Intel Core i9-9900K, i7-9700K, i5-9600K specifications exposed (updated)
Click here to post a comment for Intel Core i9-9900K, i7-9700K, i5-9600K specifications exposed (updated) on our message forum
nizzen
YES.
9900K 8core i9 is mainstream from 9 series, and wil be supported by z370 with bios update.
There is no info about refresh of x299 cpu's yet.
Darksword
My prediction:
i9-9900K = $499.99
i7-9700K = $399.99
i5-9600K = $299.99
IF they do end up being soldered, I think people will buy them at these prices.
Andrew LB
That's because they're largely gpu bottlenecked. look at lower resolution benchmarks to see how much faster intel's chips perform ... (or do i have that backwards? im still half asleep)
entr0cks
Please sir, could we have some more PCI-E lanes.
nizzen
Buy x99/x299/Threadripper 😛
H83
I have the same idea. Otherwise releasing Z390 boards is going to be pointless.
nizzen
They did it before.
P67 to z68
z77 to z87
tunejunky
WOW...some people are lifting the hyperbolic "godlike" a la MSI.
this is just a cpu, not a religion.
and to be perfectly clear, Intel is screwing the pooch by having 2 sku's without hyperthreading in the I-7 line-up.
granted, they will go to oem, but they will be available in all the regular sales channels (i.e. new egg etc...).
i do hope they use solder, but as someone has already pointed out, that's not a panacea.
they will undoubtedly run hot and require liquid cooling or "big" air, but what else is new?
this is yet another stop-gap by Intel. and as others have pointed out Ryzen 2 will most likely exceed the specs at lower power and heat.
now, if i was doing e-sports that 9900 would seem like the winning ticket...until you factored in all variables incl. price.
the ability to buy an enthusiast class gpu on the price differential alone between Ryzen 2 and 9900 will make this cpu a nine day wonder.
Intel please free your engineers from marketing crapola.
schmidtbag
warlord has got to be the most bipolar and confusing member on these forums. One day he'll be like "I've been buying AMD for years, they're not so bad except for these couple of small problems" and the next day he'll be like "hurr durr Intel is the best, they're going to mop the floor with AMD. There's no competition.".
I seriously don't get it, and this seems to happen regularly.
Anyway more on topic...
If these products are priced well, I think they could sell well. For example, if the 9700K is roughly the same price as the 8700K (+/- $25), it could be a compelling alternative. With the same clock speeds, it'll be faster in some tasks and slower in others. Let's face it, the IPC is going to be roughly the same and the 8700K's price probably isn't going to drop much, so Intel is basically giving people a choice of "pick the 8700K if you want better performance in A, B, and C, or pick the 9700K if you want better performance in X, Y, and Z".
Of course, they could just enable HT and say "get better performance in everything" but Intel isn't a charity. 🙄
BuildeR2
True. If they are not, buy them from siliconlottery.com for around those same prices with a delid+LM.
schmidtbag
I certainly don't disagree, hence my last sentence. But regardless of being distasteful (and also probably a poor value) I'm sure it's still going to sell well.
I assume Intel knows it's only a matter of time before AMD figures out how to either meet/exceed Intel in IPC and/or achieve good overclocks, so they're probably banking on people jumping the gun on a decision for a CPU before that happens.
H83
I think that´s a little hard to know unless Intel´s next CPU architecture is a failure. Or Intel knows that they have to delay their new CPUs once again...
schmidtbag
Knowing for certain is irrelevant - AMD is catching up, and whether or not they accomplish what I said, Intel can't afford to take chances with them. If the 9700K gives Intel an edge that AMD can't compete with (in particular, when it comes to clock speeds) then that'll give them a head start on sales before AMD makes a product to respond with.
H83
Yes but that´s what happens every time a new product is released, it´s better than the older stuff from the competition, so the competition has to release something better to counter and then the others do the same, it´s a never ending cycle regarding PC hardware. For example Intel has been catching up to AMD regarding core count, something that finally achieved, and AMD is trying to catch up Intel regarding CPU clocks, something they will accomplish sooner or later.
So business as usual, nothing more.
BuildeR2
While an i7 without HT does leave a sour taste at first, if they are going to "allow" i9's on the Z390 chipset for non HEDT users it kind of makes sense. Now Intel would have 4 options in the consumer space, so it could be i3=no HT, i5=i3+HT, i7=more cores than i3 and i5 but with no HT, i9=i7+HT, while AMD is still following the 3, 5, and 7 naming scheme for now until a possible Ryzen 9 with 8+ cores comes to X470 or above.
TLD LARS
A 9900k base clock of 100Mhz lower then the AMD 2700X, the performance should be close under full load all cores.
Memory speed would help the 9900k compaired to the 2700X
I dont think the 95W TDP is realistic compaired to the 8700k, i think it would be closer to the AMDs 105W or more under full load.
Time will tell.
schmidtbag
Well, the all-core boost speed is still higher than the 2700X. But otherwise I agree.
Remember, the TDP isn't the real-world wattage, it's the approximate heat output at the base clock.
nizzen
Who care about stock? All cores @ 5Ghz easy 😀
TLD LARS
The all-core boost is more or less overclocking, because the all-core boost would produce 150 Watts or something like that and 5Ghz all-core would be close to 250 Watts, in other words more then a AMD 9590.
nizzen
And now we care about powerdraw?
Years ago, 3930k OC + 2x 780ti classified OC draw 1700w from the wall with watercooling. THAT was powerdraw...
