Intel Core i9-9900KS to be Available from October

[btarunr]

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.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[TheRainMakerD]

14nm ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

[GoldenX]

14nm ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

At this point it's better to use #, saves space.
The most boring release from Intel in 4 years of boring Skylake releases. Look, a 9900K that you don't need to overclock, and that we will charge a stupid price for.

 

[ixi]

Leadership on the desktop.

 

[biffzinker]

I'd rather wait for 10nm, and Sunny Cove than a warmed over Skylake.

 

[Xaled]

So they confess that up to this one "5ghz wasn't actually 5ghz" because it was a single core 5ghz? That's why they made it all-core 5ghz?
As for TDP, People who will buy this CPU, and they are a lot, wont really care about the new TDP, so it really won't matter even if it was 1000w.

At this point it's better to use #, saves space.
The most boring release from Intel in 4 years of boring Skylake releases. Look, a 9900K that you don't need to overclock, and that we will charge a stupid price for.

That's totally false. The most boring cpu were i7700 K and the kaby lake as it was the 10th refreshment of the kentsfield q6600 that was released in 2007. Those were the worst 10 years in CPU history. Since then, we've been living a great two years. And every thing released after the i7700k is a lot better that what intel presented in 10 years.

 

[dj-electric]

Commence 5+ pages more of internet community telling Intel how they feel about them

 

[unluckymsk]

it must have original 9900k price tag , and 9900k price must be reduced 50 USD minimum.

If intel didnt do it - f ..u .. 90% of people will buy 3900x instead

 

[GoldenX]

That's totally false. The most boring cpu were i7700 K and the kaby lake

Kaby Lake and Coffee Lake are just Skylake with more cores or slightly better turbos. Never wondered why the HEDT line is still called Skylake?
We've been on the 6th series for far too long.

 

[piloponth]

Meanwhile, this is how Intel is panicking in Slovakia:

and in Czech rep. after AMD releasing Zen2.

 

[Xzibit]

That PCPerspective slide made me chuckle. Ryan Strout leading the Intel Marketing and his old site gets referenced with the words Transparency on top.

 

[btarunr]

That PCPerspective slide made me chuckle. Ryan Strout leading the Intel Marketing and his old site gets referenced with the words Transparency on top.

Brilliant catch.

 

[Turmania]

So the new "S" suffix means, something 'super' is coming? I would like to see thermals and avg.power consumption before making a comment but ideally this should have been the time to release 10th gen on 10nm.

 

[laszlo]

So the new "S" suffix means, something 'super' is coming? I would like to see thermals and avg.power consumption before making a comment but ideally this should have been the time to release 10th gen on 10nm.

"S" i think it means 'sucker' edition and will be priced accordingly

 

[las]

it must have original 9900k price tag , and 9900k price must be reduced 50 USD minimum.

If intel didnt do it - f ..u .. 90% of people will buy 3900x instead

For gaming and emulation? LMAO... AMD CPU is hit or miss performancewise. Mostly miss if you're a 120-240 Hz gamer.
Even 9700K rapes the 3900X here. For less money.

I would never choose Ryzen for a gaming PC unless it's for 4K/UHD+ / GPU bound gaming maybe. Because for high fps gaming, fps will be lower for sure compared to 8th or 9th gen Intel. Especially when these are running at 5 GHz or more.

I would however choose 3600 over 6C i5's in the budget range tho, if you plan to use it for more than 2 years.
For high-end, nothing beats 8700K, 8086K, 9700K and 9900K/9900KS with OC. As good as it gets for high fps gaming for now and this is a fact.

If you do emulation, like I do, AMD CPU is a no-go unless you want to see terrible perf
I'm blasting 100+ fps in Zelda BOTW at 5K using tons of graphicpacks, newest CEMU, try that on Ryzen, good luck

 

[ratirt]

So the new "S" suffix means, something 'super' is coming? I would like to see thermals and avg.power consumption before making a comment but ideally this should have been the time to release 10th gen on 10nm.

Oh You don't want to see the thermals and power consumption trust me. If you want to buy it just buy it and forget power and thermals.
Anyway. These advertisements of Intel's marketing crew reminds me of the Monthy Python series. It is amusing at a start but after a while watching, it becomes just annoying.

 

[aaroliini1]

For gaming and emulation? LMAO... AMD CPU is hit or miss performancewise. Mostly miss if you're a 120-240 Hz gamer.
Even 9700K rapes the 3900X here. For less money.

I would never choose Ryzen for a gaming PC unless it's for 4K/UHD+ / GPU bound gaming maybe. Because for high fps gaming, fps will be lower for sure compared to 8th or 9th gen Intel. Especially when these are running at 5 GHz or more.

I would however choose 3600 over 6C i5's in the budget range tho, if you plan to use it for more than 2 years.
For high-end, nothing beats 8700K, 8086K, 9700K and 9900K/9900KS with OC. As good as it gets for high fps gaming for now and this is a fact.

