Wednesday, February 14th 2024

Intel Core i9-14900KS Draws as much as 409W at Stock Speeds with Power Limits Unlocked

Intel's upcoming limited edition desktop processor for overclockers and enthusiasts, the Core i9-14900KS, comes with a gargantuan 409 W maximum package power draw at stock speeds with its PL2 power limit unlocked, reports HKEPC, based on an OCCT database result. This was measured under OCCT stress, with all CPU cores saturated, and the PL2 (maximum turbo power) limited set to unlimited/4096 W in the BIOS. The chip allows 56 seconds of maximum turbo power at a stretch, which was measured at 409 W.

The i9-14900KS is a speed-bump over its predecessor, the i9-13900KS. It comes with a maximum P-core boost frequency of 6.20 GHz, which is 200 MHz higher; and a maximum E-core boost frequency of 4.50 GHz, which is a 100 MHz increase over both the i9-13900KS and the mass market i9-14900K. The i9-14900KS comes with a base power value of 150 W, which is the guaranteed minimum amount of power the processor can draw under load (the idle power is much lower). There's no word on when Intel plans to make the i9-14900KS available, it was earlier expected to go on sale in January, along the sidelines of CES.
Source: HKEPC
Add your own comment

228 Comments on Intel Core i9-14900KS Draws as much as 409W at Stock Speeds with Power Limits Unlocked

#101
Dr. Dro
HBSoundQuestion - So, the smaller format ITX motherboards with 24 Pin + 8 Pin CPU Power. Can not handle the complete power of the 14900KS?
This CPU does not have any higher power footprint than the i9-13900KS. It's the same reason, they're exceptional quality bin CPUs. But it is very, very high indeed, provided you uncap it. I personally run mine with a 288 watt cap. It performs plenty enough in multithreaded workloads and to its fullest extent under light to moderate loads such as gaming. I reckon it'll have the same problems the i9-14900K has, namely, it trades more aggressively boosts for longer term stability. See this for reference:

Posted on Reply
#102
lexluthermiester
HBSoundQuestion - So, the smaller format ITX motherboards with 24 Pin + 8 Pin CPU Power. Can not handle the complete power of the 14900KS?
Sure they can, but you will not get the maximum boost clocks. You'll still get the base clocks and the Intel boost spec, but nothing beyond.
Posted on Reply
#103
HBSound
lexluthermiesterSure they can, but you will not get the maximum boost clocks. You'll still get the base clocks and the Intel boost spec, but nothing beyond.
Thank you
Dr. DroThis CPU does not have any higher power footprint than the i9-13900KS. It's the same reason, they're exceptional quality bin CPUs. But it is very, very high indeed, provided you uncap it. I personally run mine with a 288 watt cap. It performs plenty enough in multithreaded workloads and to its fullest extent under light to moderate loads such as gaming. I reckon it'll have the same problems the i9-14900K has, namely, it trades more aggressively boosts for longer term stability. See this for reference:
Thank you
Posted on Reply
#105
A Computer Guy
lexluthermiesterAnd you'll need a custom loop for that much heat output. What are you planning? For that much heat I would do 2x280mm rads or a 240 & 360.
Somehow when I read that it's doesn't seem like enough.
Vya DomusIt doesn't make sense to compare an E core to a logical thread, if you disable SMT you are inevitably making that core less efficient, I don't mean just power wise but also performance wise. It's a serious regression architecturally. The whole purpose of SMT was to increase the utilization of resources that would otherwise be idle.
With the numerous issues with SMT and security some folks might disagree with the architectural regression argument.
Nosferatu666yet an optimized 7800x3d with 30-40 watts in gaming equals it. who the fuck is still buying intel for gaming who has clue?
Isn't a 12600K still good for gaming with a good GPU and costs significantly less including with paired motherboard?
Posted on Reply
#106
dgianstefani
TPU Proofreader
HBSoundQuestion - So, the smaller format ITX motherboards with 24 Pin + 8 Pin CPU Power. Can not handle the complete power of the 14900KS?
You'll get the full single core boost clock, just maybe not when you fully load all 24 cores synthetically.
Posted on Reply
#107
absoluteUnit
only basement-living bench boys who run cinebench and blender all day will draw 400 watts from the CPU. enthusiasts who buy this are doing it for gaming, where power draw is almost always going to be ~150 watts or lower.
Posted on Reply
#108
Recon5
This is how I feel for Intel.

