Thoughts on 9900KS? So anyone buying a 9900K is getting screwed?

[Jae30001]

So, how do you guy's feel about intel, releasing Binned versions of the 9900K?  

 

I feel it could be good for better binned chips..  At the same time, i believe it completely screws anyone that is in the market for a regular 9900K.  Because clearly if the chip performs well AT ALL, Intel is going to bin that chip with a Freaking S, and more than likely up charge the cost!  (9900KS).

 

This will completely remove the opportunity for an enthusiast to receive a "GREAT" Chip from intel, because intel is clearly taking every performer and relabeling them another chip!

 

It's good and bad.  If the price point is the same as the current 9900K.  well then it would be good. However, if the up charge this as a high costing premium. Anyone in the market for a 9900K, completely gets screwed on the silicon lottery chance of getting a good chip.

 

 

Well, that's my 2 nickels worth.  

 

Thanks Guys!

[5x5]

It's just a rebrand. Nothing new about it. They are simply feeding it more voltage and power making it a worthy successor to the FX9590

[Fasauceome]

AMD already kind of screwed the 9900K, the 3700X taking a significant lead in price to performance with hardly any lower performance.

[Jae30001]

31 minutes ago, 5x5 said:

It's just a rebrand. Nothing new about it. They are simply feeding it more voltage and power making it a worthy successor to the FX9590

From what I have gathered directly from intel, they are binning the 9900K to re brand these.  Leaving 0 chance for a 9900K purchaser to hit the silicone lottery.

28 minutes ago, Fasauceome said:

AMD already kind of screwed the 9900K, the 3700X taking a significant lead in price to performance with hardly any lower performance.

This, i do agree with.  Price to performance.  

[5x5]

Just now, Jae30001 said:

From what I have gathered directly from intel, they are binning the 9900K to re brand these.  Leaving 0 chance for a 9900K purchaser to hit the silicone lottery.

This, i do agree with.  Price to performance.  

Of course intel would say that. Do you think they'd openly admit to milking people? 99% of 9900Ks do 5Gjz with most doing 5.1. this is intel basically giving the CPU 200W of power budget and turning on MCE. Also known as doing the FX9590 thing

 

[Fasauceome]

1 minute ago, 5x5 said:

9900Ks

Enter the confusion, referring to plural 9900K or 9900KS

 

God forbid you need to use 9900KSs

[Jae30001]

On 9/8/2019 at 6:39 PM, 5x5 said:

Of course intel would say that. Do you think they'd openly admit to milking people? 99% of 9900Ks do 5Gjz with most doing 5.1. this is intel basically giving the CPU 200W of power budget and turning on MCE. Also known as doing the FX9590 thing

 

I am sure, regardless the plan is going to be run a higher vcore, and up the cores to a max of 5Ghz.  However, i am sure they are still going to be binning these chips, leaving 0 chance for silicone lottery.  Kind of what AMD is doing with the 3800X, Binning the 3700X to get the 3800x.  Leaving a smaller chance for silicone lottery. 

 

I have had a 9900k hit 5.3 on open loop.  But that was my original chip from launch.  my recent purchase of a 9900k last week, for a test bench barely hits 5.1 without good cooling.   Has anyone recently purchased a 9900K chip?  how are your thermals?

 

Also, Just the thought of the silicone lottery, completely disappearing would be really sad.

 

in other words, they are charging a premium for the silicone lottery. and calling the KS.

 

Whatever, take my money,

Edited September 9, 2019 by Jae30001

[5x5]

Just now, Jae30001 said:

I am sure, regardless the plan is going to be run a higher vcore, and up the cores to a max of 5Ghz.  However, i am sure they are still going to be binning these chips, leaving 0 chance for silicone lottery.  Kind of what AMD is doing with the 3800X, Binning the 3700X to get the 3800x.  Leaving a smaller chance for silicone lottery. 

 

I have had a 9900k hit 5.3 on open loop.  But that was my original chip from launch.  my recent purchase of a 9900k last week, for a test bench barely hits 5.1 without good cooling.  Just the fact, of the silicone lottery, completely disappearing..

 

in other words, they are charging a premium for the silicone lottery. and calling the KS lol

They're going to be pumping a lot of voltage meaning it's just a rebrand. Barely any binning to be done. Only the bottom 1% of 9900K CPUs won't be rebranded.as 9900 Keep Spending

[xg32]

depends on the price, the kf is gonna be 400usd soon, and combined with a z390 elite it's not too bad of a deal, the ks is probably gonna cost around 500usd, for some the extra binning isn't worth 100usd, not sure where that leaves the regular 9900k though.

[Jae30001]

During the manufacturing process.  they loose a massive percentage of the silicone wafer.  My entire point.. is any chance of getting a silicone lottery on the 9900K is Now GONE.  because of the 9900KS.  basically, you pay a premium, for the top performers.  

 

Even though, i do believe the only 9900K i have heard of not hitting 5Ghz, was Romans Early access 9900k.  They are probably binning chips that hit 5.4, 5Ghz stable.

