Intel's 9th Generation Core Family - Coffee Lake (Refresh)

Sancus said:
No, liquid metal is better than solder. Derbauer has stated this several times in the past, I can't remember in which video so I just pasted the most recent statement about it. The difference is very small, so of course you don't have to bother with delidding. But to the enthusiast population who already delids all their CPUs, there is no performance gain if Intel decides to go back to soldering. Just a convenience gain.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the correction.
 
Looking more and more like my 8600K will be replaced with a 9700K, finally a reason to dump my poor OC 8600K (4.75GHz 1.31v) :p Great to finally be able to not have to upgrade MB on the Intel side even if just for a refresh, I'm pretty sure initial plans could have been otherwise, gotta thank AMD for stepping up as good better things start to happen.

Was the screenshot removed from that leak or? Was just wondering if it said any volts, I mean 5.5GHz at for example 1.35v or 1.5v is changing how you look at it pretty much. Just as interesting will be what the quality of the chips are like, if there's any signs of better/worse than current 6-core counterparts.
 
Last edited:
Sancus said:
You're welcome! Honestly, I was pretty surprised when I found that out too.
Click to expand...

wowzer that honestly doesn't make sense. pretty sure his measurements and applying TIM between IHS and heatsink is off. isnt solder known to have higher heat transfer rate than LM? unless the solder is cheaply done i could see it happening.
 
oleNBR said:
wowzer that honestly doesn't make sense. pretty sure his measurements and applying TIM between IHS and heatsink is off. isnt solder known to have higher heat transfer rate than LM? unless the solder is cheaply done i could see it happening.
Click to expand...

Correct. Gallium is about 40w /mK whereas SAC solder or SnAgCu is about 60w /mk.

However, there can easily be voids in the solder which greatly affects coductivity. There is no sucj thing as an ideal solder as different mixtures have different coductivity, thermal expansion, applicayion ease etc. Also, liquid metal might be applied thinner so that could negate some of the conductivitu advamtages over gallium or liquid metal.

Both are head and shoulders above even high grade thermal paste which is 8.5 W/mK
 
Last edited:
Thermal conductivity is not the end all metric. Viscosity is important as something with half the comductivity of another material that can be applied 3x smaller would still have better heat transfer. Complicated stuff, no doubt
 
Nightfire said:
Pardon my ignorance, but which is better, STIM or delid+liquid metal? I though they were pretty equivelant. And what what is the difference in clocks between paste and the better of those two? I was thinking the extra speed was from the 14++ architecture or is this still unconfirmed?
Click to expand...

delid+liquid
 
I wonder if the i9 part is soldered because they need to, not want to. Will the OC headroom be less? If they are just soldering it to get higher stock frequency's to create a new sku, are we really gaining anything? If you are an OCer I would say no.
 
Nightfire said:
Thermal conductivity is not the end all metric. Viscosity is important as something with half the comductivity of another material that can be applied 3x smaller would still have better heat transfer. Complicated stuff, no doubt
Click to expand...

you mean 3x thinner for vertical transfer im assuming
 
New Asus Z390 motherboards
ASUS officially confirms Z390 / MAXIMUS XI motherboard series - VideoCardz.com
Asus entwickelt derzeit 19 Mainboards mit Z390-Chipsatz | PC Builders Club

Maximus XI
  • ROG MAXIMUS XI APEX
  • ROG MAXIMUS XI CODE
  • ROG MAXIMUS XI EXTREME
  • ROG MAXIMUS XI FORMULA
  • ROG MAXIMUS XI HERO
  • ROG MAXIMUS XI HERO (WI-FI)
Z390 Strix
  • ROG STRIX Z390-E GAMING
  • ROG STRIX Z390-F GAMING
  • ROG STRIX Z390-H GAMING
  • ROG STRIX Z390-I GAMING
Z390 Prime
  • PRIME Z390-A
  • PRIME Z390M-PLUS
  • PRIME Z390-P
Z390 TUF
  • TUF Z390M-PRO GAMING
  • TUF Z390M-PRO GAMING (WI-FI)
  • TUF Z390-PLUS GAMING
  • TUF Z390-PLUS GAMING (WI-FI)
  • TUF Z390-PRO GAMING
Z390 Dragon
  • Z390-DRAGON
 
Z370 confirmed to support the new 8-cores? Not that I need another 2 cores right now .
 
9900K, 9700K, 9600K, 9400 to arrive in Q3, the rest to come later
intel-2019-cpu-roadmap-1000x520.jpg

Z370 to support the 9900K
Intel-Roadmap3.png

Source
 
So I guess MCE is now a standard Intel PBO? Good stuff as long as you have the cooling for it.
 
Intel Abuses it's market position to screw you guys, the consumer, over. Why do you all talk about rewarding this monopolistic behavior by giving them more money.

