# I9-9900 (NON K)



## HaKN ! (Jun 21, 2019)

Hey guys , just the bought the i9-9900 non k for 1727kr danish money ( 261,2 USD / 206 pounds / 231 euro ) and its very cheap here. U think i need to worry when the new ryzen series launches or should i just keep this. 

Im a gamer/browser. I dont OC at all only out of box OC. Cause i really dont got time anymore( just got my first born ) so stability is key nr1


----------



## dumo (Jun 21, 2019)

Wow good price. $430 here in US.

What is the S-spec and batch#? Just wondering if this an R0 stepping


----------



## HaKN ! (Jun 21, 2019)

Yea it was a mistake priceset but i was faster  it is a R0 , the batch nr is unreadable


----------



## Metroid (Jun 21, 2019)

Very good price, it seems those prices reflect to what will happen in few weeks. Price drop!!!


----------



## Melvis (Jun 21, 2019)

Good buy! and no id just keep it and use it and wouldnt worry about going to AMD, your not going to get much more improvement over that CPU for that price I would think, well done!


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 21, 2019)

great price,killer cpu.
why would you worry regardless of what ryzen brings ? you got a beatly cpu for a great price. at 230 euros you won't be remotely close to buying a ryzen 3700.hell,even the 2600x's 6 core successor (3600x) is gonna cost $250.


----------



## HaKN ! (Jun 21, 2019)

Yea well i guess the ryzen hype got me worried. The boost is very diffrent from other intel cpus ive seen before. Boost to 5ghz even under gaming and i undervolted it to 1.24 and it stays under 75c with a small noctua cooler


----------



## xtreemchaos (Jun 21, 2019)

well done, a give away price for a cracking chip you will not be dissapointed it will match ryzen and out perform most.


----------



## hat (Jun 21, 2019)

It looks like it will be a decent chip for some time to come yet. More than marginal changes are coming for the first time in millions of internet years, but it's not like there will be a revolutionary upgrade from an i9-9900. Especially when you are that busy with real life where you don't have much time to spend on the computer anyway.


----------



## Metroid (Jun 21, 2019)

HaKN ! said:


> Yea well i guess the ryzen hype got me worried. The boost is very diffrent from other intel cpus ive seen before. Boost to 5ghz even under gaming and i undervolted it to 1.24 and it stays under 75c with a small noctua cooler



That is the idea, undervolt instead of overvolting, overvolting a 14nm 8 cores 16 threads cpu will burn the entire house hehe, at this time and age I think turbo has to be for at least 50% of threads and the undervolting would have to consider those 50% threads to be stable for at least 60 minutes. All those 50% threads would have to hit 5ghz.


----------



## JalleR (Jun 21, 2019)

where can i get one of those ?


----------



## dj-electric (Jun 21, 2019)

That's an incredible price, what the hell


----------



## bug (Jun 21, 2019)

Newer Ryzen may perform better in heavily multithreaded scenarios, but games are not among those. You have one of the best 5 gaming CPUs in the world and it's not going to become slower just because new Ryzens are launched. Enjoy your new toy


----------



## HaKN ! (Jun 21, 2019)

JalleR said:


> where can i get one of those ?



Proshop.dk had them to 1727kr for some hours , i took advantage right away but waited for a month before it came



dj-electric said:


> That's an incredible price, what the hell



I know man , i was lucky AF


----------



## Bill_Bright (Jun 21, 2019)

HaKN ! said:


> U think i need to worry when the new ryzen series launches


I am going to assume there is a "lost in translation" issue here as "worry" suggests a strong feeling of anxiety or fear about a situation resulting in faster heart rate, rapid breathing, sweating even nausea, diarrhea and more. I don't think you mean that. 

The i9-9900 is a great processor and as seen here (2902kr), you got it at a fantastic price! Assuming it is not counterfeit or "hot" (stolen), what's there to "worry" about? If you wait for the Ryzen, you would have to spend a lot more because that would also require a different motherboard and possibly different RAM too.


----------



## Crackong (Jun 24, 2019)

Nice,  that's half the price of the k SKU


----------



## Enterprise24 (Jun 24, 2019)

9900K still cost $573 here with no sign of non-K version.


