Patriot Viper V765 Keyboard Review
Combo deal: Office 2016 Pro and W10 for $34
Shadow of the Tomb Raider: RTX and DLSS Update
ASUS RT-AX88U (AX6000) router review
The Division 2: PC graphics performance benchmark review
URCDkey Spring Sale(up to 86% off) Windows 10 Pro $11
MSI GeForce GTX 1660 Gaming X review
MSI GeForce GTX 1660 VENTUS XS 6G OC review
Palit GeForce GTX 1660 StormX OC review
Corsair Crystal 680X PC Chassis Review
Intel Core i9-9900K, i7-9700K, i5-9600K specifications exposed (updated)
A little while ago we reported that Intel is to release three new three CPU SKUs. An 8-core, 16-thread CPU (Core i9 9900K); a 6c/12t one (Core i7 9700K) and a 6c/6t part (Core i5 9600K ).
The processors all will be a series 9000 model and based on Coffee Lake architecture. Asia based website coolaler now adds some juicy details to these processors. We're looking at only mild tweaks.
- The Core i9-9900K is an 8-core 16 thread with a base clock of 3.6GHz, a Boost of up to 5GHz, a cache memory of 16MB, a TDP of 95W, and an 8-core maximum acceleration clock of 4.7GHz.
- The Core i7-9700K is an 8-core 8 thread. It does not support HT. The base clock is 3.6GHz, Boost is up to 4.9GHz, the cache memory is 12MB, TDP 95W, and the 8-core maximum acceleration clock can reach 4.6GHz.
- Core i5-9600K is a 6-core 6 thread, with the same base clock as 3.7GHz, Boost up to 4.6GHz, cache memory of 9MB, TDP 95W, and 6 core maximum acceleration clocks up to 4.3GHz.
The Core i9-9900K (if it's really named like that) of course would be the premium 8-core part, released to battle AMD with their 8-core Ryzen processors, in specific the ZEN+ Ryzen 2700X. Though I still have a gut feeling that AMD is hiding a 2800X for release to compete with the Core i9-9900K (but perhaps that's wishful thinking). That 9700K was expected to be a 6-core part, but now looks to be an 8-core one, however lacking Hyperthreading. Intel is expected to launch these chips later at the end of Q3 2018.
Update: screenshot added with SiSift Sandra entry showing 9700K with 8 threads (no HT)
Shuttle now offers XPC Cube for 8th Gen Intel Core Processors - 07/12/2018 09:54 AM
The XPC cubes are the first models in the Shuttle range to benefit from the generation leap forward to Intel's latest processor models with a 14nm architecture (Coffee Lake). The SH370R6, which is de...
Intel Core Series 9000 Specifications published - merely 100 and 200 MHz speed bumps - 07/04/2018 07:30 AM
Yesterday we reported that Intel to be releasing Coffee lake based six and eight-core part in the 9000 series with processors like the Core i5-9600(K). We can advance a bit more on that as the specif...
Intel Coffee lake Core i9 9900K and other product names leaked? - 06/27/2018 09:03 PM
So much speculation on the Z390 chipset and the 8-core processors that go along with it, the news kind of gets lost in space eh? We talked Z390 for quite a while now. We know it's paired with at l...
Intel confirms it will release their first high-end GPU in 2020 - 06/12/2018 08:18 PM
Pretty much as expected, Intel is working on a dedicated GPU that Intel which is now confirmed to be released in 2020. Intels first real GPU likely will end up as graphics accelerator for artificia...
Intel Core i7-8086K CPU Turbo bins are Close To Similar to 8700K - 06/11/2018 04:20 PM
Over at Computex last week, Intel announced the anniversary edition Core i7-8086K, which they kind of did silently. Probably there was a good reason for that. The processor is advertised as 5 GHz pr...
warlord
Senior Member
Posts: 2083
Joined: 2012-10-22
Senior Member
Posts: 2083
Joined: 2012-10-22
#5567625 Posted on: 07/24/2018 09:57 AM
@HWgeek Blah blah as much as you want. Intel is sitting on throne, whether you ROFLing or not. War cries will not give you any victories.
@HWgeek Blah blah as much as you want. Intel is sitting on throne, whether you ROFLing or not. War cries will not give you any victories.
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 8506
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 8506
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5567627 Posted on: 07/24/2018 09:57 AM
Yeah, Frightening change of having 50% more cores
well, now it will be Frightening change by having 33% more cores.
Secondly, Since Ryzen release it is intel who is in reactive mode. It is AMD who's following their own roadmap.
@Fox2232 Whenever you like it or not If differences between 9900K and 8700K are like 8700K vs 7700K we are talking for frightening power inbound. AMD is still weak to react. Everything else mentioned is blabbing.
Yeah, Frightening change of having 50% more cores
well, now it will be Frightening change by having 33% more cores.
