TahoeDust
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2011
- Messages
- 502
Really? Why not?The only way I was going to get a 9900K is if I could have a stable sub-1.4v all-core 5.0 without an AVX offset.
Looks like that’s not going to happen - not even close...
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Really? Why not?The only way I was going to get a 9900K is if I could have a stable sub-1.4v all-core 5.0 without an AVX offset.
Looks like that’s not going to happen - not even close...
You are horribly GPU-limited. I would suggest in 99% of the games that are somewhat modern, you are held back by your GPU.if you're only gaming, at 1440p, with a 6950x, is this a viable upgrade?
Honestly, I am not sure about that right now. If I saw a lot of our community willing to do this, I think I might, but I am not so sure a lot of folks are going to want to go the distance on the 9900K. First there is a good chance of fracturing that die delidding the CPU. Then you are talking about sanding the die itself...again very risky. Surely it can be done, but I am not sure a lot of folks are going to want to take it down that road. Dunno.Great review mate, shame about the OC potential. Still seems like you pay out the rear end for top performance, albeit not as badly as for a 2080 ti. Do you plan on doing any delidding testing with Liquid metal?
We use Prime95 because it has an AVX workload. It is basically the worst possible scenario. In CC loads at STOCK clocks we are seeing about ~150w CPU package power recorded. Looking at OC numbers now.From Tom’s on OCing:
“We tapped Corsair's H115i v2 to test our Core i9-9900K sample in the U.S. lab. This liquid cooler afforded enough headroom to sustain a 5.0 GHz overclock with a 1.33V Vcore and a Load Line Calibration 4 setting. It kept the chip at a steady 85°C during extended non-AVX stress tests. Folding in AVX instructions did, unfortunately, overwhelm the all-in-one. To reign in the thermal output, we set the AVX offset to -2, meaning the chip ran at 4.8 GHz during AVX-optimized workloads and 5.0 GHz in the absence of AVX instructions. We maintained a temperature of 95°C during three hours of Prime95 using those settings.
To model real-world settings attainable by enthusiasts with closed-loop liquid coolers, we applied the -2 AVX offset for our 5.0 GHz overclock in the gaming, office and productivity, and rendering tests.”
Looking forward to seeing an i7-9700K review: I won't be surprised if the non-HT part OC's better and is the top gaming CPU.
Edit: From Anandtech: "For the Core i7-9700K, we hit 5.3 GHz very easily, for a small bump in power and temperature."
The other knock on the i9-9900K is going to be the price. As of typing this, the 9900K is selling for $530.
Performance is not surprising but a 2700 can be had at almost half the cost.
Power hungry, hot, expensive, but fast as hell. Is this not what everyone expected?
I get BSODs pushing to 5.24GHz with the same settings just running Cinebench.I’m seeing quite the spread of experiences on the various review sites. LOTS of variables at play. Early mobo firmware, different coolers, different testing methods...
I think Kyle did a worse-case conservative OC while others are more best case - especially where AVX is in play..
Same as always been with mainstream Intel system. Ryzen also has 16.
OK, we go it, can we talk about what it is, rather than what it is not?No. Ryzen also has too few lanes, but they have 50% more of them at 24 lanes.
I understand that mainstream parts have always had fewer PCIe lanes than the -E parts, it is an 8C/16T 5Ghz monster really a mainstream part?
If this CPU were an LGA AS 2066 part with 40+ lanes I'd be in.
8C/16T without sacrificing the per core performance of the 8600K.
It seems like the holy grail of CPU's if not for one small detail...
The fact that it only has a gimped number of PCIe lanes (16) takes this from a "must buy immediately" product to a "no interest under any circumstance" product.
I just can't bring myself to buy any CPU/motherboard combo with fewer than 40 lanes. I currently have 40 lanes on my i7-3930k and Asus P9X79 WS, and I actually use most of them.
Slot 1: GPU (16x)
Slot 2: No slot, and covered by GPU
Slot 3: Empty (if populated, slot 1 would drop to 8x)
Slot 4: 10G Base T NIC (4x)
Slot 5: Creative Titanium HD Sound Card (1x)
Slot 6: 1TB Samsung 970 EVO with PCIe Adapter(4x)
Slot 7: 400GB Intel SSD 750 (because it is has a boot ROM) (4x)
Well, I at least I use 29 of them.
Indeed, for most folks 2700 or 2700X is a great buy but if you want the absolutely best without going to HEDT territory, then I can see value of a 9900K. That being said, if a person spends 500 bucks, said person might as well consider 1950X.Performance is not surprising but a 2700 can be had at almost half the cost.
I have no idea who he is.Why do you think Tom Logan is seeing such different thermal performance?
From Tom’s on OCing:
“We tapped Corsair's H115i v2 to test our Core i9-9900K sample in the U.S. lab. This liquid cooler afforded enough headroom to sustain a 5.0 GHz overclock with a 1.33V Vcore and a Load Line Calibration 4 setting. It kept the chip at a steady 85°C during extended non-AVX stress tests. Folding in AVX instructions did, unfortunately, overwhelm the all-in-one. To reign in the thermal output, we set the AVX offset to -2, meaning the chip ran at 4.8 GHz during AVX-optimized workloads and 5.0 GHz in the absence of AVX instructions. We maintained a temperature of 95°C during three hours of Prime95 using those settings.
I am thinking that a 9800x would be a better bet than than the 9900k for those that want the best gaming with plenty of threads.
From what we have seen with the 7820x, clocks should be similar now that it is using stim. Also, temps should be lower since it has such a bigger surface area. Finally, price of the CPU and motherboard should be similar considering the cost of the a Z-390 that can handle those clocks. Never mind you also get way more I/O.
Both the 9800x and upcoming 2920x seem like better ways to go.
Egads.... 85c under water?
My god... my 9590 runs right at 50c under full load at 5Ghz with a 110i. Yea I know how much slower it is... but cmon Intel. That's got to be like 1000 BTU. You'll heat a room with that, during the winter, with the furnace out.
Why did Tom Logan not have the temp issues other's are complaining about?...
Intel is going into the HVAC sector.
They're really running the edge here to compete with (and beat!) AMD, I like it. Never a bad thing, competition.
Should be interesting to see what they release as a proper response when they take the time to do it right.
In all honesty, I very rarely read reviews.Since I casually watch hardware reviews and you are in the industry for a living, I assumed you knew who he was. Sorry.
What we do know is that at a full 16 thread load is that the 9900K shows a ~31% power usage increase compared to the 2700X, which greatly outpaces its performance increases shown in our benchmarks (16% average).
Do we know what test he ran even?
Hey Kyle, just run it at 1.45v with a chiller to get 5.4ghz. It's super practical!
Yeah, 24 lanes that bottleneck into 4.you get 16x pcie lanes DIRECTLY to the CPU, however the chipset also have other 24x PCIe-Lanes for a total of 40 usable.. this has been this way since skylake IIRC. so you can still have your GPU in fully x16 and drive the other components by the mobo chipset.