----------



## Outback Bronze (Jun 24, 2019)

HaKN ! said:


> U think i need to worry when the new ryzen series launches



Nope, especially since you stole it : )


----------



## Countryside (Jun 24, 2019)

Damn thats one big bang for a buck, conqrats


----------



## Claptrap (Jul 15, 2019)

Wow,what a damn good price.Some one wrote that in the USA it costs 440,but checkmate,in Ukraine 9700 non k costs 440 dollars and i9 9900 isn't sold yet.Also one question,i have a b360 and i couldn't update to 9900k because of its "95 tdp",but non k has a "65w tdp",i think that would be enough for b360 but it is better to ask,people who bought it for b360 could you answear if it steadily works


----------



## rootuser123 (Jul 16, 2019)

@*HaKN ! Is the stock Intel cooler an aluminium slug instead of copper slug?*


----------



## HaKN ! (Jul 18, 2019)

@rootuser123  Its the s´hitty all *aluminium cooler thats way to slim !*


----------



## Bill_Bright (Jul 18, 2019)

HaKN ! said:


> aluminium cooler thats way to slim !


While copper is certainly better, aluminum is an excellent conductor of heat too. So no doubt, your problem is the fact this particular aluminum cooler is too slim, suggesting the problem is the surface area of the fins and not the "slug" or the portion that makes actual contact with the CPU die. 

Since obviously you cannot make the fins larger, you might be about to increase heat transfer by using a fan that moves more air. But it would probably just be easier to replace the whole HSF assembly.


----------



## 64K (Jul 18, 2019)

*Which Metals Conduct Heat The Best?*


*Common metals ranked by thermal conductivity**Rank**Metal**Thermal Conductivity [BTU/(hr·ft⋅°F)]*1Copper2232Aluminum1183Brass644Steel175Bronze15

Copper conducts heat almost twice as fast as aluminum. It's more expensive though.



			https://www.metalsupermarkets.com/which-metals-conduct-heat-best/


----------



## Bill_Bright (Jul 18, 2019)

It is more about twice as much heat, not twice as fast. Copper can move almost twice as much heat in the same amount of time as aluminum. But that is not to say aluminum is a poor conductor. 

The F-15 can travel 1,656 miles in 1 hour while the F-35 can "only" go 1,199 in the same amount of time. But I would not turn down a ride in either!


----------



## Space Lynx (Jul 18, 2019)

if the i9-9900 non-k were $399 I would buy one right now.  I'm just being patient, and also not in any rush so meh.


----------



## John Naylor (Jul 19, 2019)

HaKN ! said:


> Hey guys , just the bought the i9-9900 non k for 1727kr danish money ( 261,2 USD / 206 pounds / 231 euro ) and its very cheap here. U think i need to worry when the new ryzen series launches or should i just keep this.
> 
> Im a gamer/browser. I dont OC at all only out of box OC. Cause i really dont got time anymore( just got my first born ) so stability is key nr1



What's to worry about ?  Is this about "bragging rights.  ?   Are you happy with the performance of the system in the things that you actually do ?  Be smart and avoid the temptation to select a PC component because is is faster in things you never or rarely do,  I can't tell you how many times I have had this conversation where someone wants a new build and said "But I read on the internet that this [insert new CPU here] is better"  And when i ask "better at what", all I get is this dumbfounded look on their face. 

What are you doing with the PC ?

Is it a gaming box ?  Look here:








						AMD Ryzen 9 3900X Review
					

The flagship of AMD's new Ryzen 3000 lineup is the Ryzen 9 3900X, which is a 12-core, 24-thread monster. Never before have we seen such power on a desktop platform. Priced at $500, this processor is very strong competition for Intel's Core i9-9900, which only has eight cores.




					www.techpowerup.com
				




Is it for office productivity ?   Look here:








						AMD Ryzen 9 3900X Review
					

The flagship of AMD's new Ryzen 3000 lineup is the Ryzen 9 3900X, which is a 12-core, 24-thread monster. Never before have we seen such power on a desktop platform. Priced at $500, this processor is very strong competition for Intel's Core i9-9900, which only has eight cores.




					www.techpowerup.com
				




Now that was a trick question.  The 9900 was 40 ms faster..... who cares ?  1.  That is 0.04 seconds, not exactly going to change your productivity one way or another and 2)  You can't type that fast.

Is it for rendering ?   Look here:








						AMD Ryzen 9 3900X Review
					

The flagship of AMD's new Ryzen 3000 lineup is the Ryzen 9 3900X, which is a 12-core, 24-thread monster. Never before have we seen such power on a desktop platform. Priced at $500, this processor is very strong competition for Intel's Core i9-9900, which only has eight cores.




					www.techpowerup.com
				





Seems to me ya got  a great deal there .... I see no reason o 2nd guess yaself


----------



## HaKN ! (Jul 20, 2019)

John Naylor said:


> What's to worry about ?  Is this about "bragging rights.  ?   Are you happy with the performance of the system in the things that you actually do ?  Be smart and avoid the temptation to select a PC component because is is faster in things you never or rarely do,  I can't tell you how many times I have had this conversation where someone wants a new build and said "But I read on the internet that this [insert new CPU here] is better"  And when i ask "better at what", all I get is this dumbfounded look on their face.
> 
> What are you doing with the PC ?
> 
> ...