If you do emulation, like I do, AMD CPU is a no-go unless you want to see terrible perf
I'm blasting 100+ fps in Zelda BOTW at 5K using tons of graphicpacks, newest CEMU, try that on Ryzen, good luck

Have you read this https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-5-3600/4.html ? You only loose around 5% using ryzen 3000 prosessors while using fastest gpu today. If you downgrade to something like 1080 gtx or lower you won't see hardly any difference in fps. And if you are using 2080ti that 10-30 fps increase is pretty useless. You're still getting over 140fps almost in every game.

I have intell 9700k and my brother has ryzen 3700 and both have 1080ti. I have better fps in every game but you cant tell difference in game if fps display is not on.

 

[ratirt]

Even 9700K rapes the 3900X here

If you call 3-5% more a rape? Funny

I would never choose Ryzen for a gaming PC unless it's for 4K / GPU bound gaming maybe. Because for high fps gaming, fps will be lower for sure compared to 8th or 9th gen Intel. Especially when these are running at 5 GHz or more.

Depends which game and I'd rather go min fps than max.

If you do emulation, like I do, AMD CPU is a no-go unless you want to see terrible perf
I'm blasting 100+ fps in Zelda BOTW at 5K using tons of graphicpacks, newest CEMU, try that on Ryzen, good luck

The Emulator is not optimized for Ryzen which is a new processor. Just give it some time

 

[Ruru]

The most boring cpu were i7700 K and the kaby lake as it was the 10th refreshment of the kentsfield q6600 that was released in 2007. Those were the worst 10 years in CPU history. Since then, we've been living a great two years. And every thing released after the i7700k is a lot better that what intel presented in 10 years.

I don't agree with that, at least 7700K OC'd to 5GHz easily, which was rare with 6700K.

So the new "S" suffix means, something 'super' is coming? I would like to see thermals and avg.power consumption before making a comment but ideally this should have been the time to release 10th gen on 10nm.

Few years ago S was the low-power version, for example this 4770S: https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...-4770s-processor-8m-cache-up-to-3-90-ghz.html

 

[ratirt]

Few years ago S was the low-power version, for example this 4770S: https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...-4770s-processor-8m-cache-up-to-3-90-ghz.html

Sure it was but I don't think it is the same with the 9900KS. Basically "K" and "S" never go together so the "S" here means something else. Maybe instead of separating these two it's a new moniker "KS". "K" is pretty obvious meaning unlocked multiplier but I wouldn't be so sure about the "S" being low-power cause these 2 cancel each other out.

 

[Ruru]

Sure it was but I don't think it is the same with the 9900KS. Basically "K" and "S" never go together so the "S" here means something else. Maybe instead of separating these two it's a new moniker "KS". "K" is pretty obvious meaning unlocked multiplier but I wouldn't be so sure about the "S" being low-power cause these 2 cancel each other out.

The joke here was that S used to be the low-power version, now it's the factory-overclocked version.

 

[Ferrum Master]

It is not the first time for the S moniker to appear...

First was the Pentium III-S 1.4GHz...

It is no use to dig it really... it is just a name.

 

[Ruru]

It is not the first time for the S moniker to appear...

First was the Pentium III-S 1.4GHz...

It is no use to dig it really... it is just a name.

Wasn't that the version with 512k L2?

 

[Aerpoweron]

I am a little worried about the 9900KS CPU. If they still use the same soldering process with the very high or thick CPU-Die, then it will run very hot.
And in my usecase the 9900K already runs at 240W at stock (4.7 GHZ all core). And these 240W is about the max the CPU-die can transfer the heat out to the IHS. And it runs at 100°C+ at that wattage no matter the cooling you use.

Since it is probably just a highly binned 9900K i think it will use the same die an solder as the 9900K. And depending what the mainboard automatically ignores of the intel specs, the cpu just might blow up in my usecase.

Intel has still a way to go to keep the mainboard manufacturers in check to honor their specs about the short term and long term boost times and wattages.

I would tiltle the cpu: 5GHz means 5GHz until it thermal throttles or blows up.

But since it is only designed for games, office stuff and internet browsing, it should be ok.

And if AMD is able to fix the boost issue quite soon, then the 5GHz statement has no reference any longer an d just makes it rediculus.

 

[randomUser]

I am a little worried about the 9900KS CPU. If they still use the same soldering process with the very high or thick CPU-Die, then it will run very hot.
And in my usecase the 9900K already runs at 240W at stock (4.7 GHZ all core). And these 240W is about the max the CPU-die can transfer the heat out to the IHS. And it runs at 100°C+ at that wattage no matter the cooling you use.

Since it is probably just a highly binned 9900K i think it will use the same die an solder as the 9900K. And depending what the mainboard automatically ignores of the intel specs, the cpu just might blow up in my usecase.

Intel has still a way to go to keep the mainboard manufacturers in check to honor their specs about the short term and long term boost times and wattages.

I would tiltle the cpu: 5GHz means 5GHz until it thermal throttles or blows up.

But since it is only designed for games, office stuff and internet browsing, it should be ok.

And if AMD is able to fix the boost issue quite soon, then the 5GHz statement has no reference any longer an d just makes it rediculus.

What workload are you doing?
My 9900k couldnt get past 200W of total SYSTEM power with prime95.

Nothing can get this cpu to 100C unless it's prime95 small fft, or i try to OC it to 4.9GHz all core.