The fact that AMD is within 5-10% in most single threaded applications and beat intel in threaded apps, Take the very small hit and support AMD. The stronger AMD is the more competitive Intel is being forced to become. Just over a year ago intel was still releasing 4core 8 thread enthusiast desktop CPU's.

Just my 2c
 
Unoid said:
The fact that AMD is within 5-10% in most single threaded applications and beat intel in threaded apps
Click to expand...

Would be great if this were true, but it's not. Even multi-threaded apps often heavily favor Intel if the threads aren't uniformly loaded. For example I have a major application build on Windows that executes about 20% faster on an 8700K vs a Ryzen 2700X - and that's with a 2 core disadvantage! 8-core CFL will destroy the 2700X. Even in gaming, the AVERAGE is 12% faster for the 8700K and this is ignoring that the outliers almost always favor Intel by a huge margin - 20-30%.

The end result is that if you are using an 8700K, you are almost always going to be faster than a 2700X, and in many of those cases you will be MUCH faster. The cases where it's the opposite -- uniformly, heavily multi-threaded applications -- are a pretty tiny segment of desktop use cases, and a lot of people who have a serious production use case of such a multithreaded app will use Threadripper or SkyLake-X if they can afford it, not these consumer CPUs.

The case for Ryzen is frankly just not very good. I am really excited to see what AMD can do with 7nm Ryzen 2, but we need to be realistic and critical about performance claims. AMD NEEDS to get their clocks and IPC up by at least 15-20%.
 
Unoid said:
Intel Abuses it's market position to screw you guys, the consumer, over. Why do you all talk about rewarding this monopolistic behavior by giving them more money.

The fact that AMD is within 5-10% in most single threaded applications and beat intel in threaded apps, Take the very small hit and support AMD. The stronger AMD is the more competitive Intel is being forced to become. Just over a year ago intel was still releasing 4core 8 thread enthusiast desktop CPU's.

Just my 2c
Click to expand...

Also, it sucks, because for whatever reason, MAME runs way faster on Intel CPUs. What I have today is faster than what AMD will do with MAME with TR2.
 
Unoid said:
Intel Abuses it's market position to screw you guys, the consumer, over. Why do you all talk about rewarding this monopolistic behavior by giving them more money.

The fact that AMD is within 5-10% in most single threaded applications and beat intel in threaded apps, Take the very small hit and support AMD. The stronger AMD is the more competitive Intel is being forced to become. Just over a year ago intel was still releasing 4core 8 thread enthusiast desktop CPU's.

Just my 2c
Click to expand...
How does Ryzen (R7 2700/X) compare to the I7 8700/K with temps and power consumption? I think that might be the determining factor for me. I am on the fence. I am even willing to delid a 6-core i7 CL chip if needed. It's not expensive to do. But, I have seen benchmarks that show 'differences' - ones in which the Intel is better and vice versa.

So, I would like to confirm. I also thought the upgrade path for CL is not that bad - now that the i9s will eventually be an option. However, you are right, I think. The prices are pretty expensive. The chips in Canada, at least, are way up there.
 
Dayman said:
View attachment 95476
View attachment 95477
Intel Core i9-9900K will boost up to 4.7 GHz with all eight cores
Click to expand...

juanrga said:
So 9th gen is

i9 = 8C16T
i7 = 8C8T
i5 = 6C6T
i3 = 4C4T

I don't like it :( I had preferred

i7 = 8C16T
i5 = 6C12T
i3 = 4C8T
Click to expand...

8 core soldered confirmed. now however going from 6 cores to 8 cores still stayed with same turbo 4.7ghz all cores ontop of that all within 95w tdp normally that doesn't sound possible. changing to STIM only helps heat transfer, the actual power and heat generated will be more for 8 cores, unless this might be THE confirmation we've been looking for, 14nm+++ except intel doesn't call it at that.

back then we had broadwell -> skylake both remained on 14nm, but it was a fact that skylake could clock higher on average by about 200mhz than broadwell. so we might see yet another optimization on the 9900k allow 100mhz more while getting 2 more cores and still stay somewhat power efficient. just like how 7700k to 8700k did.

it'd be amazing if we could get that.
 
oleNBR said:
95w tdp normally that doesn't sound possible. changing to STIM only helps heat transfer, the actual power and heat generated will be more for 8 cores
Click to expand...
Intel rates their TDP at baseclock(PL1), boost clock has a seperate power value (PL2)
 
Dayman said:
Intel rates their TDP at baseclock(PL1), boost clock has a seperate power value (PL2)
Click to expand...

