was not that many games/programs benefiting. But those which did (unreal engine) shown great difference. That specific HT code did not benefit from real cores, so 1C/2T chip won against 2C/2T.
Today with many cores, it is not that easy to say how much HT helps in each case. But disabling SMT on Zen CPUs has quite some negative impact on well threaded applications.
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 9736
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 9736
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5594204 Posted on: 10/09/2018 12:24 PM
Are you talking about overkill? Then you can say that anything above 1080p is not needed too. Then 2080Ti is not needed. And anything above 8700K is not needed.
But good experience, that's needed and stutter means bad experience.
So - which games require 100fps+ and are CPU bound anno 2018? Surely the focus for developers is GPU using VRAM?
Are you talking about overkill? Then you can say that anything above 1080p is not needed too. Then 2080Ti is not needed. And anything above 8700K is not needed.
But good experience, that's needed and stutter means bad experience.
sverek
Senior Member
Posts: 5294
Joined: 2011-01-02
Senior Member
Posts: 5294
Joined: 2011-01-02
#5594211 Posted on: 10/09/2018 12:39 PM
100fps+ for any action game. Even civ feels smoother by moving a camera.
CPU bound are any games in which you remove GPU bound. So if changing settings from ultra to high, will offset load from GPU and stress more CPU.
In BF4, I am capped by CPU (2500K) @90 fps. While GPU (GTX970) is on 60% load.
Game on Medium settings, 1440p resolution.
So yeah, its more common than you think. Not even mentioning stutters that caused by CPU when explosion happens and client have to calculate all debris, overloading CPU.
So - which games require 100fps+ and are CPU bound anno 2018? Surely the focus for developers is GPU using VRAM?
100fps+ for any action game. Even civ feels smoother by moving a camera.
CPU bound are any games in which you remove GPU bound. So if changing settings from ultra to high, will offset load from GPU and stress more CPU.
In BF4, I am capped by CPU (2500K) @90 fps. While GPU (GTX970) is on 60% load.
Game on Medium settings, 1440p resolution.
So yeah, its more common than you think. Not even mentioning stutters that caused by CPU when explosion happens and client have to calculate all debris, overloading CPU.
D3M1G0D
Senior Member
Posts: 1929
Joined: 2017-03-10
Senior Member
Posts: 1929
Joined: 2017-03-10
#5594254 Posted on: 10/09/2018 01:45 PM
The 9900K will stomp everything in the mainstream, many cores/threads and excellent clocks. The problem is that it will reach in EU 600€ or close to that.
It will not be easy to recommend when a 2700X costs basically half and although it´s not the best CPU in absolute performance, it offers more than enough for most people.
I think the i9 will end up being a niche CPU, the sales champion should be the 9700K, now also with 8 cores (but lacking HT). I'm curious to see how it will behave compared to the 6C/12T of the 8700K.
Well, you can't really compare a 2700X or 8700K to a 9900K - the former is a mainstream product while the latter is HEDT. No mainstream processor costs 600 euros.
The 9900K will stomp everything in the mainstream, many cores/threads and excellent clocks. The problem is that it will reach in EU 600€ or close to that.
It will not be easy to recommend when a 2700X costs basically half and although it´s not the best CPU in absolute performance, it offers more than enough for most people.
I think the i9 will end up being a niche CPU, the sales champion should be the 9700K, now also with 8 cores (but lacking HT). I'm curious to see how it will behave compared to the 6C/12T of the 8700K.
Well, you can't really compare a 2700X or 8700K to a 9900K - the former is a mainstream product while the latter is HEDT. No mainstream processor costs 600 euros.
D3M1G0D
Senior Member
Posts: 1929
Joined: 2017-03-10
Senior Member
Posts: 1929
Joined: 2017-03-10
#5594285 Posted on: 10/09/2018 02:52 PM
Seems that Intel is up to their old tricks. They commissioned a report by Principled Technologies (ironic name) where they showed large differences between the Intel CPUs and AMD ones. Intel CPU used Noctua cooler while AMD used the default cooler, memory timings were looser on AMD, and they tested at 1080p @ medium (on a 4K monitor no less). Steve with the lowdown:
https://www.techspot.com/article/1722-misleading-core-i9-9900k-benchmarks/
Seems that Intel is up to their old tricks. They commissioned a report by Principled Technologies (ironic name) where they showed large differences between the Intel CPUs and AMD ones. Intel CPU used Noctua cooler while AMD used the default cooler, memory timings were looser on AMD, and they tested at 1080p @ medium (on a 4K monitor no less). Steve with the lowdown:
https://www.techspot.com/article/1722-misleading-core-i9-9900k-benchmarks/
mohiuddin
Senior Member
Posts: 757
Joined: 2010-11-06
Senior Member
Posts: 757
Joined: 2010-11-06
#5594294 Posted on: 10/09/2018 03:24 PM
^^ no wonder
^^ no wonder
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 9736
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 9736
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5594303 Posted on: 10/09/2018 03:35 PM
Seems that Intel is up to their own tricks. They commissioned a report by Principled Technologies (ironic name) where they showed large differences between the Intel CPUs and AMD ones. Intel CPU used Noctua cooler while AMD used the default cooler, memory timings were looser on AMD, and they tested at 1080p @ medium (on a 4K monitor no less). Steve with the lowdown:
https://www.techspot.com/article/1722-misleading-core-i9-9900k-benchmarks/
Then we should make "Ethical Technology Reviews" site. I bet intel pays good buck for confusing enough name.
We can promise to disable SMT on AMD's side as it would be unfair against intel's chip which has no HT.
And maybe we can put AMD's system into enclosed box and wait till it fails. If lucky we can claim that it failed horribly and burst into flames.
Seems that Intel is up to their own tricks. They commissioned a report by Principled Technologies (ironic name) where they showed large differences between the Intel CPUs and AMD ones. Intel CPU used Noctua cooler while AMD used the default cooler, memory timings were looser on AMD, and they tested at 1080p @ medium (on a 4K monitor no less). Steve with the lowdown:
https://www.techspot.com/article/1722-misleading-core-i9-9900k-benchmarks/
Then we should make "Ethical Technology Reviews" site. I bet intel pays good buck for confusing enough name.
We can promise to disable SMT on AMD's side as it would be unfair against intel's chip which has no HT.
And maybe we can put AMD's system into enclosed box and wait till it fails. If lucky we can claim that it failed horribly and burst into flames.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Posts: 5294
Joined: 2011-01-02
As it gets released, October 19th I think.