[G00fySmiley]

I doubt the 9900Ks with invalidate the 9900k. it seems likely they will take the chips closer to center/ if they do anything at all. seems more like they are just doing the overclocking for you and then recommending proper cooling rather than just tuning for efficiency and lower heat generation. IE for people not wanting to play silicone lottery they can buy this and know they have a good one or can just RMA for a replacement. 

[CTR640]

Nah, Intel can simply fuck off. Now AMD finally provides competition, they are running like chickens without a head and in panic mode. Making stupid decisions like this one. Charging a premium price for the KS edition indeed. If the 3700X is a very good CPU with good price/performance ratio, then why not the 3700X lol.

[nick name]

22 hours ago, Jae30001 said:

-snip-

 

 

Well, that's my 2 cent worth.

 

-snip-

I don't respect any opinion valued less than nickel.  

[Zando_]

21 hours ago, Jae30001 said:

I have had a 9900k hit 5.3 on open loop.  But that was my original chip from launch.  my recent purchase of a 9900k last week, for a test bench barely hits 5.1 without good cooling.  Just the fact, of the silicone lottery, completely disappearing..

That's a sample size of 2, not really enough to draw a conclusion like that. 

[Jae30001]

3 hours ago, nick name said:

I don't respect any opinion valued less than nickel.  

 haha,

 

On 9/8/2019 at 5:59 PM, Jae30001 said:

Well, that's my 2 nickels worth.  

Fixed!  Now, can we talk? lol

[Turtle Rig]

On 9/8/2019 at 2:59 PM, Jae30001 said:

So, how do you guy's feel about intel, releasing Binned versions of the 9900K?  

 

I feel it could be good for better binned chips..  At the same time, i believe it completely screws anyone that is in the market for a regular 9900K.  Because clearly if the chip performs well AT ALL, Intel is going to bin that chip with a Freaking S, and more than likely up charge the cost!  (9900KS).

 

This will completely remove the opportunity for an enthusiast to receive a "GREAT" Chip from intel, because intel is clearly taking every performer and relabeling them another chip!

 

It's good and bad.  If the price point is the same as the current 9900K.  well then it would be good. However, if the up charge this as a high costing premium. Anyone in the market for a 9900K, completely gets screwed on the silicon lottery chance of getting a good chip.

 

 

Well, that's my 2 nickels worth.  

 

Thanks Guys!

Also I don't know your other uses.  A 9700 would be great for games and desktop productivity.

[Jae30001]

2 hours ago, Zando Bob said:

That's a sample size of 2, not really enough to draw a conclusion like that. 

I agree.. .  Actually I incorrectly depicted the meaning of that sentence, and i did just rephrase it for better words .  

[Slash621]

On 9/8/2019 at 3:45 PM, Jae30001 said:

Has anyone recently purchased a 9900K chip?  how are your thermals?

 

I just got mine in August.  I can barely hold 4.9 at 1.285 VRin (which I've been told is the best VCORE on Aorus Z390).  My actual Vcore is set to 1.3 and holds at 1.32 VCCIN in HWINFO.  My temps hold exactly 100C on a Noctua D15 with it's 2 stock fans and the noctua paste.  Reapplication didnt improve these. I idle in the high 30s.

 

I still get crashes even though I pass x264 bench, realbench and blender bench for an hour each.  The crashes are in DCS world, which is a full fidelity flight simulator so the single thread CPU abuse is higher than any other game i've come across.  Also Aces High III which is another sim, occasionally  I crash esp in VR.  This is with my 2080ti on stock settings so it's not the card, since the card can pass Heaven and Superposition for hours at a time at a +150/+650 OC.

 

I think I just got a poor silicon lottery result, but of course if intel is scraping off the top 30% (according to Silicon lottery 30% hit 5ghz) then everyone else is going to get 4.9ish at best and i've seen a few forum records of 4.7 all core being an issue at times.

 

Side Note: I do plan to get myself a 9900KS to replace this. I dont know why, but I'm obsessed with having that 5GHZ number show up...  Esp since the majority of games I play are CPU limited with the 2080TI and all the details cranked in VR.

[Princess Luna]

On 9/8/2019 at 6:59 PM, Jae30001 said:

So, how do you guy's feel about intel, releasing Binned versions of the 9900K?

It's a money grab they should be ashamed of.

[jones177]

On 9/8/2019 at 5:59 PM, Jae30001 said:

So, how do you guy's feel about intel, releasing Binned versions of the 9900K?  

 

I feel it could be good for better binned chips..  At the same time, i believe it completely screws anyone that is in the market for a regular 9900K.  Because clearly if the chip performs well AT ALL, Intel is going to bin that chip with a Freaking S, and more than likely up charge the cost!  (9900KS).

 

This will completely remove the opportunity for an enthusiast to receive a "GREAT" Chip from intel, because intel is clearly taking every performer and relabeling them another chip!

 

It's good and bad.  If the price point is the same as the current 9900K.  well then it would be good. However, if the up charge this as a high costing premium. Anyone in the market for a 9900K, completely gets screwed on the silicon lottery chance of getting a good chip.