Yeah, in addition, the 8700K did not increase power consumption at all from the 7700K, so I would expect the 9900K to have very close if not identical power consumption(86W). They just keep reducing boost clocks and turbos in combination with whatever incremental process improvements. Given that the base clock of the 7700K was 4.2ghz, the 8700K @ 3.7 and the 9900K @ 3.6ghz, I expect if you run stock you'll see much lower turboing on a 9900K than a 7700K, with the 8700K somewhere in the middle.

And if you run with even multi core enhancement turned on, you're already outside the bounds of Intel's TDP ratings, let alone any OCing.
 
Dayman said:
Intel rates their TDP at baseclock(PL1), boost clock has a seperate power value (PL2)
Click to expand...

Sancus said:
Yeah, in addition, the 8700K did not increase power consumption at all from the 7700K, so I would expect the 9900K to have very close if not identical power consumption(86W). They just keep reducing boost clocks and turbos in combination with whatever incremental process improvements. Given that the base clock of the 7700K was 4.2ghz, the 8700K @ 3.7 and the 9900K @ 3.6ghz, I expect if you run stock you'll see much lower turboing on a 9900K than a 7700K, with the 8700K somewhere in the middle.

And if you run with even multi core enhancement turned on, you're already outside the bounds of Intel's TDP ratings, let alone any OCing.
Click to expand...

damn so i guess theres no way to find out if 9900k's silicon is any better than 8086k's until its out and binned by SL.

btw at PL1 baseclock, does it include extensions like avx/avx2 workloads or no?
 
Intel obliterates AMD in emulation, which is basically the only thing with high CPU requirements.

Does anyone know if there's any motherboards out there that have 12 USB ports?
 
oleNBR said:
8 core soldered confirmed. now however going from 6 cores to 8 cores still stayed with same turbo 4.7ghz all cores ontop of that all within 95w tdp normally that doesn't sound possible. changing to STIM only helps heat transfer, the actual power and heat generated will be more for 8 cores, unless this might be THE confirmation we've been looking for, 14nm+++ except intel doesn't call it at that.
Click to expand...

There are rumors that 9th gen uses an improved 14nm node, but not enough to be named 14nm+++.
 
juanrga said:
There are rumors that 9th gen uses an improved 14nm node, but not enough to be named 14nm+++.
Click to expand...

thats great to know. broadwell to skylake was like that too, some improvement but wasn't all that much. if we can see some 5.4 or hopefully 5.5 samples from SL i'll be all over it. CFL was 5.3 max, maybe a 5.4 exists with this improved 14nm++.
 
Unoid said:
Intel Abuses it's market position to screw you guys, the consumer, over. Why do you all talk about rewarding this monopolistic behavior by giving them more money.

The fact that AMD is within 5-10% in most single threaded applications and beat intel in threaded apps, Take the very small hit and support AMD. The stronger AMD is the more competitive Intel is being forced to become. Just over a year ago intel was still releasing 4core 8 thread enthusiast desktop CPU's.

Just my 2c
Click to expand...

I own both - I built two Ryzen systems because I liked what AMD was doing and I built an 8700k system for my main rig. Regardless, AMD isn't a charity - if they want me to use them exclusively, they have to win both ST and MT.
 
bigbluefe said:
Does anyone know if there's any motherboards out there that have 12 USB ports?
Click to expand...

Well mine has 17 USB Ports in total (Asus Rampage VI Extreme)

12X USB 3.1 Gen 1 / 5Gps
3X USB 3.1 Gen 2 / 10Gbps - 1 Type C & 1 Type A at the back, and one connector for the front panel (I used a Lian Li cable for that)
2X USB 2.0 through an internal connector - I used an NZXT hub on that to get 4 connectors on 1 channel. The other is at the front.


I am sure there are other motherboards with at least 12 USB ports that you are looking for.
 
intel has sit on their ass for too damn long.
8th 9th....why not 10th
maybe than come up with a cool name and add some led's
 
IndyColtsFan said:
I own both - I built two Ryzen systems because I liked what AMD was doing and I built an 8700k system for my main rig. Regardless, AMD isn't a charity - if they want me to use them exclusively, they have to win both ST and MT.
Click to expand...

I really wanted to build a 2950x system, upgrading from my aging 3930k at 4.6ghz, but it still looks like it would be a downgrade in single threaded performance lol. Q4 2011 hardware is still relevant.
 
IndyColtsFan said:
I own both - I built two Ryzen systems because I liked what AMD was doing and I built an 8700k system for my main rig. Regardless, AMD isn't a charity - if they want me to use them exclusively, they have to win both ST and MT.
Click to expand...

I think AMD is just as happy with you buying 1 AMD cpu and 1 Intel cpu as they would with you just buying an AMD cpu.
 
is removing HT from the 9700K a good or bad thing for enthusiasts/gamers?...is hyperthreading important for enthusiast/gaming rigs?...or is this just Intel's way of getting people to upgrade to the more expensive 9900X chip?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top