Yea i know what your saying , i guess that i just fell in the hype train with the new CPU's being sooo much better. 
But im only gaming and web browsing/youtube, nothing else


----------



## RevengE (Jul 20, 2019)

You’re fine. That’s a very good cpu.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jul 20, 2019)

64K said:


> *Which Metals Conduct Heat The Best?*
> 
> 
> *Common metals ranked by thermal conductivity**Rank**Metal**Thermal Conductivity [BTU/(hr·ft⋅°F)]*1Copper2232Aluminum1183Brass644Steel175Bronze15
> ...



And denser


----------



## Space Lynx (Jul 21, 2019)

I'm still jelly he bought this chip for 260 bucks or whatever it was. Talk about deal of the year. Minus those cameras that were 13 grand that Amazon accidentally listed for $94 lol... last I heard Amazon was honoring the sales too, talk about lucky if you got one.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Jul 21, 2019)

eidairaman1 said:


> And denser


This is a good point as in this case, it typically results in a heavier heatsink. This is not a problem in computers that are just sitting quietly on the floor or desk. But when shipped, especially with tall coolers in tower cases, I have seen where the heavy coolers caused physical damage to the sockets and motherboards after the FedEx truck went airborne over the railroad tracks.  So when shipping, I recommend removing heavy coolers unless the computer will never leave your sight and you can orient the case during travel in a horizontal position where the heavy cooler sits on top of the motherboard instead of hanging off the side.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jul 21, 2019)

bill I agree about tower heatsinks being removed before shipment, that is any of them tbf


----------



## Nichronos (Aug 8, 2019)

Hello, please post some pictures of HWmonitor with the TDP visible on stress tests,
I am EXTREMELY interested in buying that CPU!
Currently using the Noctua L9i on a i7-8700 with -120mw offset sitting around 78c at all core stress tests


----------



## cucker tarlson (Aug 8, 2019)

Nichronos said:


> Hello, please post some pictures of HWmonitor with the TDP visible on stress tests,
> I am EXTREMELY interested in buying that CPU!
> Currently using the Noctua L9i on a i7-8700 with -120mw offset sitting around 78c at all core stress tests


you're gonna cook the 9900 stress testing on this cooler.Solution-don't stress test.why even bother stress testing if it's locked.for gaming it'll be one of the most effcient cpus out there now,look at stock 9900k


----------



## HaKN ! (Aug 8, 2019)

Cpu wattage never goes above 120-130 w in normal to high stress test but with avx it reachs 150-180w depending on software and thats with underclock. Never testet with auto voltage or stock. It boost to 4.6 - 4.7 ghz in games and in really heavy workload it goes to 4.5 and stays there until it reaches 95c then it throttles to 4 - 4.2


----------



## cucker tarlson (Aug 8, 2019)

HaKN ! said:


> Cpu wattage never goes above 120-130 w in normal to high stress test but with avx it reachs 150-180w depending on software and thats with underclock. Never testet with auto voltage or stock. It boost to 4.6 - 4.7 ghz in games and in really heavy workload it goes to 4.5 and stays there until it reaches 95c then it throttles to 4 - 4.2


you got any cpu MT heavy games to test what frequency it can hold ? if it can do 4600mhz in games like odyssey that'd be quite impressive.


----------



## Nichronos (Aug 8, 2019)

LOL! That is insane TDP... my i7-8700 with the undervolt is sitting around 85W TDP during stress test!


----------



## HaKN ! (Aug 8, 2019)

It holds 4.6 in rs6 , bf1 and bf3-5.

in rocket league it goes to 4.7-4.8 , only seen 5ghz in desktop mode lol

*yea but in games it sits at 40-90watt*


----------



## cucker tarlson (Aug 8, 2019)

HaKN ! said:


> It holds 4.6 in rs6 , bf1 and bf3-5.
> 
> in rocket league it goes to 4.7-4.8 , only seen 5ghz in desktop mode lol


this is great,bf1 can be quite a cpu bug.
I'm considering getting a 9900 non-k or 9700f for myself.Both locked but if they can do 4600mhz gaming I'm fine with it,all you get with a K-sku is extra 200mhz-400mhz,tons of extra heat and noise and extra costs with a Z-mobo for 5% more pefromance tops.


----------



## Nichronos (Aug 8, 2019)

Can you please post some pictures of HWmonitor with a stress?


----------



## HaKN ! (Aug 8, 2019)

Nichronos said:


> Can you please post some pictures of HWmonitor with a stress?


