Thursday, September 5th 2019
Intel Core i9-9900KS to be Available from October
Intel's panic response to the 3rd generation Ryzen processor series, the Core i9-9900KS, will be generally available in October. The company will extensively market it as the best processor money can buy for gaming, and the specs to support that claim are formidable - 8-core/16-thread, with an all-core Turbo Boost frequency of 5.00 GHz. Intel will also actively publicize the growing clamor against real-world boost frequencies of 3rd gen Ryzen processors falling short of what's advertised, as detailed in the slide below. "5 GHz means 5 GHz" could be a prominent catchphrase of the chip's marketing, highlighting the all-core boost clocks. This chip is based on the existing 14 nm++ "Coffee Lake Refresh" silicon, but is likely its topmost bin.
Intel didn't, however, specify the TDP or pricing of the processor. The TDP is bound to be higher than that of the i9-9900K, as it would take a lot more power to sustain 5.00 GHz across all 8 cores. Intel may also try to retake the $499 price-point. The company may time the launch of this chip to closely follow AMD's flagship Ryzen 9 3950X 16-core/32-thread processor launch, which is due later this month. Intel's performance numbers for the i9-9900KS focus squarely on gaming and applications relevant to home users or PC enthusiasts. The i9-9900KS ships in a similar-looking acrylic case as the i9-9900K, with "Special Edition" branding on the front face. The retail package continues to lack a cooling solution.
Source:
Guru3D
Intel didn't, however, specify the TDP or pricing of the processor. The TDP is bound to be higher than that of the i9-9900K, as it would take a lot more power to sustain 5.00 GHz across all 8 cores. Intel may also try to retake the $499 price-point. The company may time the launch of this chip to closely follow AMD's flagship Ryzen 9 3950X 16-core/32-thread processor launch, which is due later this month. Intel's performance numbers for the i9-9900KS focus squarely on gaming and applications relevant to home users or PC enthusiasts. The i9-9900KS ships in a similar-looking acrylic case as the i9-9900K, with "Special Edition" branding on the front face. The retail package continues to lack a cooling solution.
159 Comments on Intel Core i9-9900KS to be Available from October
On the other hand, applications that use more than a couple of threads are much faster on 3900X - up to 50% than on 9900K in some cases (rendering for instance). And by the time Intel introduces 9900KS, AMD 3950X will be available - with up to 100% faster multicore results than 9900K.
What usage will then 9900KS have? In low threaded applications it will be similar to 9900K, and 9700K. And in really multithreaded applications it will still be way slower than new 12 an 16 core AMDs.
I can practically smell Intel brewing a special 16-threaded AVX 512 benchmark just for this case. Because 16 threads is magical number, and it's way more "Real World" than 24 or 36 threads...
What he DID say, and pay attention to this bit; was that in single threaded workloads, the 9900k was often right next to the 9700k, because these applications are not demanding enough to load the cores to the point the extra clock speed makes sense. When OCed to 5 ghz, there is almost no difference in performance, because the single thread software can only do so much.
Let's cut to the chase here, AMD is beating Intel in productivity benchmarks with a 1 GHz clock deficit. That is MASSIVE. In games, often the 5 GHz Core i5/i7 is only a handful of FPS faster then a 4.1 GHz r5 3600. That extra clock speed is meaningless, because performance isnt scaling with it.
Intel fans miss this point. Having the highest number doesnt mean anything if it cant perform. AMD has taken back the IPC crown with ryzen, and intel should be scared that AMD already has zen 3 nearly finished, and zen 4 on the way.
Nvidia is watching AMD GPU shipments grow despite not having a 2080 or 2080ti competitor, and their RT cores are driving up costs and not delivering for most people. Consumers are very split on the RT issue. AMD has cemented control of the two big home consoles. Next gen cosnoles, if they have RT, will be using AMD RT hardware, not nvidias.
Intel has been watching with utter incompetence as AMD take one bite after another of intel's markets. They still have no real answer to the Zen problem except to throw more 14nm at it. 10nm has been a trainwreck for intel, and they are not one to give up an investment until it is well and truly buried.
AMD has manged this with a fraction of the budget. Imagine what they are going to manage as revenue continues to increase, as does their R+D budgets? The titans of the market, despitte arguably having superior tech and budgets, have sat idly and allowed AMD to return.
- "Well, some highly threaded applications can run faster on..."
- "But it has five jiggahurtz! It's what applications crave!"
IMO this 9900ks part is pretty irrelevant beyond giving the opportunity to Intel to charge more for their better binned chips while degrading their lesser SKU silicon, but it'll keep pushing AMD which is better for consumers.
Not everyone needs ultra-extreme high FPS, that's something that only the top one percent of gamers want; the rest of us will get what offers the best bang for the buck and that's AMD.What's your definition of cheap? Money doesn't grow on trees for many of us.
Now that I've seen benchmarks of Ryzen 3000 I really do have to admit that going with the 8700K was a mistake. The Z370 chipset is essentially dead and so I have no upgrade path, thanks a lot Intel.
-----
I do wonder if the i9-9900KS will reach widespread availability, or if this is going to be another limited "PR stunt" like i7-8086K and various other "anniversary" products from other parties.
And just wait until we have B550 boards out, going AMD will be even cheaper for those who don't absolutely need PCIe4.
Prime < TUF < STRIX < ROG