Guru3D Thermal Paste Roundup - Round 2 (2021)
ClockTuner v2.1 for Ryzen (CTR) Guide
TRENDnet 5-port Unmanaged 2.5G Switch review
Powercolor RX 6700 XT Hellhound Spectral White review
Resident Evil Village: PC graphics performance benchmark review
Enermax LIQMAX III aRGB 240mm review
PCIe Resizable BAR Performance AMD and NVIDIA benchmarks
Guru3D Rig of the Month - April 2021
Intel Core i7 11700KF processor review
Acer Predator Apollo and Predator Talos DRAM Review
Intel's all 5 GHz cores Core i9 9900KS Processor has 127W TDP (Updated)
Intel today held a conference call related to IFA in Berlin, and unexpectedly they actually talked about the 9900KS, and mention that the all-core 5 GHz processor is due for a release next month.
The Core i9 9900KS processor will have 5 GHz boost activated on all eight cores. So in threaded workloads where one or all threads are utilized, the processor will jump to 5 GHz in all threads/cores. The existing Core i9 9900K, which has one core active up to 5 GHz, and all core stress translates towards a maximum of 4.7 GHz on all cores is the same product, this, however, is a heavily binned version of that SKU. Intel did not share any details on what the TDP is going to be for this SKU, as certainly it'll be higher than 100 Watts. Intel has not disclosed a price either.
In a presentation, they also showed some slides mentioning the slightly confusing situation on Turbo bins with AMD's Ryzen 3000, claiming for Intel 5 GHz simply is 5 GHz. The slide-show also held an interesting screengrab. Have a peek.
Update September 19th, 2019
New information reached us, the Core i9 9900KS will get a 127 Watt TDP as ASUS has released a BIOS update for its upcoming motherboards listing precisely this TDP, that's an increase if 34 percent. Not bad really, so we are really wondering how long the 5 GHz on all cores that's in place. 20~30 Seconds and then back to the base-clock at 4000 GHz as with this TDP you cannot continuously run 5 GHz at that wattage in our belief.
Also, mind you that TDP for Intel is not a maximum power used, that number likely is far higher in the 5 GHz all-core boost. So the question remains, the Intel all-core 5 GHz Boost .. is for how many seconds? The Core i9-9900KS has 16 MB of L3 cache, built-in UHD 630 GT2 graphics chip, supports DDR4-2666 memory, and the processor will continue to use IHS soldering to improve the heat and unpacking of the chip. The chip is due for release next month.
Intel's discrete graphics cards will not start at $200 - 08/05/2019 09:04 AM
Last week it was rumored that Intel's upcoming dedicated graphics cards, codenamed Arctic Sound, could become real price-goers, at least according to recent statements by chief architect and former A...
Single-core performance of Intel's Sunny Cove chips Surface - Shows Big IPC Increase - 06/17/2019 09:04 AM
Funny how these slides always seem to leak right after a competitor announcement ;) Anyhow, we're talking about Intel's new Sunny Cove architecture, which is still out for quite a while. Mind you t...
Intel's 'Auction-only' 14 Core Core i9-9990XE Gets Listed at Retailer website for 2999 EUR - 04/12/2019 08:25 AM
You guys remember the Core i9-9990XE we've talked about a couple of times right? Basically, Intel launched the product, then it was discovered this processor has only 14 cores and thus 28 threads o...
Eurocom Armadillo multi-touch 14" ultrabook with Intel's Core i7-4500U - 01/17/2014 08:33 AM
Eurocom releases Armadillo a multi-touch 14" ultrabook with Intel's Core i7-4500U. Eurocom is launching the thin, light and multi-touch enabled 14” Armadillo Ultrabook notebook. The b...
Intel's answer to ARM: Customisable x86 chips with HIDDEN POWERS - 05/21/2013 08:39 AM
Intel is dabbling in the customization of its x86 processors for specific large-scale customers in the server market. The effort is a strategy to expand its dominance and increase competition vs ARM. ...
fry178
Senior Member
Posts: 1689
Joined: 2012-04-30
Senior Member
Posts: 1689
Joined: 2012-04-30
#5713724 Posted on: 09/23/2019 03:59 PM
@gx-x
Lol, just a quick use of web and a ppi calculator would have shown you that at 1080p res, 24in is about as big as the screen can get, before i can see pixels messing up the image at desktop distance, and that's 91.79 ppi.