Posted on Reply
#109
absoluteUnit
Nosferatu666yet an optimized 7800x3d with 30-40 watts in gaming equals it. who the fuck is still buying intel for gaming who has clue?
enjoy dropping frames with your AM-DIP.
Posted on Reply
#110
lexluthermiester
A Computer GuySomehow when I read that it's doesn't seem like enough.
2 280 rads or a 240 and 360? Either one is enough for a 64core Threadripper under full load so an OC'd 14900 should be no problem.
Posted on Reply
#111
AleXXX666
ChaitanyaHow many motherboards have VRMs that can handle this pig?
just connect it directly to 380 V with "star" connection, 3 phase is enough lol
Posted on Reply
#112
Vya Domus
A Computer GuyWith the numerous issues with SMT and security some folks might disagree with the architectural regression argument.
Those security issues wont go away if you disable SMT.
Posted on Reply
#113
londiste
lexluthermiesterIf by SMT you mean Symmetric-Multi-Tasking, then no they didn't get rid of it. If I understand correctly(and I admit I might not), they simply changed the way it was implemented without changing the effective functionality.
SMT in this context means simultaneous multithreading.
Posted on Reply
#114
lexluthermiester
londisteSMT in this context means simultaneous multithreading.
Ok, same thing different name.
Posted on Reply
#115
chrcoluk
DimitrimanI also feel that Intel is missing the point with this chip. If you want a "Gaming King" to challenge the 7800X3D why not release a 8 P-Core only (no E-Cores) at >6.2 Ghz and a "reasonable" power draw?
I think ditching HTT and keeping e-cores would yield a better result (keep the e-core clocks 3ghz max, and dont need more than 8) HT is horrible inefficient, and e-cores have obsoleted it.

Hoping the rumours are true HT is ditched in upcoming CPUs.
Posted on Reply
#116
lexluthermiester
chrcolukI think ditching HTT and keeping e-cores would yield a better result (keep the e-core clocks 3ghz max) HT is horrible inefficient, and e-cores have obsoleted it.
What is this? Are you kidding?
chrcolukHoping the rumours are true HT is ditched in upcoming CPUs.
That is beyond silly. It's just a rumor but why would you hope for that? That's crazy talk...
Posted on Reply
#118
bug
AusWolfI mean, I'm ready for stones thrown for thinking that overclocking is pointless, and for saying that I much more prefer modern CPUs that run to the max out of the box, with the ability to be further limited if cooling is restricted. I don't miss tinkering in the BIOS for that extra 100 MHz one single bit. :)
It wasn't always that bad. My first overclock was an Am5x85 (AMD's name for their 80486 counterpart). It was as easy as changing the FSB from 33 to 40MHz and bam! all of a sudden I was running the more expensive, 160MHz CPU!
For modern CPUs, yeah, you almost need a PhD.
Posted on Reply
#119
lexluthermiester
bugIt wasn't always that bad. My first overclock was an Am5x85 (AMD's name for their 80486 counterpart). It was as easy as changing the FSB from 33 to 40MHz and bam! all of a sudden I was running the more expensive, 160MHz CPU!
For modern CPUs, yeah, you almost need a PhD.
Yeah, OCing is MUCH more complicated these days. It's no longer a simple process like BITD.
Posted on Reply
#120
Carlyle2020hs
AusWolfI totally agree, although I can't imagine anyone buying a Keep Spending CPU and then clocking it down or limiting it in any other way. That's what the non-prefix 14900 is for.
The 14900´s VID is trash. Same goes for the trash bin called "14700k".

