Intel 9900K Reviews

[JoeCoke]

So... Like a 10-20% difference for almost twice the price of the 2700x? Intel better hope that they lower the price. They don't have to lower it all the way down to AMD's price considering their brand is so strong and the 9900k is indeed the best gaming CPU, but almost twice the price is ridiculous. The 2700 is also 250$ right now, so there's that. That's well under half the cost of the 9900k, overclock the 2700 to be 2700x level, and you win.

 

Also, if AMD truly did gain another 15% IPC improvement with Zen 2 and if that actually translates well to real world performance, then AMD will be sitting VERY pretty in 2019. Maybe Zen 2 could raise clock speeds a little too, maybe 4.5ghz? With a 10%ish increase in both IPC and clock speed, AMD could finally be even with Intel. Oh my god, I can't wait for 2019. And with THAT much heat, we could maybe even see the next q6600/sandy bridge from Intel.

 

inb4 "REAL ENTHUSIASTS DON'T CARE ABOUT PRICE!!!"

 

EDIT: Looking at the thermals, the AMD CPUs look even better. You can comfortably run a 2700x with the included box cooler, while you'll be spending over 100$ on a AIO for the 9900k. The plot thickens. Adjusted price for the 9900k is 700$ now (580ish + 120ish for the AIO). Meanwhile the 2700x is 300$ on Amazon and 280$ at Microcenter. Or, like I said earlier in this post, you could just go with the 2700 for 250$.

 

AMD is already looking good now, I can't wait to see how they'll look with the 3000 series.

[pas008]

12 minutes ago, 2Buck said:

So... Like a 10-20% difference for almost twice the price of the 2700x? Intel better hope that they lower the price. They don't have to lower it all the way down to AMD's price considering their brand is so strong and the 9900k is indeed the best gaming CPU, but almost twice the price is ridiculous. The 2700 is also 250$ right now, so there's that. That's well under half the cost of the 9900k, overclock the 2700 to be 2700x level, and you win.

 

Also, if AMD truly did gain another 15% IPC improvement with Zen 2 and if that actually translates well to real world performance, then AMD will be sitting VERY pretty in 2019. Maybe Zen 2 could raise clock speeds a little too, maybe 4.5ghz? With a 10%ish increase in both IPC and clock speed, AMD could finally be even with Intel. Oh my god, I can't wait for 2019. And with THAT much heat, we could maybe even see the next q6600/sandy bridge from Intel.

 

inb4 "REAL ENTHUSIASTS DON'T CARE ABOUT PRICE!!!"

hate when they say best gaming cpu

who buys that cpu or even 8700k and games on 1080p

 

productivity/office/etc went up also but keep aiming at gaming?

 

wish some reviewers would start testing real world multitasking

gaming and streaming arent the only things users multitask on

[TahoeDust]

52 minutes ago, yian88 said:

This clearly shows how good Ryzen chips are, while the 9900k/9700k at stock with good coolers hit 84C with solder wtf? and thats only blender load if you hammer it with OCCT/Prime95 it will burn in 0.1seconds after clicking run, and ryzen chips are built on inferior 14/12nm from GF. Judging by HWU review these 8 core chips have no OC potential .... so if you do decide to buy one buy a locked model and save some money since you wont be overclocking these without a massive custom water loop. Even if you do manage to OC them if you reach beyond 80C then thats really bad your chip will die quite fast, in the video 360mm water cooling is at 89C at 5ghz thats just retarded. And now you cant delid it easy, theres a high chance you destroy the die when deliding which is not the case with TIM paste. So if you buy one of these chips youre fucked. 

 

Intel just fucked themselves with this release since 9900/9700k have a turbo to 4.7-5.0 ghz so you will hit those very high temps, you will have to invest a massive ammount ~200$+ into good custom watercooling just to use your cpu daily LOL.

 

I wouldnt buy these chips even for half their price.

Literally 4 posts above this rant is a very reputable reviewer running a 9900k @ 5GHz all cores under an AIO staying in the 70s.

[JoeCoke]

12 minutes ago, pas008 said:

hate when they say best gaming cpu

who buys that cpu or even 8700k and games on 1080p

 

productivity/office/etc went up also but keep aiming at gaming?