 Yea in 2 hours time. Work now


----------



## Nichronos (Aug 8, 2019)

Thanks! i appreciate it 
I am a custom ITX maker, and need to consider things like TDP in those "cramped" builds!


----------



## trog100 (Aug 8, 2019)

one thing is for sure.. you need some pretty impressive cooling to overclook a 9900k so maybe the none K version will make sense for most people.. 

trog


----------



## jaggerwild (Aug 8, 2019)

HaKN ! said:


> Yea i know what your saying , i guess that i just fell in the hype train with the new CPU's being sooo much better.
> But im only gaming and web browsing/youtube, nothing else



 The New CPU'S are better, in different tasks. NO AMD can go near 5Ghz(not sure on the pricing). Enjoy! Plus you don't need an expensive board either


----------



## Vario (Aug 8, 2019)

cucker tarlson said:


> this is great,bf1 can be quite a cpu bug.
> I'm considering getting a 9900 non-k or 9700f for myself.Both locked but if they can do 4600mhz gaming I'm fine with it,all you get with a K-sku is extra 200mhz-400mhz,tons of extra heat and noise and extra costs with a Z-mobo for 5% more pefromance tops.


I think you should go for the next generation after this one, either AMD or Intel.  You'd be upgrading from a 2014 14nm to a 2015 era 14nm architecture. Its already dated.  Go for whatever comes next, maybe AMD's 4000 series or whenever Intel releases its next die shrink.


----------



## ppn (Aug 8, 2019)

It is now or never. Roadmaps advance pretty fast. 2020 14/10+, 2021 10++/7 nm, 2022 7+ 2nd gen Cove Core with 50% IPC gains and 4 times the density of 14nm in under 3 years makes them obsoleted antiques.


----------



## Vario (Aug 8, 2019)

ppn said:


> It is now or never. Roadmaps advance pretty fast. 2020 14/10+, 2021 10++/7 nm, 2022 7+ 2nd gen Cove Core with 50% IPC gains and 4 times the density of 14nm in under 3 years makes them obsoleted antiques.


Already is an antique.  Time to buy that gen was 2 years ago in 2017, with the 8700K.  His Broadwell is only one generation behind in single thread speed.  I think either Intel's answer to Ryzen, or the following Ryzen (2.5,3?,4000?) will be the solution.


----------



## trog100 (Aug 8, 2019)

over the last four years cpu wise i have gone from a 4790k to a 7700K a  8700K and now a 9900K..

gpu wise.. 970 sli to 980ti sli to 1070 sli and now a 2080TI..

apart from running benchmarks i can honestly say that my PC gaming and general experience hasnt changed much.. its good but then again it always has been..

waiting for something better two years down the line is a cop out and always has been.. 

trog


----------



## HUSKIE (Aug 8, 2019)

> PC gaming and general experience hasnt changed much.



that's why my hashwell-e 5960x and 980ti still alive.


----------



## HaKN ! (Aug 8, 2019)

Here are the diffrent modes as u can see , didnt do a long time test because of time.

But i remember the wattage completly wrong i guess , they are a little lower then what i remembered them as

And thats with a Noctua L9x65 on 85% fan speed at all time , it makes no sounds so it doesent bother me at all


----------



## Vario (Aug 8, 2019)

You have very good temperatures from a small heatsink such as that L9x65.  Very nice CPU.  Low voltage too.


----------



## HaKN ! (Aug 8, 2019)

Vario said:


> You have very good temperatures from a small heatsink such as that L9x65.  Very nice CPU.  Low voltage too.



Yeah i was honestly pretty suprised myself tbh


----------



## Nichronos (Aug 8, 2019)

I didn't know the i9 drops to 4,5GHz... that is far from an upgrade over my 8700 which i can boost to 4,4GHz with a simple BCLK and the TDP is abnormal!


----------



## HaKN ! (Aug 8, 2019)

Nichronos said:


> I didn't know the i9 drops to 4,5GHz... that is far from an upgrade over my 8700 which i can boost to 4,4GHz with a simple BCLK and the TDP is abnormal!



4.5 drop is worst case and heavy synthetic tests, in games it sits at 4.6 to 4.9


----------



## Nichronos (Aug 9, 2019)

Did you go full YOLO and set in BIOS the Power limit, short and long duration to max values? 
I can't think of any other way to reach those insane 140W TDP. 
I will try doing the same tomorrow and see how much will crank up my 8700.
My expectations are around the 130W range... i will share the results


----------



## HaKN ! (Aug 9, 2019)

Nichronos said:


> Did you go full YOLO and set in BIOS the Power limit, short and long duration to max values?
> I can't think of any other way to reach those insane 140W TDP.
> I will try doing the same tomorrow and see how much will crank up my 8700.
> My expectations are around the 130W range... i will share the results




Lol, it is full yolo , no limits what so ever


----------



## btarunr (Aug 9, 2019)

That's a fantastic deal. I think you're set for the next 4 years.


