Intel Core i9-9900K 9th Generation CPU Review @ [H]

lazz

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 15, 2007
Messages
324
Great review, as always. Had to read it twice through to really understand the deltas here.

I think the truly interesting comparo will be between the new 9th gen i5 and the 2700X. If you factor in $40 for the Wraith cooler these are the same price. Given that, and given the benches in this review, that i5 will be at a huge disadvantage from a value perspective, which is the very thing an i5 is supposed to represent.
 
D

Deleted member 201992

Guest
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?
 

Brahmzy

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
4,958
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.”

^^ There ya have it. The deets I needed. Can’t run 5.0 without an AVX offset. been spoiled by the 8086Ks I have. I know the 9700Ks will do it.
So...
Max Performance OCd on H115iv2 AIO.. 9900K or 9700K... tough choice. I think the 9700K will best the 9900K in most all games. In heavy multithreaded loads, what’s the point if the 9900K is throttling all over itself?
 
Last edited:

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
51,988
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?
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.
 

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
51,988
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.”
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.
 

Nightfire

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 7, 2017
Messages
3,211
Thanks for the review Kyle.

The CPU seems to run ALOT hotter than anyone expected. Also, this CPU needs some serious vrm support to prevent throttling.

So dropping $500+ on the CPU is only part of the equation. It seems you need one hell of a cooler and a very good MB to get the most if the CPU.
 

Dahkoht

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 2, 2014
Messages
450
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."


Same , for my gaming machine all I ever run other than the actual game at the same time is Discord/Vent etc at most. Nothing remotely close for games that will require more than 8 real cores , and 8 real cores at 5.3 ghz I think will be the top of gaming for a while.
 

tsuehpsyde

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 22, 2004
Messages
6,604
The other knock on the i9-9900K is going to be the price. As of typing this, the 9900K is selling for $530.

I saw that price on launch day, but even by the end of the day, the prices had gone up. As of today, they're still selling for $580 basically everywhere:

Amazon: $580 https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i9-9900K-Desktop-Processor-Unlocked/dp/B005404P9I/
NewEgg: $580 https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117957&cm_re=9900k-_-19-117-957-_-Product
BHPhoto: $580 https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1435917-REG/intel_bx80684i99900k_core_i9_9900k_3_6_ghz.html

I may be pissing sour grapes, but the value from $530 to $580 (~10% higher cost) is notably lower, at least for me. But between this and nVidia's situation, it appears the kings of performance get to make whatever prices they want and let the market decide.

On the performance side, I'm curious how the 9700k vs the 8700k stack up at typical overclocks due to the OC walls reviewers seem to be hitting. Clearly the 9900k with 8 cores and hyperthreading is today's Intel performance king, but apples to apples, last gen to this gen, I'm more interested in.
 

DuronBurgerMan

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
1,340
Great review, and I'm glad to see Intel finally pushing their products to the raggedy edge. The high boost clocks, sTIM (even if kind of shitty), all point to Intel getting off the ass and pushing the envelope. Were I building today, it would be 9900k all day - or a 2950X. I'd have a hard time on that decision. But this is an excellent product. As it stands, though, it's not worth a platform switch from my 2700X for ~16%. And there's Zen 2 to consider in the near-ish future.

Still, an excellent CPU. Well worth the gold award.
 

sc5mu93

Gawd
Joined
Jul 11, 2018
Messages
617
great review. I already run with undervolted 2700x so I'm not in the market. If intel could/wanted to solve the price/value problem, I do like that their chips have the iGPU even if it sucks. Its a good backup if you have issues with your dGPU and have no extra gfx cards laying around to troubleshoot with. I found this out with the 2700x, so I would like to see AMD add some rudimentary gfx to the Zen2 high end, just as a fallback.
 

Brahmzy

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
4,958
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..
 

CoreStoffer

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
263
Power hungry, hot, expensive, but fast as hell. Is this not what everyone expected?

Exactly. I might be the only one here that want to get this CPU, but then I need it more for content creation than games (3D and heavy photo editing) where the 9900K should fly.

I actually like that Intel has more or less made an optimal overclock OOB for me. :rolleyes:

Excellent value in the AMD camp, but I want to make a Windows / Hackintosh dual boot machine, so AMD is a no go, unfortunately.

That high full load temp is something to consider in regards to cooling though.
 

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
51,988
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..
I get BSODs pushing to 5.24GHz with the same settings just running Cinebench.

That said, we have used Prime95 as our base bulletproof overclocking test for over a decade. I really do not see changing that now because a CPU has less OC headroom.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
32,304
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.


upload_2018-10-19_13-0-33.png


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.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
32,304
Same as always been with mainstream Intel system. Ryzen also has 16.

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.
 

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
51,988
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.
OK, we go it, can we talk about what it is, rather than what it is not?
 

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
51,988
Bumping actual vCore to 1.26v and just running Cinebench on a COLD system from idle immediately locks up after about a couple of seconds. Look at where these per core temperatures go to. And this is hardly and AVX workload.

IMG_20181019_123115.jpg
 

Araxie

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
6,452
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.

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.
 

Chimpee

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 6, 2015
Messages
1,677
Performance is not surprising but a 2700 can be had at almost half the cost.
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.
 

Nightfire

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 7, 2017
Messages
3,211
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.
 

Spirit_Retro

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
319
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.

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.
 

Digital Viper-X-

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 9, 2000
Messages
14,470
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.

Maybe that will help with better heat dissipation :D
 

Inacurate

Gawd
Joined
Aug 25, 2004
Messages
520
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.

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.
 

Spirit_Retro

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
319
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.

I like the competition as well. I just took so many shots for going with a 9590 it was time to have a little fun :)
 

Elmy

Gawd
Joined
Sep 1, 2009
Messages
928
Holy crap... Looks like I will have to delid my 9900K even though its soldered and then lap it down .20mm

This is a very good video talking about thermals of the 9900K

Skip to 11:15 .... the most important chart in the video.

 
Joined
Mar 3, 2017
Messages
938
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).

Hoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooly shit, AMD beating Intel on performance per watt. 37 more watts at full thread load? Shit, the world is over
 

Meeho

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 16, 2010
Messages
5,333
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.
Yeah, 24 lanes that bottleneck into 4.
 

tacos4me

Gawd
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
814
Even If you do want one, it appears as of right now you'll be waiting until December.

Was going to put one together, but Intel made up my mind for me.
 
Top