Feel free to calculate that yourself for higher res and/or larger screens, to see what does and what doesn't make sense.
And with 20 of my friends being med drs, a handful of them i know for +25y,
and having gone thru the basic numbers, i know that "we" can see up to 32K.
As others said, also depends on distance, if you can actually see the difference with content.
@D3M1G0D
Because on monitors you pixels are small enough to show all the details,
when 720/1080 tvs have such large pixels that they basically are unable to show enough detail to see how crappy the game actually looks.
and partially connected to the distance, and why 10in tablets need at least 1080 for readable web browsing.
Same reason i started using dsr and record at 4/5K with shadowplay,
so not to see pixels when demoing, for ppl gaming on 4k tvs..
@gx-x
Lol, just a quick use of web and a ppi calculator would have shown you that at 1080p res, 24in is about as big as the screen can get, before i can see pixels messing up the image at desktop distance, and that's 91.79 ppi.
Feel free to calculate that yourself for higher res and/or larger screens, to see what does and what doesn't make sense.
And with 20 of my friends being med drs, a handful of them i know for +25y,
and having gone thru the basic numbers, i know that "we" can see up to 32K.
As others said, also depends on distance, if you can actually see the difference with content.
@D3M1G0D
Because on monitors you pixels are small enough to show all the details,
when 720/1080 tvs have such large pixels that they basically are unable to show enough detail to see how crappy the game actually looks.
and partially connected to the distance, and why 10in tablets need at least 1080 for readable web browsing.
Same reason i started using dsr and record at 4/5K with shadowplay,
so not to see pixels when demoing, for ppl gaming on 4k tvs..
Deleted member 213629
Unregistered
Unregistered
#5713726 Posted on: 09/23/2019 04:03 PM
Finally .... someone!
I get there are industries born out of irrationality and stupidity - devil's advocate aside; entire industries aren't wasting their hard earned money on research and development for moot points. Well sometimes, but generally that's not fiscally responsible. With so many consumer reviews these days - the internet at everybody's fingertips; if 4K Monitors had a huge placebo effect going on; it'd be widely-published news item.
Or, if you're going to say something you deem credible, you better also come up with the source to prove your claims. Otherwise, all these monitor manufacturers are selling 4k monitors for no reason /s.
Finally .... someone!
I get there are industries born out of irrationality and stupidity - devil's advocate aside; entire industries aren't wasting their hard earned money on research and development for moot points. Well sometimes, but generally that's not fiscally responsible. With so many consumer reviews these days - the internet at everybody's fingertips; if 4K Monitors had a huge placebo effect going on; it'd be widely-published news item.
fry178
Senior Member
Posts: 1689
Joined: 2012-04-30
Senior Member
Posts: 1689
Joined: 2012-04-30
#5713780 Posted on: 09/23/2019 06:44 PM
BTT
seems a bit to me that intel is really trying to push the "look, i'm doing 5ghz on all cores)..",
knowing about their "shortcomings" outside 720/1080 gaming or regarding cores/price,
and knowing very well that the days of increasing (max) clock with each other cycle are numbered.
at least on the long run i dont see clocks going past 5.xx, at least for +90% consumer cpus used in desktops/laptops.
maybe an exception here and there, when they release some platinum/titanium/iridium pentium dual core in space grey ;-)
BTT
seems a bit to me that intel is really trying to push the "look, i'm doing 5ghz on all cores)..",
knowing about their "shortcomings" outside 720/1080 gaming or regarding cores/price,
and knowing very well that the days of increasing (max) clock with each other cycle are numbered.
at least on the long run i dont see clocks going past 5.xx, at least for +90% consumer cpus used in desktops/laptops.
maybe an exception here and there, when they release some platinum/titanium/iridium pentium dual core in space grey ;-)
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 2068
Joined: 2017-03-10
Yeah, I noticed the same thing with console games - NES games looked great on a TV but looked like crap on a computer monitor. I read that it has something to do with the imperfections of the display (TV) but not really sure. Also, real life doesn't have jaggies