----------



## Taraquin (Aug 9, 2019)

Nice results! Have you tried undervolting it? Using throttlestop and setting offset on CPU core and cache? I have a Asus B360m K With a i5 8400 which I consider upgrading With a 9700 or 9900 Vanilla, I know that a 8700K will work running stock, but VRM\mosfets gets up to around 95C during demanding loads so I think undervolting a 9700 og 9900 and perhaps adding a second fan is the only way I can use them without suffering VRM-throttling. In retrospect I should have bought a Z370, but they costed 70USD more than my MB and ram was so expensive then that I went With cheap but quite slow ram (G.skill Aegis 3000cl16 running at 2666cl13\350tRFC\CR1 which should help a bit compared to Stock 2666cl16, even though 3200+ ram would be far better suited for 9700\9900). I undervolted my 8400 and consumption dropped With about 30W during Extreme loads and temps dropped over 10C, actually running crappy Stock cooler and it never exceeds 65C during long gamingsessions. If I could do that With a 9700 og 9900 it would be doable.

Found this test that showed that MB gets toasty with 8700K running stock, but that there is no throttling: https://translate.google.no/transla...tps://ru.gecid.com/mboard/asus_prime_b360m-k/


----------



## ppn (Aug 9, 2019)

with b360 power limits are probably stuck on 65 watts and 3.1Ghz. better wait the i7-10700 (8/16) +Z470.


----------



## Nichronos (Aug 9, 2019)

ppn said:


> with b360 power limits are probably stuck on 65 watts and 3.1Ghz. better wait the i7-10700 (8/16) +Z470.



You shouldn't think that all B360 are the same, the Power limit is set by the manufacturer's custom BIOS, not by the chipset maker!
And about the 10th gen, you're dreaming too far ahead...


----------



## Taraquin (Aug 9, 2019)

ppn said:


> with b360 power limits are probably stuck on 65 watts and 3.1Ghz. better wait the i7-10700 (8/16) +Z470.


If you look at the review I linked to the same motherboard I have ran the 8700K unthrottled and matched the perf-scores of the Z370 at same ram speed. There was high temp at vrms (93C) but the 9700/9900vanilla with undervolt might consume less than a stock 8700K so that could be fine. My B360 MB don't have any powerlimits according to XTU.


----------



## Nichronos (Aug 9, 2019)

Taraquin said:


> If you look at the review I linked to the same motherboard I have ran the 8700K unthrottled and matched the perf-scores of the Z370 at same ram speed. There was high temp at vrms (93C) but the 9700/9900vanilla with undervolt might consume less than a stock 8700K so that could be fine. My B360 MB don't have any powerlimits according to XTU.



ASUS and MSI have power limit on all the B360/65 motherboards but have the option to enable "Sync all Cores" in BIOS which overrides all default intel limits but sets all cores to the same frequency no mater the load!


----------



## Taraquin (Aug 9, 2019)

Nichronos said:


> ASUS and MSI have power limit on all the B360/65 motherboards but have the option to enable "Sync all Cores" in BIOS which overrides all default intel limits but sets all cores to the same frequency no mater the load!


Okay. XTU could not find a limir, it usually does. No limit I can find in Bios. Sync all cores does not work on my current i5 8400, no difference.


----------



## Nichronos (Aug 9, 2019)

Taraquin said:


> Okay. XTU could not find a limir, it usually does. No limit I can find in Bios. Sync all cores does not work on my current i5 8400, no difference.



Doesn't work probably because you have the shitty XTU installed, it overrides everything back, so "Sync all cores" has no effect!


----------



## Taraquin (Aug 9, 2019)

Nichronos said:


> Doesn't work probably because you have the shitty XTU installed, it overrides everything back, so "Sync all cores" has no effect!


I don't use XTU, only throttlestop, dont think it interferes with SAC? Installed XTU only to see if my MB had pwr-limit.


----------



## RealNeil (Aug 9, 2019)

This was the kind of deal that one dreams about but rarely gets.
Congrats on that buy. Outstanding!


----------



## Nichronos (Aug 11, 2019)

Taraquin said:


> I don't use XTU, only throttlestop, dont think it interferes with SAC? Installed XTU only to see if my MB had pwr-limit.



So i don't understand what you're trying to do then? 8400 is low cost / low performance chip and it shouldn't hit any power limit at all


----------



## Taraquin (Aug 11, 2019)

Nichronos said:


> So i don't understand what you're trying to do then? 8400 is low cost / low performance chip and it shouldn't hit any power limit at all


Why answear if you dont bother reading what I have said earlier. I consider upgrading my 8400 to a 9700/9900vanilla and wondered how the lucky 9900vanilla owner has  undervolting to see power consumption etc. I know from the review I posted that a 8700k will not hit pwrlimits on my MB, but the vrms do getva bit toasty. If a undervolted 9700/9900vanilla uses less power than a stock 8700k it should run fine.



HaKN ! said:


> Yea well i guess the ryzen hype got me worried. The boost is very diffrent from other intel cpus ive seen before. Boost to 5ghz even under gaming and i undervolted it to 1.24 and it stays under 75c with a small noctua cooler


How much were you able to undervolt? Did you use offset or fixed voltage? How did powerconsumption drop? For testing I compared my i5 8400 with stock cooler in CB15 with UV vs stock 3 runs without payse. Stock it uses about 80W with prak of 83W and temp got to 82C, vrm at 67C. With - 145 cpu core and - 175 cpu cache undervolt consumption dropped to 58W with 60W peak and 68C temp, vrm at 57C. That was a big difference I think.


----------



## Nichronos (Aug 11, 2019)

Taraquin said:


> Why answear if you dont bother reading what I have said earlier.



You are the one who didn't read buddy, HaKN already wrote in details what are his voltages, posted images and stress test, and still your question is quite useless by any means!


----------



## Taraquin (Aug 11, 2019)

Nichronos said:


> You are the one who didn't read buddy, HaKN already wrote in details what are his voltages, posted images and stress test, and still your question is quite useless by any means!


No, I cant find anywhere if he used offset or fixed voltage, how much UV to core/cache, not how much UV did to consumption. Was 50mv, 150mv? There is no fixed voltage on a 9900k, it varies with the lottery. I have never said anything about my 8400 hitting a pwr limit, that was you, hence my reply.

If you cant answear my questions, please dont reply  I never asked about sync all cores, 8400 pwr limit etc.

To clairify, I consider a 9700Vanilla, it uses a bit less pwr than 9900v, if HaKN used fixed voltage, there is usually quite a bit to gain from doing offset instead, throttlestop can change cache/core independent, and cache usually UVs more than core which will lower pwr-consumption even more. Where I live 9900v costs 550usd, but a 9700v costs 380usd so for me 9700 is the only option.


----------



## Nichronos (Aug 11, 2019)

1st of all you quoted ppn saying you don't have power limits according to XTU, and i clearly explained why you may experience that, and it seems you somehow misunderstood me...
If you gave us more accurate information like what brand and model of B360 motherboard you are using, also on what BIOS version we may actually help you!



Taraquin said:


> My B360 MB don't have any powerlimits according to XTU.



2nd as i already wrote, HaKN explained that he used fixed voltage, posted his voltage, screenshots and stress tests, also gave some useful info on core utilization in two games: RS6 and Battlefield.
With all this said, you had more than enough information to answer your question and please be kind to not annoy me and other users with your pointless arguments. Thanks!



HaKN ! said:


> Boost to 5ghz even under gaming and i undervolted it to 1.24 and it stays under 75c with a small noctua cooler


----------



## Taraquin (Aug 11, 2019)

Nichronos said:


> 1st of all you quoted ppn saying you don't have power limits according to XTU, and i clearly explained why you may experience that, and it seems you somehow misunderstood me...
> If you gave us more accurate information like what brand and model of B360 motherboard you are using, also on what BIOS version we may actually help you!
> 
> 
> ...


In my post it says Asus B360m K, latest Bios. It was the ither guy that started talking about owr limits, there is none in bios nor in xtu which sometimes can read mb-spesific pwr-limits, on MSI for instance it often does. 

I see now that he says fixed voltage, but judging from images it varies quite a bit. A fixed voltage says nothing about how much you have actually UVed, only a offset does that. My question was hiw big of a UV he achieved. What was stock voltage during loads? I have been able to do a - 192 on my laptop which made temps drop with 15C and consumption with 25%, another laptop stopped at - 70mv and that only made 5C and - 8% W difference. On my desktop I can do - 145/-175 core/cache which reduces pwr with almost 30% and temps by 14C. I was only curious, english is not my native language and I'm sorry if I offended you in any way. If


----------



## Tatty_One (Aug 11, 2019)

If you two want your own private chatroom move it to PM's, otherwise please move on.


----------



## Nichronos (Aug 17, 2019)

@HaKN ! did you try to lower your voltage below 1,24? It seems quite high, my 8700 is running at 1,08 completely stable even with no core-ring offset and power limits set to full yolo mode!


----------



## HaKN ! (Aug 17, 2019)

Nichronos said:


> @HaKN ! did you try to lower your voltage below 1,24? It seems quite high, my 8700 is running at 1,08 completely stable even with no core-ring offset and power limits set to full yolo mode!



yea it crash on everything below 1.24. At stock it runs at 1.3 - 1.45


----------



## Nichronos (Aug 17, 2019)

i can run at 1.07 but with ring offset active, 1,24 seems quite toasty! Bet i cant put an NH-L9i on that....


----------



## ppn (Aug 17, 2019)

He runs 4.6, voltage goes up by 150mV to get 300MHz higher.


----------



## Tatty_One (Aug 18, 2019)

I would expect more volts and more heat from a 9900 versus an 8700, for a start you have a higher core and thread count, that coupled with a 5gig max turbo boost, add to that the silicon lottery and you could be in for a struggle without decent cooling solutions.


----------



## trog100 (Aug 18, 2019)

Tatty_One said:


> I would expect more volts and more heat from a 9900 versus an 8700, for a start you have a higher core and thread count, that coupled with a 5gig max turbo boost, add to that the silicon lottery and you could be in for a struggle without decent cooling solutions.



more heat for sure but i think the 9900 chips are better binned so will run on lower voltages at least my 9900k does compared to my earlier 8700K.. 

my 8700k needed at least 1.34 to run at 5 g.. my 9900k only needs 1.24 but even at that it still gets too hot.. being as i never use more than 8 cores i have turned HT off on mine to keep the temps down.. 

trog4


----------



## HaKN ! (Aug 18, 2019)

Nichronos said:


> i can run at 1.07 but with ring offset active, 1,24 seems quite toasty! Bet i cant put an NH-L9i on that....



Well tbh , i just tried to run it at 1.20v and 3600mhz stabile in windows and games, but stress test make it crash instantly


----------



## Tatty_One (Aug 18, 2019)

trog100 said:


> more heat for sure but i think the 9900 chips are better binned so will run on lower voltages at least my 9900k does compared to my earlier 8700K..
> 
> my 8700k needed at least 1.34 to run at 5 g.. my 9900k only needs 1.24 but even at that it still gets too hot.. *being as i never use more than 8 cores i have turned HT off *on mine to keep the temps down..
> 
> trog4


In that case you could have saved some £££ and got a 9700k


----------



## Lionheart (Aug 18, 2019)

I'm so out of touch with Intel hardware lately I didn't even know this existed or was coming out.. About time, I always preferred the non K Intel CPU's mainly due to always going with mini ITX builds & plus all modern CPU's Auto OC themselves, does the job, looks like you got yourself a great deal.


----------



## Nichronos (Aug 18, 2019)

Lionheart said:


> I'm so out of touch with Intel hardware lately I didn't even know this existed or was coming out.. About time, I always preferred the non K Intel CPU's mainly due to always going with mini ITX builds & plus all modern CPU's Auto OC themselves, does the job, looks like you got yourself a great deal.



I think i won't be getting the i9 for my ITX because it seems like its not gonna be cooled by an NH-L9i, 
the maximum that cooler can handle before reaching 95c is 1.15, the 1,24 is really far off that bracket! PepoSad ;(


----------



## trog100 (Aug 18, 2019)

Tatty_One said:


> In that case you could have saved some £££ and got a 9700k



i could have saved more money and simple stuck with my 8700K which was perfectly fine.. he he..

trog


----------



## Nichronos (Aug 18, 2019)

trog100 said:


> i could have saved more money and simple stuck with my 8700K which was perfectly fine.. he he..



9700 has literally 0.0005% performance over 8700 so i'm with you m8, especially with no ring-core offset!


----------



## Arctucas (Aug 18, 2019)

Excellent price.

Looking around, I see 9900 going for $440US on Amazon.

I paid $485US for my 9900K in mid-May on Amazon. Now the 9900K is down to $480US.


----------



## Taraquin (Aug 18, 2019)

Nichronos said:


> I think i won't be getting the i9 for my ITX because it seems like its not gonna be cooled by an NH-L9i,
> the maximum that cooler can handle before reaching 95c is 1.15, the 1,24 is really far off that bracket! PepoSad ;(


https://www.anandtech.com/show/13400/intel-9th-gen-core-i9-9900k-i7-9700k-i5-9600k-review/22 4.8 all core can be doable at 1.125v unless you are unlucky in the lottery. Also, unless I'm mistaken, 9900K uses STIM while vanilla 9900 65W uses paste so temps at same volt and clock will be a bit worse. Doing offset UV and also adjusting cache can improve temps and consumption quite a bit more than locked voltage


----------



## Nichronos (Aug 18, 2019)

Taraquin said:


> https://www.anandtech.com/show/13400/intel-9th-gen-core-i9-9900k-i7-9700k-i5-9600k-review/22 4.8 all core can be doable at 1.125v unless you are unlucky in the lottery. Also, unless I'm mistaken, 9900K uses STIM while vanilla 9900 65W uses paste so temps at same volt and clock will be a bit worse. Doing offset UV and also adjusting cache can improve temps and consumption quite a bit more than locked voltage



I am interested only in the overall capability and temps for the majority of that chip. 
The ITX cases i develop are targeted for everyone and not only for those who "won the lottery"... 
So if this chip is not equally consistent in quality compared to its predecessors, i will avoid recommending it to anyone!!!
Sadly i am limited to low profile coolers, so the best options remains i7-8700 for intel and the new r7-3700 on the AMD side


----------



## Taraquin (Aug 18, 2019)

I see. The 3700X seems like a very good deal and performance pr watt is awesome


----------



## RealNeil (Aug 18, 2019)

trog100 said:


> my 8700k needed at least 1.34 to run at 5 g.


I only get 4.971 with my 8700K. (1.30v) It won't go any higher, but it's stable and cool under load. (72c)
I delidded it over a year ago. The CPU is cooled with a CoolerMaster 240mm AIO.



Taraquin said:


> I see. The 3700X seems like a very good deal and performance pr watt is awesome


The 3700X looks like a great option. I put a 3800X on layaway, but I'm thinking of changing that to a 3700X instead.


----------



## anonekun (Nov 9, 2019)

Hi guys! little off-topic. I'm not native English, but I will do the best.

I already have Asrock B365 phantom gaming 4 and about to pair with i7 9700 non-K, but my friend sells his 9900 non-K at a decent price (slightly pricier than brand new 9700), and I'm interested to buy his CPU.

My real concern is the VRM will do fine under i9-9900 non-K in long term (3-5 years) for Gaming, 3d modeling, and rendering?

In Tech Yes City youtube channel, he did testing the board with the 9900K and has decent results. The VRM temp hit 75-degree Celcius on AIDA stress test (in the middle of summer in Australia) 








I just want to make sure my system will do fine in the long run. I live in a tropic country but I live in a relatively (always) cold area.
Thank you!


----------



## HaKN ! (Nov 9, 2019)

anonekun said:


> Hi guys! little off-topic. I'm not native English, but I will do the best.
> 
> I already have Asrock B365 phantom gaming 4 and about to pair with i7 9700 non-K, but my friend sells his 9900 non-K at a decent price (slightly pricier than brand new 9700), and I'm interested to buy his CPU.
> 
> ...



just set the power mode to “power saving” it wontgo over 100watt on full load. You will be just fine with a 365 board


----------



## cucker tarlson (Nov 9, 2019)

It'll do as long as there's some air moving.if you have a tower cooler and a fan on the top of the case there's nothing to worry about


----------



## anonekun (Nov 9, 2019)

HaKN ! said:


> just set the power mode to “power saving” it wontgo over 100watt on full load. You will be just fine with a 365 board



Thank you for fast response! 
How much performance loss if I set to "power saving" when gaming or rendering? 



cucker tarlson said:


> It'll do as long as there's some air moving.if you have a tower cooler and a fan on the top of the case there's nothing to worry about



Thank you! 
Yes! I have NZXT H500, there is a single fan on top of the case.


----------



## HaKN ! (Nov 9, 2019)

anonekun said:


> Thank you for fast response!
> How much performance loss if I set to "power saving" when gaming or rendering?
> 
> 
> ...



tbh not much , i didnt loose anything or clock speed.


----------



## anonekun (Nov 9, 2019)

HaKN ! said:


> tbh not much , i didnt loose anything or clock speed.



Once again thank you!
Now, I'm more convinced to get the i9.


----------



## Darmok N Jalad (Nov 20, 2019)

I’m watching the 9900 non-k this Christmas season. I have an H370 board, so the K version isn’t all too critical for me. I was having a hard time finding reviews for this chip, but my search brought me back here! Good to see it performs well despite the lower-rated TDP. Probably for my use case, I wouldn’t even be able to tell the difference. I just want the threads.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Nov 20, 2019)

RealNeil said:


> I only get 4.971 with my 8700K. (1.30v) It won't go any higher, but it's stable and cool under load. (72c)
> I delidded it over a year ago. The CPU is cooled with a CoolerMaster 240mm AIO.



v-core is too low. Should be able to run 5ghz quite easily with that 8700K. Probably between 1.35 and 1.40v would do the trick. 
Mine on auto v-core (maximus X) runs 5ghz around 1.4000v.


----------