Secondly, Since Ryzen release it is intel who is in reactive mode. It is AMD who's following their own roadmap.
nizzen
Senior Member
Posts: 578
Joined: 2005-08-05
Senior Member
Posts: 578
Joined: 2005-08-05
#5567628 Posted on: 07/24/2018 10:00 AM
Godlike IPC? Are you on intel's drugs? Last time I checked IPC of intel and AMD chips are practically same.
Only intel started to call it "instructions per core" which makes no sense as there is no time unit in name anymore.
Or do you expect them to improve IPC drastically, and prove that they intentionally held IPC back while having improvements ready for years?
And fun fact... "Well done Intel." Congratulating before fact? Reminds me of all those racers who lost their races on last meters due to them celebrating early.
Per clock there is not much difference, but Intel can run @ ~1Ghz faster core and ~Ghz faster memory. This makes the big difference. If you don't like it, don't buy it.
Godlike IPC? Are you on intel's drugs? Last time I checked IPC of intel and AMD chips are practically same.
Only intel started to call it "instructions per core" which makes no sense as there is no time unit in name anymore.
Or do you expect them to improve IPC drastically, and prove that they intentionally held IPC back while having improvements ready for years?
And fun fact... "Well done Intel." Congratulating before fact? Reminds me of all those racers who lost their races on last meters due to them celebrating early.
Per clock there is not much difference, but Intel can run @ ~1Ghz faster core and ~Ghz faster memory. This makes the big difference. If you don't like it, don't buy it.
Glottiz
Senior Member
Posts: 433
Joined: 2006-11-18
Senior Member
Posts: 433
Joined: 2006-11-18
#5567629 Posted on: 07/24/2018 10:02 AM
Oh that 9900K looks juicy sweet. Maybe finally I'll upgrade my aging 5820K.
Oh that 9900K looks juicy sweet. Maybe finally I'll upgrade my aging 5820K.
nizzen
Senior Member
Posts: 578
Joined: 2005-08-05
Senior Member
Posts: 578
Joined: 2005-08-05
#5567631 Posted on: 07/24/2018 10:07 AM
Fox2232 is just mad, cuz his AMD cpu is bad (slow) :p
Fox2232 is just mad, cuz his AMD cpu is bad (slow) :p
Goiur
Senior Member
Posts: 617
Joined: 2009-04-29
Senior Member
Posts: 617
Joined: 2009-04-29
#5567632 Posted on: 07/24/2018 10:10 AM
Just edit your first post
Actually my reading comprehension failed. Hilbert should ban me forever.
Just edit your first post
-Tj-
Senior Member
Posts: 16023
Joined: 2012-05-18
Senior Member
Posts: 16023
Joined: 2012-05-18
#5567635 Posted on: 07/24/2018 10:15 AM
So much fail in these posts, spoken like a true diehard fanboy.
That 9700K will be the new gaming king. It will obliterate 8086k and 2700x in all aspects. 8/8 with strong clocks and godlike IPC is more than enough before 2020. Well done Intel.
@Fox2232 Whenever you like it or not If differences between 9900K and 8700K are like 8700K vs 7700K we are talking for frightening power inbound. AMD is still weak to react. Everything else mentioned is blabbing.
@HWgeek Blah blah as much as you want. Intel is sitting on throne, whether you ROFLing or not. War cries will not give you any victories.
So much fail in these posts, spoken like a true diehard fanboy.
sverek
Senior Member
Posts: 4727
Joined: 2011-01-02
Senior Member
Posts: 4727
Joined: 2011-01-02
#5567636 Posted on: 07/24/2018 10:15 AM
Hardly a war with 8 cores. Not to mention how much it will cost.
Still could be interesting as a "highest end gaming CPU"
The core wars has begun
Hardly a war with 8 cores. Not to mention how much it will cost.
Still could be interesting as a "highest end gaming CPU"
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 8506
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 8506
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5567637 Posted on: 07/24/2018 10:18 AM
Yes, you are right there. But that's what Warlord does not get. He considers intel's future chips as holy grail. But in meanwhile intel is losing that clock advantage. We will see what clocks intel can have on 8C/16T under full load even with solder.
And then we will see Zen2 around same time. There AMD is likely to gain 5~10% IPC as they promised since Zen/Zen+ is new architecture with a lot of low hanging fruits. And we can expect 8C/16T max auto clock moving from 4.0GHz to 4.4GHz while max auto clock from 4.35GHz to 4.8GHz. Basically making AMD's solution equal to intel's in performance while AMD is likely going to keep prices as they have them now.
That's price where AMD's 8C/16T costs about same as intel's 6C12T.
Please note that I do not call intel's chip bad, they are good by all means. But AMD is good option in almost entire price spectrum. AMD just does not have Zen in lowest part of spectrum. And AMD is definitely better value in HEDT spectrum. (With budget for intel system, you can get 1.5x performance from AMD's side. Or get same while clocking it so low that it becomes extremely power efficient.)