And you have to deal with the VIDs beeing not the same. KS chips VIDs are aligned.

No disabling waste-cores and hypertreading would help to get that _hitty silicone to run 6 Ghz all-core.

But a 13900ks could. Without any need to tweak PLL voltages i might add.

Now imagine a 14900ks running 6 Ghz all-core without the need to turn off hyperthreading
or
wanting to use the least amount of wattage possible during gaming at 14900k speeds.

If you can, the KS is for you.

in conclusion:
The KS is for people hunting for the best p-cores possbile.
Either to overclock or to use less voltage at any given Mhz if compared to the rest of intels offerings.

And yes, if compared to the red team a 14900ks looks rather pathetic.
But that´s because intel has no imagination on how to sell it.
They easily could have disabled the waste cores completely and sell a 8x p-core only gaming beast that would loose to 60% but would win 40% by quiet a margin during gaming benchmarks.

Those 40% leads beeing almost all competetive online-games mind you. So intels marketing could have brandished that as a win over amd.
Posted on Reply
#121
pavle
londisteWhy is 14900K a 350W CPU?
That is a good question. If you look at power tests, maximum power for it seems to suggest that and it's always better to honestly tell the max. value than intel's average usage numbers so one can choose the proper cooling system.
Posted on Reply
#122
AusWolf
Carlyle2020hsThe 14900´s VID is trash. Same goes for the trash bin called "14700k".

And you have to deal with the VIDs beeing not the same. KS chips VIDs are aligned.

No disabling waste-cores and hypertreading would help to get that _hitty silicone to run 6 Ghz all-core.

But a 13900ks could. Without any need to tweak PLL voltages i might add.

Now imagine a 14900ks running 6 Ghz all-core without the need to turn off hyperthreading
or
wanting to use the least amount of wattage possible during gaming at 14900k speeds.

If you can, the KS is for you.

in conclusion:
The KS is for people hunting for the best p-cores possbile.
Either to overclock or to use less voltage at any given Mhz if compared to the rest of intels offerings.
In other words, the KS is for people who like chasing (pointless?) numbers, not performance-per-Watt, or performance-per-dollar. Got it. :)
Carlyle2020hsAnd yes, if compared to the red team a 14900ks looks rather pathetic.
But that´s because intel has no imagination on how to sell it.
They easily could have disabled the waste cores completely and sell a 8x p-core only gaming beast that would loose to 60% but would win 40% by quiet a margin during gaming benchmarks.

Still winning in almost all competetive online-games mind you.
I'm not sure. An e-core-less version would have to be way cheaper, which is not a good bargain for Intel. In my opinion, the timing is wrong. By not releasing this thing at the same time as the rest of the line-up, they're losing lots of potential buyers who aren't looking for arbitrary numbers, for example GHz, but want the best of the best in a generation.
Posted on Reply
#123
lexluthermiester
AusWolfIn other words, the KS is for people who like chasing (pointless?) numbers, not performance-per-Watt, or performance-per-dollar. Got it. :)
Yuppers. It's effectively the Extreme Edition version.
Posted on Reply
#124
AusWolf
lexluthermiesterYuppers. It's effectively the Extreme Edition version.
I love these kind of products. "For an extra X bucks, you may not get a lot of extra performance, but we'll give you the powah of JIGGAHERTZ brags!" :roll:
Posted on Reply
#125
lexluthermiester
AusWolfI love these kind of products. "For an extra X bucks, you may not get a lot of extra performance, but we'll give you the powah of JIGGAHERTZ brags!" :roll:
In all fairness, the highend market drives a lot of sales and always has. I love these kinds of models because I can appeal to the folks with the money to burn and offer them the best of the best.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Dec 18th, 2024 04:56 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts