Top Three Intel 9th Generation Core Parts Detailed

[RejZoR]

i think the problem is that soldering can bring to many chip damagend and a different past with bettet perf could have shorther durabilit

Who gives a crap, that's like having Ferrari that can go 300km/h but you drive it only 50km/h out of durability concerns. May just as well buy a Celeron then to be sure it'll work for 30 years because it won't get even warm either way...

 

[dj-electric]

i think the problem is that soldering can bring to many chip damagend and a different past with bettet perf could have shorther durabilit

Thousands of overclocked 2500Ks, 2600K, X79-based and X99-based chips would wholly disagree with you on that one

 

[Vayra86]

You forget that your CPU is a quad core and now we're talking twice as many cores. You're also only overclocking your CPU a mere 600MHz from bar clock, whereas this would be 1.4 GHz. Quite a difference, no? The 8086K is struggling with 5GHz and this has another two cores. I can see maybe 2-4 cores hitting 5GHz stable across the board, but not all eight.

Exactly this, the 5 Ghz is a 1-core turbo and even getting two core turbo to 5 Ghz is possibly going to be a challenge on 'normal' cooling.

They can add another + behind their node but it doesn't magically create more thermal headroom.

As far as I can see the reason HT is gone from all but the top part means Intel has also realised its merit in a consumer environment is limited, and it also helps them with binning because they only need the 9900K to do that now. I think binning is the key word here. Intel has now pushed 14nm to the max right out of the box. You can buy a K-CPU but the reality is that Intel's done most of the work for you, another 'new' similarity to Ryzen if you think of it. Except here you're still paying the K-premium and Z board premium.

 

[Midland Dog]

Anybody mention the 16 PCI-E lanes. What gives??

the cpu has 16 lanes, generally the chipset has the other few

 

[TheLostSwede]

Anybody mention the 16 PCI-E lanes. What gives??

It's apparently all the consumer segment deserves... (Yes, AMD is almost as limiting, as you only get four extra for one NVMe drive)
That said, it's kind of costly, both in terms of actual cost and die space to add a lot of PCIe lanes to the CPU, so Intel gives them to us via the bottle necked chipset instead, chopped up in little pieces with four lanes seemingly being the widest supported.
It also seems like neither CPU maker is considering a fatter pipe to the chipset, which is sad.

 

[Outback Bronze]

the cpu has 16 lanes, generally the chipset has the other few

Yeah thought that would be the case. But seriously 8/16 Threaded CPU with only 16 PCI-E lanes.

Seems a little too far fetched for me.

 

[Fabio]

There are thousands of soldered chips still working, electromigration kills CPUs, not soldering the IHS.

no you not understand me. I was saying that soldering process may damage a chip during production, and mean costs for Intel.
And a better paste may not last as long as the one actuality used by Intel.

 

[Vayra86]

Yeah thought that would be the case. But seriously 8/16 Threaded CPU with only 16 PCI-E lanes.

Seems a little too far fetched for me.

But why though. Do you use more now? Its not like the lane count needs to be related to core count in any way, you're not going quad SLI anyway and if you do or did, HEDT has always been the way to go.

 

[Fabio]

Thousands of overclocked 2500Ks, 2600K, X79-based and X99-based chips would wholly disagree with you on that one

I bad explained my thoughts, read my new post

 

[Outback Bronze]

But why though. Do you use more now? Its not like the lane count needs to be related to core count in any way, you're not going quad SLI anyway and if you do or did, HEDT has always been the way to go.

If I want to run SLI or Xfire I will only get 8x yeah?? So I have to spend buckets loads on a HEDT?

Not that from what I've seen really matters. You would just think from a mainstream CPU they would allow more.

 

[Vayra86]

If I want to run SLI or Xfire I will only get 8x yeah?? So I have to spend buckets loads on a HEDT?

Not that from what I've seen really matters. You would just think from a mainstream CPU they would allow more.

No, x8/x8 is and always has been sufficient for regular SLI and quad SLI isn't even possible anymore. So, in the *past* you had to resort to HEDT but only for tri/quad cards. And today its not even an issue to begin with.

I don't understand why you would think a mainstream CPU would allow more. Again: why?

 

[Hood]

You forget that your CPU is a quad core and now we're talking twice as many cores. You're also only overclocking your CPU a mere 600MHz from bar clock, whereas this would be 1.4 GHz. Quite a difference, no? The 8086K is struggling with 5GHz and this has another two cores. I can see maybe 2-4 cores hitting 5GHz stable across the board, but not all eight.

Okay, so maybe we'll need that 1 hp chiller Intel used at CES

 

[Outback Bronze]

No, x8/x8 is and always has been sufficient for regular SLI and quad SLI isn't even possible anymore. So, in the *past* you had to resort to HEDT but only for tri/quad cards. And today its not even an issue to begin with.

I don't understand why you would think a mainstream CPU would allow more. Again: why?

Why not?

 

[StrayKAT]

HEDT isn't going to be that much more expensive than this. Especially when these come out. Just go that route if you want to.

 

[dj-electric]

Okay, so maybe we'll need that 1 hp chiller Intel used at CES

I had kind of a sad moment earlier this month when building a PC for my brother.
It has an 8-core 22nm based 5960X CPU, and taking it to 4.4Ghz on a fairly non-expensive air cooler was an easy mission. A part of me got very sad at that moment.

 

[RejZoR]

HEDT isn't going to be that much more expensive than this. Especially when these come out. Just go that route if you want to.

Not on CPU side, but on motherboard side. X99 boards were stupid expensive where CPU's weren't all that more compared to Z170 offerings.

 

[Vya Domus]

That 9700K is going to make the 9900K absolutely redundant.

 

[Tomgang]

Gonna admit. Clock speed on that 8 core i9 is higher than i exspected. This seems then to be possible to have a cpu capable of 5 ghz on all 8 cores then with a little luck, cause i dout all are capable of. Again silicon lottery.

 

[hat]

no you not understand me. I was saying that soldering process may damage a chip during production, and mean costs for Intel.
And a better paste may not last as long as the one actuality used by Intel.

It's a cost cutting measure for Intel to save a couple bucks. If you save 5 cents on the manufacturing cost per cpu x 1,000,000, you just pocketed yourself a cool 50 grand. No matter what arguments anyone may use to support their decision to use paste rather than solder, that's what truly lies at the heart of the matter. In the plastics factory I work at, I've seen new molds come in that were making exactly the same part as the old mold we were already using... the only difference is the part might be like a few hundredths of an inch thinner. Seems like a silly investment, but when you take the cost of the little bit of material saved by making a slightly thinner part and multiply that by some number in the millions over the lifetime of the mold and you're pocketing quite a bit over time.

Gonna admit. Clock speed on that 8 core i9 is higher than i exspected. This seems then to be possible to have a cpu capable of 5 ghz on all 8 cores then with a little luck, cause i dout all are capable of. Again silicon lottery.

It's already 5GHz turbo. That's probably the max turbo frequency supported by a single core, but still, 5GHz across the board wouldn't be a very far stretch from that. 5GHz is already no stranger to currently existing K series Coffee Lake chips, anyway. Intel is pushing core count and frequency in response to Ryzen.

 

[ppn]

10nm cannon lake icelake is the only cpu to buy that counts

 

[R0H1T]

It's already 5GHz turbo. That's probably the max turbo frequency supported by a single core, but still, 5GHz across the board wouldn't be a very far stretch from that. 5GHz is already no stranger to currently existing K series Coffee Lake chips, anyway. Intel is pushing core count and frequency in response to Ryzen.

I can't see how an 8 core i9 will do 5GHz or above, all core, without consuming close to 200W just for the CPU. Also not forgetting the crap TIM issue, the i9 would've been much better at 10nm but that's still MIA.

 

[Gungar]

That 9700K is going to make the 9900K absolutely redundant.

Redundant? intel does that for years i7 4 cores with HT i5 4 cores without HT. Wtf are you talking about???

 

[Vya Domus]

Redundant? intel does that for years i7 4 cores with HT i5 4 cores without HT.

"4 cores with HT i5 4 cores without HT" isn't relevant anymore.

The effectiveness of HT drops with higher core counts , so much that I wouldn't be surprised to see the 8 core part without HT outperform the one with in menial tasks such as games. Also given the fact that this is still on the same 14nm node , heat and power consumption are going to become even more problematic so in addition to that the 9700K will likely OC higher with less trouble. Bottom of the line is parts with HT in the higher segment have always been somewhat poor value but now that will be the case even more. Given Intel's never ending desire for higher prices it will likely push the 9900K into absolute obscurity more so than any other previous mainstream flagship.

Wtf are you talking about???

I suggest you don't ask someone what the fuck are they talking about in your first comment to that person. It's rather distasteful.

 

[lexluthermiester]

I don't get it. What is Intel trying to do here? What it seems like is that they don't want to answer AMD at all. Ryzen has been out for over a year and this is the best Intel can muster? WTH Intel? Get the fricken lead out. AMD is cleaning your clock in just about every market and all you answer with is crap like this?

 

[Gungar]

"4 cores with HT i5 4 cores without HT" isn't relevant anymore.

The effectiveness of HT drops with higher core counts , so much that I wouldn't be surprised to see the 8 core part without HT outperform the one with in menial tasks such as games. Also given the fact that this is still on the same 14nm node , heat and power consumption are going to become even more problematic so in addition to that the 9700K will likely OC higher with less trouble. Bottom of the line is parts with HT in the higher segment have always been somewhat poor value but now that will be the case even more. Given Intel's never ending desire for higher prices it will likely push the 9900K into absolute obscurity more so than any other previous mainstream flagship.



I suggest you don't ask someone what the fuck are they talking about in your first comment to that person. It's rather distasteful.

It suppose to be distasteful because you couldn't be more wrong. the 9900k has more cache so it will be faster anyway. And there is no diminishing returns with more threads its far more future proof. And for the difference in pricing (should be around 100 dollars) the 9900 is a way better value proposition for anything except gaming.


PS : i have no idea why i argue with someone that bought a FX cpu.