 

wish some reviewers would start testing real world multitasking

gaming and streaming arent the only things users multitask on

The way I see it is, they call it "best gaming CPU" because they can't call it best at anything else, but they want to market it as best at something. They can't say "best productivity CPU" because that would be a lie, Intel's own x299 and AMD's x399 are better for productivity. Sure, they could say "best consumer productivity CPU", but that just doesn't sound as exciting. I don't blame Intel for marketing the CPU the way they chose to.

 

I do agree that people who buy super duper high end CPUs just for 1080p gaming are kinda stupid though. Unless you're doing super high refresh rates, a sandy bridge i5 even has you covered there.

[NumLock21]

Don't care about performance as It does not interest me what the 9900K is capable of. What I care about is how some of the reviewers got the shaft by not getting those cool looking 3D packaging, like Anandtech.

[IceCold008]

Its blue wearing a green disguise, get my drift 

[ZcanKal]

Intel fanboys are desperately defending from the AMD fanboy onslaught.
And loosing.

[Blademaster91]

1 hour ago, TahoeDust said:

Literally 4 posts above this rant is a very reputable reviewer running a 9900k @ 5GHz all cores under an AIO staying in the 70s.

All the whining about cooling on a $500+ cpu is interesting. I mean really though if you're affording a system with a 9900k you're likely going to have a large AIO or custom loop and not cheaping out on anything else either.

[pas008]

Just now, Blademaster91 said:

All the whining about cooling on a $500+ cpu is interesting. I mean really though if you're affording a system with a 9900k you're likely going to have a large AIO or custom loop and not cheaping out on anything else either.

its typical negative nancy shit now days

intel this amd that nvidia hit me with baseball bat

 

I am loving this competition which everyone should

 

but always people bashing and taking sides to shit on anything and everything

[Gullerback]

Seems to me the vast consensus is get a 8700k AND mobo for far less than the 9900k alone.

[Ryujin2003]

12 minutes ago, Gullerback said:

Seems to me the vast consensus is get a 8700k AND mobo for far less than the 9900k alone.

Or if you have a more than capable CPU, then spend this money on a GPU for higher resolution where the CPU isn't necessarily the looking for the game.

[NumLock21]

1 hour ago, VegetableStu said:

they did? o_o maybe because they had to get the other two as well?

 

actually are there any other outlets who also did 3 CPUs? o_o

 

Haven't checked out all of the reviewers if they got all three 9th gen cpus. Okay it seems the all the press sample got the shaft. They're packaging looked like this

Spoiler

 

[0x00000001]

my god, follow anantech's 9900k review, that cpu draw more power than my 2950X at all cores load. May be i will build 8700k game pc for my son...

 

[Gullerback]

1 hour ago, Ryujin2003 said:

Or if you have a more than capable CPU, then spend this money on a GPU for higher resolution where the CPU isn't necessarily the looking for the game.

more or less

[Phentos]

36 minutes ago, NumLock21 said:

 

Haven't checked out all of the reviewers if they got all three 9th gen cpus. Okay it seems the all the press sample got the shaft. They're packaging looked like this

  Hide contents

 

Looks way better than the goofy Destiny engram boxes.

[Maticks]

So glad I bought my 8086k 2 weeks ago. Looks like you still need to delid this solder Tim and it's not easy. Along with the chip thicknesses causing heat issues.

Managed to get 5.4Ghz all 6 cores stable. 

Watched all the reviews deb8er was saying the only way to get 8th gen overclocking is to lap 1.8mm off the CPU so it transfers more heat off the chip.

 

Can't imagine many people will be willing to do that. So it's 95c 5ghz for most out of the box. The worst got 4.8ghz all cores at 90+c.

 

[Curufinwe_wins]

Actually looks pretty damn impressive. 5.3 GHz  consistent processor at reasonable voltages with minimum cooling requirements? (Yes a half-decent aio is what I'd consider minimum cooling requirement for any 8 core cpu).

 

Obviously efficiency is past the curve, but it's running near stock at levels that even the most insane binned chips could barely do.

 

25% Frequency advantage and a decent IPC advantage over Zen+? Sure it may not be the best value, but that's a hell of an argument for it compared to any HEDT in the past.

 

People love to say that oh look! Ryzen is half the price. Ok so factor in 16/32GB ram, a TB SSD, psu, case, good graphics card that makes it even slightly useful all that jazz and the 300 dollar combined price difference might be only 20% of the total. 20% total for 15-35% improved CPU performance? That is an easy buy for anyone actually using their CPU. It's not even diminishing returns. 