Which brings us to main AMD's disadvantage with current Zen. That's pretty poor power efficiency at last 100~200MHz they can reach easily.
IIRC: In my tests 8C/16T @4.25GHz easily reached 200W+. While 4.15GHz kept under 150W. And 4GHz under 100W. 3.8GHz under 65W. If Zen2 on 7nm gains additional power efficiency...
Per clock there is not much difference, but Intel can run @ ~1Ghz faster core and ~Ghz faster memory. This makes the big difference. If you don't like it, don't buy it.
Yes, you are right there. But that's what Warlord does not get. He considers intel's future chips as holy grail. But in meanwhile intel is losing that clock advantage. We will see what clocks intel can have on 8C/16T under full load even with solder.
And then we will see Zen2 around same time. There AMD is likely to gain 5~10% IPC as they promised since Zen/Zen+ is new architecture with a lot of low hanging fruits. And we can expect 8C/16T max auto clock moving from 4.0GHz to 4.4GHz while max auto clock from 4.35GHz to 4.8GHz. Basically making AMD's solution equal to intel's in performance while AMD is likely going to keep prices as they have them now.
That's price where AMD's 8C/16T costs about same as intel's 6C12T.
Please note that I do not call intel's chip bad, they are good by all means. But AMD is good option in almost entire price spectrum. AMD just does not have Zen in lowest part of spectrum. And AMD is definitely better value in HEDT spectrum. (With budget for intel system, you can get 1.5x performance from AMD's side. Or get same while clocking it so low that it becomes extremely power efficient.)
Which brings us to main AMD's disadvantage with current Zen. That's pretty poor power efficiency at last 100~200MHz they can reach easily.
IIRC: In my tests 8C/16T @4.25GHz easily reached 200W+. While 4.15GHz kept under 150W. And 4GHz under 100W. 3.8GHz under 65W. If Zen2 on 7nm gains additional power efficiency...
RzrTrek
Senior Member
Posts: 2060
Joined: 2012-04-16
Senior Member
Posts: 2060
Joined: 2012-04-16
#5567639 Posted on: 07/24/2018 10:20 AM
I think it's misleading to show "5GHz" when it's only for 1 core.
I think it's misleading to show "5GHz" when it's only for 1 core.
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 8506
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 8506
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5567642 Posted on: 07/24/2018 10:26 AM
Be warned, I have 2400G too. I intentionally limit it to 3.6GHz. It is excellent system in tiny box.
Go enthusiastically with same box on intel's side. I wonder if you can get higher CPU and iGPU performance while keeping it as cool.
Fox2232 is just mad, cuz his AMD cpu is bad (slow) :p
Be warned, I have 2400G too. I intentionally limit it to 3.6GHz. It is excellent system in tiny box.
Go enthusiastically with same box on intel's side. I wonder if you can get higher CPU and iGPU performance while keeping it as cool.
Glottiz
Senior Member
Posts: 433
Joined: 2006-11-18
Senior Member
Posts: 433
Joined: 2006-11-18
#5567644 Posted on: 07/24/2018 10:29 AM
5.0 GHz (1-2 Cores)
4.8 GHz (4 Cores)
4.7 GHz (6-8 Cores)
I think it's misleading to show "5GHz" when it's only for 1 core.
5.0 GHz (1-2 Cores)
4.8 GHz (4 Cores)
4.7 GHz (6-8 Cores)
RzrTrek
Senior Member
Posts: 2060
Joined: 2012-04-16
Senior Member
Posts: 2060
Joined: 2012-04-16
#5567647 Posted on: 07/24/2018 10:47 AM
5.0 GHz (1-2 Cores)
4.8 GHz (4 Cores)
4.7 GHz (6-8 Cores)
Thanks for the clarification (AMD also does it) but still very confusing to say the least.
5.0 GHz (1-2 Cores)
4.8 GHz (4 Cores)
4.7 GHz (6-8 Cores)
Thanks for the clarification (AMD also does it) but still very confusing to say the least.
Angushades
Senior Member
Posts: 154
Joined: 2007-06-11
Senior Member
Posts: 154
Joined: 2007-06-11
#5567649 Posted on: 07/24/2018 10:57 AM
Yeah, Frightening change of having 50% more cores
well, now it will be Frightening change by having 33% more cores.
Secondly, Since Ryzen release it is intel who is in reactive mode. It is AMD who's following their own roadmap.
Very salty mate, if you got ur head outta ya ass you might think objectively.
Yeah, Frightening change of having 50% more cores
well, now it will be Frightening change by having 33% more cores.
Secondly, Since Ryzen release it is intel who is in reactive mode. It is AMD who's following their own roadmap.
Very salty mate, if you got ur head outta ya ass you might think objectively.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 2083
Joined: 2012-10-22
@Fox2232 Whenever you like it or not If differences between 9900K and 8700K are like 8700K vs 7700K we are talking for frightening power inbound. AMD is still weak to react. Everything else mentioned is blabbing.