Team Group T-Force DarkZα 3600 MHz DDR4 review
Corsair Scimitar Elite RGB gaming mouse review
Cougar 700K Evo keyboard review
Aorus Liquid Cooler 360 review
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X review
Corsair A500 CPU air cooler review
Palit GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER GamingPRO review
Lamptron SM436 PCI fan/RGB controller review
Alphacool Eisbaer Aurora 360 review
PowerColor Radeon RX 5600 XT Red Dragon review
Intel Core Series 9000 Specifications published - merely 100 and 200 MHz speed bumps
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 specification leaked as well, the procs are a respin of the current ones, with 100 to 200 MHz clock frequency increases.
Intel will house the new procs shared over the Core i5 (6-core) and Core i7 (8-core)line. The processors all will be a series 9000 model and based on Coffee Lake architecture. Intel now shows specifications of the mentioned processors, Hardware info spotted and the 9000 series CPU's are clocked approximately 100 to 200MHz higher than their 8000 series counterparts. A microcode update guidance file reveals Coffee Lake S series featuring whats listed as six and four core configurations, the models listed are:
- Core i5-9600(K)
- Core i5-9500(T)
- Core i3-9100
- Core i3-9000
That means it's confirmed that Intel will be using 8th gen processors in the 9000 lineups.
| Intel | Cores / Threads | Base Clock | Turbo Clock | TDP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Core i7-8086K | 6C / 12T | 4.0 GHz | 5.0 GHz | 95W |
| Core i7-8700K | 6C / 12T | 3.7 GHz | 4.7 GHz | 95W |
| Core i7-8700 | 6C / 12T | 3.2 GHz | 4.6 GHz | 65W |
| Core i5-9600K | 6C / 6T | 3.7 GHz | 4.5 GHz | 95W |
| Core i5-8600K | 6C / 6T | 3.6 GHz | 4.3 GHz | 95W |
| Core i5-9600 | 6C / 6T | 3.1 GHz | 4.5 GHz | 65W |
| Core i5-8600 | 6C / 6T | 3.1 GHz | 4.3 GHz | 65W |
| Core i5-9500 | 6C / 6T | 3.0 GHz | 4.3 GHz | 65W |
| Core i5-8500 | 6C / 6T | 3.0 GHz | 4.1 GHz | 65W |
| Core i5-9400 | 6C / 6T | 2.9 GHz | 4.1 GHz | 65W |
| Core i5-8400 | 6C / 6T | 2.8 GHz | 4.0 GHz | 65W |
| Core i3-8350K | 4C / 4T | 4.0 GHz | 95W | |
| Core i3-8300 | 4C / 4T | 3.7 GHz | 62W | |
| Core i3-9100 | 4C / 4T | 3.7 GHz | 65W | |
| Core i3-8100 | 4C / 4T | 3.6 GHz | 65W | |
| Core i3-9000 | 4C / 4T | 3.7 GHz | 65W | |
| Core i3-8000 | 4C / 4T | 3.6 GHz | 65W |
Source: Hardware info
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...
Intel Core i7-8086K anniversary edition CPU gets listed at retailers (updated) - 05/31/2018 06:47 AM
And yes, it surfaces again. Remember that nostalgic sounding 8086 processor rumor we reported a while ago? Intel could be planning a special processor to be released with the 40th anniversary of the...
Unannounced Intel Core i7 8086K Spotted - 04/15/2018 04:38 PM
Yes, you read that right, an 8086 processor. So then, Intel might be planning a special processor to be released with the 40th anniversary of the 8086 processor?...
BLEH!
Senior Member
Posts: 5919
Joined: 2010-10-17
Senior Member
Posts: 5919
Joined: 2010-10-17
#5562523 Posted on: 07/04/2018 12:12 PM
Celeron - dual
Pentium - dual w/HT
i3 - quad
i5 - hex
i9 - octa
That'd make sense...
...but then again when did anything intel ever did make sense?
Celeron - dual
Pentium - dual w/HT
i3 - quad
i5 - hex
i9 - octa
That'd make sense...
...but then again when did anything intel ever did make sense?
wavetrex
Senior Member
Posts: 768
Joined: 2008-07-16
Senior Member
Posts: 768
Joined: 2008-07-16
#5562524 Posted on: 07/04/2018 12:13 PM
Byebye Intel.
And a big BOO to all the 'tards buying their latest generation with "merely 100 and 200 MHz speed bumps".
Byebye Intel.
And a big BOO to all the 'tards buying their latest generation with "merely 100 and 200 MHz speed bumps".
Irenicus
Senior Member
Posts: 554
Joined: 2015-05-03
Senior Member
Posts: 554
Joined: 2015-05-03
#5562525 Posted on: 07/04/2018 12:19 PM
Spoken like someone who hasn't used one.. they are far from crap. They are quite beastly
Core i5 still only 6 threads? What a pile of crap.
Spoken like someone who hasn't used one.. they are far from crap. They are quite beastly
Silva
Senior Member
Posts: 1032
Joined: 2013-06-04
Senior Member
Posts: 1032
Joined: 2013-06-04
#5562526 Posted on: 07/04/2018 12:21 PM
Intel for sure has perfected it's milking business. It will work on the sheep who only care to have the latest and can afford anything.
They really have nothing new or are very stupid to think consumers are this dumb.
I love my i5 2500k to pieces but I'll not be a sheep, I'll buy the best cost/performance for all workloads and what I think will be more future proof (although it's impossible to predict the future).
Intel for sure has perfected it's milking business. It will work on the sheep who only care to have the latest and can afford anything.
They really have nothing new or are very stupid to think consumers are this dumb.
I love my i5 2500k to pieces but I'll not be a sheep, I'll buy the best cost/performance for all workloads and what I think will be more future proof (although it's impossible to predict the future).
Noisiv
Senior Member
Posts: 6664
Joined: 2010-11-16
Senior Member
Posts: 6664
Joined: 2010-11-16
#5562535 Posted on: 07/04/2018 01:12 PM
Core i5 still only 6 threads? What a pile of crap.
Your brain is pile of crap.
Core i5 still only 6 threads? What a pile of crap.
Your brain is pile of crap.
FeDaYin
Member
Posts: 72
Joined: 2006-07-20
Member
Posts: 72
Joined: 2006-07-20
#5562539 Posted on: 07/04/2018 01:31 PM
1. Intel still releasing $200 chip for $300 motherboard, Z490 won't be cheap, Z480, B460 or whatever won't come early
2. Intel still releasing same chips for different chipsets
3. Intel still releasing $200 motherboards with locked multiplier
4. Intel still TIM
5. Intel still HOT
1. Intel still releasing $200 chip for $300 motherboard, Z490 won't be cheap, Z480, B460 or whatever won't come early
2. Intel still releasing same chips for different chipsets
3. Intel still releasing $200 motherboards with locked multiplier
4. Intel still TIM
5. Intel still HOT
warlord
Senior Member
Posts: 2825
Joined: 2012-10-22
Senior Member
Posts: 2825
Joined: 2012-10-22
#5562540 Posted on: 07/04/2018 01:34 PM
Sadly enough, Intel is gonna win again. The bigger brother of 8700K holding 8c/16t will cost at average 33.3eur more per core plus 16.67eur per thread. Mathematically that means ((33.3x2)+(16.67x4))=66.6+66.68=133.28eur.
With other words, it is gonna cost exactly as much as i7 7820X. But it will crush this server wannabe PoS. We are talking about a real gaming cpu and a new generation. Well everyone has eyes for 9 series of intel and ryzen 2.
Sadly enough, Intel is gonna win again. The bigger brother of 8700K holding 8c/16t will cost at average 33.3eur more per core plus 16.67eur per thread. Mathematically that means ((33.3x2)+(16.67x4))=66.6+66.68=133.28eur.
With other words, it is gonna cost exactly as much as i7 7820X. But it will crush this server wannabe PoS. We are talking about a real gaming cpu and a new generation. Well everyone has eyes for 9 series of intel and ryzen 2.
Arbie
Senior Member
Posts: 169
Joined: 2008-07-04
Senior Member
Posts: 169
Joined: 2008-07-04
#5562592 Posted on: 07/04/2018 04:35 PM
The sad truth is that without Ryzen- i7 8700K could be 7700K with same 100~200 Mhz boost with new MB and chipset...
But most of the "Gamers" don't remember this, and for the 5% @720P~1080P performance boost they choose to pay to Intel Again- instead Helping AMD to keep the competition.
I get it when AMD had only FX 83XX and performace difference was massive, but now when the gap is less then 5%? those "Gamers" do deserve to be stuck with Intel's WalletRippers
.
Exactly. More people need to understand this point. We still have "gamers" saying they'll buy Intel to get every possible single-thread Hz. Must be somebody told them that, because no one can see a small difference in CPU during a game. And, there aren't any games worth compromising the market future for. Buy AMD - that's the best way to get a great processor today AND the chance of having fantastic ones 5 years from now.
https://forums.guru3d.com/threads/core-i9-7920x-7900x-core-i7-78xx-series-specs-hit-the-web.414505/page-2#post-5431215
The sad truth is that without Ryzen- i7 8700K could be 7700K with same 100~200 Mhz boost with new MB and chipset...
But most of the "Gamers" don't remember this, and for the 5% @720P~1080P performance boost they choose to pay to Intel Again- instead Helping AMD to keep the competition.
I get it when AMD had only FX 83XX and performace difference was massive, but now when the gap is less then 5%? those "Gamers" do deserve to be stuck with Intel's WalletRippers
.Exactly. More people need to understand this point. We still have "gamers" saying they'll buy Intel to get every possible single-thread Hz. Must be somebody told them that, because no one can see a small difference in CPU during a game. And, there aren't any games worth compromising the market future for. Buy AMD - that's the best way to get a great processor today AND the chance of having fantastic ones 5 years from now.
https://forums.guru3d.com/threads/core-i9-7920x-7900x-core-i7-78xx-series-specs-hit-the-web.414505/page-2#post-5431215
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4696
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4696
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5562621 Posted on: 07/04/2018 06:52 PM
This doesn't really make sense to me. 100-200MHz is really only going to be enough to compensate for all performance losses of the Spectre and Meltdown patches. Is Intel really going to do absolutely nothing else with this lineup? I mean really, we haven't see any noteworthy IPC changes since Skylake.
This doesn't really make sense to me. 100-200MHz is really only going to be enough to compensate for all performance losses of the Spectre and Meltdown patches. Is Intel really going to do absolutely nothing else with this lineup? I mean really, we haven't see any noteworthy IPC changes since Skylake.
D3M1G0D
Senior Member
Posts: 2066
Joined: 2017-03-10
Senior Member
Posts: 2066
Joined: 2017-03-10
#5562624 Posted on: 07/04/2018 07:08 PM
I don't think there is much they can do. Much like their outdated server solutions, they need a complete overhaul to make meaningful progress. The most they can do is add more cores and try to squeeze out every last bit of MHz from their current lineup. Despite their size and influence, Intel cannot work miracles.
Intel still has an army of loyal fans who will buy anything they make (kind of like Apple sheeple, who buy and praise anything Apple creates). There were scores of people who paid well over MSRP for a binned and delidded 8700K, and these are the same people who Intel will be hoping to sell their 9000-series chips to. Even if the improvement is 2%, there will be mobs of people tripping over themselves to buy the best gaming CPU (whether it makes an actual difference in games is inconsequential). In other words, Intel will be fine.
This doesn't really make sense to me. 100-200MHz is really only going to be enough to compensate for all performance losses of the Spectre and Meltdown patches. Is Intel really going to do absolutely nothing else with this lineup? I mean really, we haven't see any noteworthy IPC changes since Skylake.
I don't think there is much they can do. Much like their outdated server solutions, they need a complete overhaul to make meaningful progress. The most they can do is add more cores and try to squeeze out every last bit of MHz from their current lineup. Despite their size and influence, Intel cannot work miracles.
Intel still has an army of loyal fans who will buy anything they make (kind of like Apple sheeple, who buy and praise anything Apple creates). There were scores of people who paid well over MSRP for a binned and delidded 8700K, and these are the same people who Intel will be hoping to sell their 9000-series chips to. Even if the improvement is 2%, there will be mobs of people tripping over themselves to buy the best gaming CPU (whether it makes an actual difference in games is inconsequential). In other words, Intel will be fine.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4696
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4696
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5562625 Posted on: 07/04/2018 07:31 PM
To my knowledge, the only difference between Coffee Lake vs Haswell (in regards to the CPU itself, maybe not the IGP) is DDR3 support and some die shrinks. For 4 years they have done nothing to improve the architecture, and they're about to go a 5th year. I find it really hard to believe a company with this much money has had no plans for a succeeding architecture in this amount of time. Even if they were doubtful of AMD's recent successes, that's still not an excuse to have no plan B at all.
And sure, they are looking a little bit into things like ASICs, quantum computers, and GPUs, but none of those are replacement products to x86 CPUs.
Intel will be fine, but there's a lot of important factors to take in regarding the last several generations:
* Despite being mostly the same as Haswell, Skylake sold well because AMD still wasn't much of a competitor, and, DDR4 was a selling point.
* To my recollection, Kaby Lake actually had worse IPC than Skylake, but, it sold well because both Skylake and Ryzen had rusty launches. In other words, Kaby Lake had very little redeeming qualities, but it didn't carry any burdens at launch date. Furthermore, Kaby Lake had higher clock speeds to make it look more appealing.
* Coffee Lake was only successful since it gave people something they've been wanting for many years - 6 core i5s and i7s. CL also panned out well since quad and dual cores shifted down a performance tier, resulting in lower prices than the KL counterparts. And, CL once again increased clock speeds.
So, what does the 9000 series have to offer? With all the vulnerability patches, the IPC is going to be worse. To my knowledge, it still won't get 10nm, there's no new Thunderbolt or USB tech, and there won't be another shift in performance tiers.
I don't think there is much they can do. Much like their outdated server solutions, they need a complete overhaul to make meaningful progress. The most they can do is add more cores and try to squeeze out every last bit of MHz from their current lineup. Despite their size and influence, Intel cannot work miracles.
To my knowledge, the only difference between Coffee Lake vs Haswell (in regards to the CPU itself, maybe not the IGP) is DDR3 support and some die shrinks. For 4 years they have done nothing to improve the architecture, and they're about to go a 5th year. I find it really hard to believe a company with this much money has had no plans for a succeeding architecture in this amount of time. Even if they were doubtful of AMD's recent successes, that's still not an excuse to have no plan B at all.
And sure, they are looking a little bit into things like ASICs, quantum computers, and GPUs, but none of those are replacement products to x86 CPUs.
Intel still has an army of loyal fans who will buy anything they make (kind of like Apple sheeple, who buy and praise anything Apple creates). There were scores of people who paid well over MSRP for a binned and delidded 8700K, and these are the same people who Intel will be hoping to sell their 9000-series chips to. Even if the improvement is 2%, there will be mobs of people tripping over themselves to buy the best gaming CPU (whether it makes an actual difference in games is inconsequential). In other words, Intel will be fine.
Intel will be fine, but there's a lot of important factors to take in regarding the last several generations:
* Despite being mostly the same as Haswell, Skylake sold well because AMD still wasn't much of a competitor, and, DDR4 was a selling point.
* To my recollection, Kaby Lake actually had worse IPC than Skylake, but, it sold well because both Skylake and Ryzen had rusty launches. In other words, Kaby Lake had very little redeeming qualities, but it didn't carry any burdens at launch date. Furthermore, Kaby Lake had higher clock speeds to make it look more appealing.
* Coffee Lake was only successful since it gave people something they've been wanting for many years - 6 core i5s and i7s. CL also panned out well since quad and dual cores shifted down a performance tier, resulting in lower prices than the KL counterparts. And, CL once again increased clock speeds.
So, what does the 9000 series have to offer? With all the vulnerability patches, the IPC is going to be worse. To my knowledge, it still won't get 10nm, there's no new Thunderbolt or USB tech, and there won't be another shift in performance tiers.
D3M1G0D
Senior Member
Posts: 2066
Joined: 2017-03-10
Senior Member
Posts: 2066
Joined: 2017-03-10
#5562631 Posted on: 07/04/2018 08:15 PM
To my knowledge, the only difference between Coffee Lake vs Haswell (in regards to the CPU itself, maybe not the IGP) is DDR3 support and some die shrinks. For 4 years they have done nothing to improve the architecture, and they're about to go a 5th year. I find it really hard to believe a company with this much money has had no plans for a succeeding architecture in this amount of time. Even if they were doubtful of AMD's recent successes, that's still not an excuse to have no plan B at all.
And sure, they are looking a little bit into things like ASICs, quantum computers, and GPUs, but none of those are replacement products to x86 CPUs.
Intel will be fine, but there's a lot of important factors to take in regarding the last several generations:
* Despite being mostly the same as Haswell, Skylake sold well because AMD still wasn't much of a competitor, and, DDR4 was a selling point.
* To my recollection, Kaby Lake actually had worse IPC than Skylake, but, it sold well because both Skylake and Ryzen had rusty launches. In other words, Kaby Lake had very little redeeming qualities, but it didn't carry any burdens at launch date. Furthermore, Kaby Lake had higher clock speeds to make it look more appealing.
* Coffee Lake was only successful since it gave people something they've been wanting for many years - 6 core i5s and i7s. CL also panned out well since quad and dual cores shifted down a performance tier, resulting in lower prices than the KL counterparts. And, CL once again increased clock speeds.
So, what does the 9000 series have to offer? With all the vulnerability patches, the IPC is going to be worse. To my knowledge, it still won't get 10nm, there's no new Thunderbolt or USB tech, and there won't be another shift in performance tiers.
I don't think they need a brand new architecture, it's just that the hiccups in their 10nm process has thrown a monkey wrench into their plans. All they can do for now is try to squeeze out the last bit of performance from their existing process until they work out the kinks with 10nm. The 9000-series chips will most likely be a stop-gap measure.
It's certainly a bad position to be in, but historically they've been able to rely on their fab advantage to thwart their competitors so they were most likely relying on it again. Even if they have a plan B, their best chances of success is still plan A so I think they're going to try to make it work before resorting to more drastic measures.
To my knowledge, the only difference between Coffee Lake vs Haswell (in regards to the CPU itself, maybe not the IGP) is DDR3 support and some die shrinks. For 4 years they have done nothing to improve the architecture, and they're about to go a 5th year. I find it really hard to believe a company with this much money has had no plans for a succeeding architecture in this amount of time. Even if they were doubtful of AMD's recent successes, that's still not an excuse to have no plan B at all.
And sure, they are looking a little bit into things like ASICs, quantum computers, and GPUs, but none of those are replacement products to x86 CPUs.
Intel will be fine, but there's a lot of important factors to take in regarding the last several generations:
* Despite being mostly the same as Haswell, Skylake sold well because AMD still wasn't much of a competitor, and, DDR4 was a selling point.
* To my recollection, Kaby Lake actually had worse IPC than Skylake, but, it sold well because both Skylake and Ryzen had rusty launches. In other words, Kaby Lake had very little redeeming qualities, but it didn't carry any burdens at launch date. Furthermore, Kaby Lake had higher clock speeds to make it look more appealing.
* Coffee Lake was only successful since it gave people something they've been wanting for many years - 6 core i5s and i7s. CL also panned out well since quad and dual cores shifted down a performance tier, resulting in lower prices than the KL counterparts. And, CL once again increased clock speeds.
So, what does the 9000 series have to offer? With all the vulnerability patches, the IPC is going to be worse. To my knowledge, it still won't get 10nm, there's no new Thunderbolt or USB tech, and there won't be another shift in performance tiers.
I don't think they need a brand new architecture, it's just that the hiccups in their 10nm process has thrown a monkey wrench into their plans. All they can do for now is try to squeeze out the last bit of performance from their existing process until they work out the kinks with 10nm. The 9000-series chips will most likely be a stop-gap measure.
It's certainly a bad position to be in, but historically they've been able to rely on their fab advantage to thwart their competitors so they were most likely relying on it again. Even if they have a plan B, their best chances of success is still plan A so I think they're going to try to make it work before resorting to more drastic measures.
vazup
Senior Member
Posts: 291
Joined: 2013-09-05
Senior Member
Posts: 291
Joined: 2013-09-05
#5562635 Posted on: 07/04/2018 08:30 PM
I dont know why so many are bashing on intel but it still is the go to CPU if you play on a 144hz monitor. For now it is still noticeable if you want to get the lowest frames as high as you possible can get.
I dont know why so many are bashing on intel but it still is the go to CPU if you play on a 144hz monitor. For now it is still noticeable if you want to get the lowest frames as high as you possible can get.
Irsh
Junior Member
Posts: 14
Joined: 2018-04-08
Junior Member
Posts: 14
Joined: 2018-04-08
#5562637 Posted on: 07/04/2018 08:31 PM
A strong AMD will force Intel to update which is good for all of us consumers/share-holders.
A strong AMD will force Intel to update which is good for all of us consumers/share-holders.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Member
Posts: 85
Joined: 2017-08-21
At intel headquarters it seems that they ve got some panic after the ryzen and threadripper release...excuse me...you know for what the bad blue people are releasing those i9 chips?
The extra die space that is being occupied by the integrated graphics is not allowing any significant improvement in terms of core count...it seems that intel is paying for their infamous $$$ marketing.