 

 

Well, that's my 2 nickels worth.  

 

Thanks Guys!

Great.

 

I have never seen a post or a video of a i9 9900k not reaching 5ghz on all cores so this is not like the i7 8700k and the i7 8086k.

 

Like my i7 8086k these will be cooler chips for going past 5ghz. Basicly a better place to start for whoever wants to pay the extra money for it.

For games this may be pointless since the architecture in its 6 core form suffers from diminishing returns past 5ghz all the way up to 5.35ghz.

 

If they were 5.35ghz out of the box I would get two.  

[jones177]

1 hour ago, Slash621 said:

I just got mine in August.  I can barely hold 4.9 at 1.285 VRin (which I've been told is the best VCORE on Aorus Z390).  My actual Vcore is set to 1.3 and holds at 1.32 VCCIN in HWINFO.  My temps hold exactly 100C on a Noctua D15 with it's 2 stock fans and the noctua paste.  Reapplication didnt improve these. I idle in the high 30s.

 

I still get crashes even though I pass x264 bench, realbench and blender bench for an hour each.  The crashes are in DCS world, which is a full fidelity flight simulator so the single thread CPU abuse is higher than any other game i've come across.  Also Aces High III which is another sim, occasionally  I crash esp in VR.  This is with my 2080ti on stock settings so it's not the card, since the card can pass Heaven and Superposition for hours at a time at a +150/+650 OC.

 

I think I just got a poor silicon lottery result, but of course if intel is scraping off the top 30% (according to Silicon lottery 30% hit 5ghz) then everyone else is going to get 4.9ish at best and i've seen a few forum records of 4.7 all core being an issue at times.

 

Side Note: I do plan to get myself a 9900KS to replace this. I dont know why, but I'm obsessed with having that 5GHZ number show up...  Esp since the majority of games I play are CPU limited with the 2080TI and all the details cranked in VR.

You are the first post I have read that did not get 5ghs.

I did 5ghz on all cores at 1.272 with a Aorus Ultra and a Noctua D15 with one fan. Running Cinebench R15 the temps don't go past 72c.

 

I can understand your desire to get a 5ghz chips since I replaced my under performing i7 8700k for a i7 8086k for that reason.

 

My i7 8700k could do up to 4.9ghz but it crashed a lot in games. At stock it did not crash at all. One of my i7 8086ks is at 5.1 and I get no crashes in games.

 

My RTX 2080 ti is a different story since I had to drop +17 on the cores to stop Control from crashing. The game likes more vram overclocking so no frame rate loss. 

 

 

[Jae30001]

I am more pointing out the fact, intel is screwing customers publically in fear of AMD ryzen.  I have a daily runner, 5.1Ghz all core, avx0, 290vcore, delided 9900k .

 

I purchased two cpu's to test my theory.  Both barely hit 5ghz.  Now my original cpu from months ago. Will hit 5.3Ghz without issue.

 

Kinda pisses me off that intel is going to crap on there own product to win a pissing match, screwing customers in the run.

 

Thanks for the replies!

[Harry Voyager]

Well, we'll see how the prices hold up once the R3900X and 3950X supply issues are worked out. I've seen I9-9900KF's frequently going on sale for $400 USD lately, so if AMD can get their clock speed up like they're trying on the 3950X parts, that could force the KS down to the price of a current K. 

[richintheveins]

I'm really curious on the silicon and how far this cpu can be overclocked, but lets look at the reality. There is like 9 days left in October and still no release date in site......We don't even know if this will be released this month let alone this year. Just my pessimistic thoughts. 

[richintheveins]

On 9/8/2019 at 5:45 PM, Jae30001 said:

I am sure, regardless the plan is going to be run a higher vcore, and up the cores to a max of 5Ghz.  However, i am sure they are still going to be binning these chips, leaving 0 chance for silicone lottery.  Kind of what AMD is doing with the 3800X, Binning the 3700X to get the 3800x.  Leaving a smaller chance for silicone lottery. 

 

I have had a 9900k hit 5.3 on open loop.  But that was my original chip from launch.  my recent purchase of a 9900k last week, for a test bench barely hits 5.1 without good cooling.   Has anyone recently purchased a 9900K chip?  how are your thermals?

 

Also, Just the thought of the silicone lottery, completely disappearing would be really sad.

 

in other words, they are charging a premium for the silicone lottery. and calling the KS.

 

Whatever, take my money,

I was actually going to pick one up as well. I know people are high on AMD, but i'm not scrapping my entire build just for benchmark numbers. In my real world work load the difference between a 3900x and a 9900k is minimal; however, I do have an addiction in having the best possible cpu with my current mb, and since my current 9900k struggles to hold at 5 ghz all cores with a pretty high idle temp I figured I would just kick the rocks on this and screw myself out of the money just to have "good silicon" and a chance to oc it beyond 5 ghz all cores. Dumb reason? Maybe...but I don't give a damn