 

Also you cant overclock a 2700 to 2700x levels and not have XFR pull you back down unless you also chunk out for a decent cooler (nothing special, but not some stock or 40 dollar option either). So yeah basically just processor price difference imo.

 

 

Is this a good buy for most people? Ofc not. Most people don't need even a 2700 or 8700k let alone the higher stuff. But it isnt even objectively a bad value unless literally all you do is game w/o streaming (or puts, but really... com'on now). 

 

Delid is only a 5C difference. Not worth it, and not much different than previous stim processors.

[Phentos]

4 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Also you cant overclock a 2700 to 2700x levels and not have XFR pull you back down unless you also chunk out for a decent cooler (nothing special, but not some stock or 40 dollar option either). So yeah basically just processor price difference imo.

 

Delid is only a 5C difference. Not worth it, and not much different than previous stim processors.

Thank you. The need for a good cooler to OC a 2700 to 2700X levels eliminates the price advantage it has imo. Might as well just go for the 2700X and enjoy its excellent XFR2 boosting and use the Prism cooler. 

 

Delidding is so stupid in principle. Having to void your warranty to improve thermals on your brand new Intel CPU is just asinine to me. Intel having switched back to solder as their TIM was a great move imo.

 

When I had a 7700K a year and a half ago, I had to delid it to control its temps when I had OC'ed it to 5Ghz. I didn't buy a delid kit, so it was a nightmare to delid for me. Sold the chip to a buddy of mine at a very negligible loss and never looked back. From now on if a chip isn't soldered then I have no interest in it whatsoever.

[79wjd]

6 hours ago, yian88 said:

This clearly shows how good Ryzen chips are, while the 9900k/9700k at stock with good coolers hit 84C with solder wtf? and thats only blender load if you hammer it with OCCT/Prime95 it will burn in 0.1seconds after clicking run, and ryzen chips are built on inferior 14/12nm from GF.

And run the 9900k at the same 4ghz~ of the 2700x and things look very different. 5ghz+ is clearly outside of the efficiency envelope.

6 hours ago, yian88 said:

Even if you do manage to OC them if you reach beyond 80C then thats really bad your chip will die quite fast

It's really not. Modern CPUs can live quite happily in the 80s.

6 hours ago, yian88 said:

theres a high chance you destroy the die when deliding which is not the case with TIM paste. So if you buy one of these chips youre fucked. 

The vast majority of people don't delid, and delidding is risky even with non-soldered CPUs.

 

[porina]

9 hours ago, VegetableStu said:

New info:

New chart:

From: https://www.anandtech.com/show/13400/intel-9th-gen-core-i9-9900k-i7-9700k-i5-9600k-review/21

 

[leadeater]

8 hours ago, 7nationarmy said:

I'm really curious to what Intel's reasoning is behind the increased die thickness.

My guess would be to protect the die from heat damage when soldering.

[leadeater]

9 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

Intel is back with its interpretation of AMD's Bulldozer Architecture. Now with 220W real consumption under load...

*Motherboard makers violation of default TDP specification. Under load guess what, it runs at TDP on a motherboard that doesn't override Intel's TDP settings. See GN video.

 

 

Would you look at that, 9900K true stock runs at rated TDP.

 

Quote

With the Asus Maximus XI Hero that we used for our 9900K video there's a stricter adherence Intel stock policies than with some of the other boards.

 

So the only people violating the TDP spec on Intel CPUs is motherboard makers, who are setting TDP parameters that Intel allows you to configure if you wish. At stock, real stock, the TDP is as spec.

 

Video link at time stamp for full context.

 

 

[D13H4RD]

8 hours ago, yian88 said:

Even if you do manage to OC them if you reach beyond 80C then thats really bad your chip will die quite fast

Not really. 

 

If your chip is constantly thermal throttling, then I'd worry. The 80s is a little toasty but is otherwise nothing to worry about too much. Laptop CPUs, especially those in gaming machines have seen the 80s as typical load temps and I haven't seen one suffer an early death. 

 

I'd start worrying if it's really close to TJ Max.

[leadeater]

9 minutes ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

I'd start worrying if it's really close to TJ Max.

And TjMax is a safe value, that's the safety point Intel is happy with. Thinking about it I'd love to see like 100 CPUs run 24/7 at TjMax until they fail, if ever. That would be really interesting and boring lol.

[D13H4RD]

4 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Thinking about it I'd love to see like 100 CPUs run 24/7 at TjMax until they fail, if ever. That would be really interesting and boring lol.

Well that's a new video idea