Monday, September 10th 2018

First Intel Core i7-9700K Review Surfaces

Spanish language tech publication El Chapuzas Informático published the first almost-complete review of Intel Core i7-9700K processor. Without Intel disclosing the pricing of this chip, the review doesn't include price/performance numbers or a conclusion that explores the competitive landscape. You still get a sumptuous serving of 14 tests, from which 9 are some of the latest AAA games.

The bottom-line is that the i7-9700K locks horns with the Ryzen 7 2700X in most multi-threaded tests except Cinebench nT; and owing to its high clock speeds, it will end up as the fastest gaming processor around the $350-400 mark. Interestingly, the i7-9700K isn't 33% faster than the i7-8700K despite 33% more cores, because HyperThreading is sorely missed. The distinction could be reserved for the Core i9-9900K, although samples of that chip are far too rare.
More graphs follow.

Source: El Chapuzas Informático
Add your own comment

88 Comments on First Intel Core i7-9700K Review Surfaces

#1
Ed_1
That review is not good IMO.
For one it should of been a higher end GPU but given that and the said early MB bios support seems good performance to me.

Once we see more reviews we will get a better idea.
Price will matter as 8700K are still out there.
Posted on Reply
#2
phanbuey
"Ed_1 said:
That review is not good IMO.
For one it should of been a higher end GPU but given that and the said early MB bios support seems good performance to me.

Once we see more reviews we will get a better idea.
Price will matter as 8700K are still out there.
Yeah it's going to be an overclockers/gamers chip... definitely not meant for workstations IMO.

That 4 FPS boost over the 6700K in Farcry 5 though... ooof.

I wonder if the security mitigations are hurting it.
Posted on Reply
#3
The Quim Reaper
"phanbuey said:


That 4 FPS boost over the 6700K in Farcry 5 though... ooof.

I wonder if the security mitigations are hurting it.
I doubt it, the Far Cry engine has always been notoriously CPU bound, just reflects the lack of IPC progress in Intels cores more than anything.
Posted on Reply
#4
Venger
I am really curious how AMD's 7nm Zen 2 is going to be compared to these...
Posted on Reply
#5
Chloe Price
I'd still go for 8700K instead, rather have 12 threads with 6 cores than 8 threads with 8 cores.
Posted on Reply
#6
dwade
The world's first gaming 8 core CPU. Thanks Intel!
Posted on Reply
#7
MAXLD
"Ed_1 said:
That review is not good IMO.
For one it should of been a higher end GPU
Well, on the contrary. Having reviews out there with different setups (and respective performances) is very useful, instead of all the reviews all using the same top of the line setup than most of the people won't be able to have, which is what normally happens with all the major websites out there.
Obviously:
- when a hardware piece is tested, it should be tested to show all his potential (w/ the most powerful setup to avoid bottlenecks)
but then again:
- when a hardware piece is tested, it should also be tested in more different financial/budget scenarios and setups so people could judge their personal need / benefits for buying (or not) such item (which would be a even more gigantic task each time a website releases a review, that's why the major ones all have a top setup for ideal top performance headroom. It's also a race for websites to publish reviews ASAP the NDA lifts, so having the review ready in time is crucial (so testing mostly for full potential also helps)).

When you have a review that shows a top piece installed in a setup that (in theory) should not take full advantage of it, then you can analyze:
- what performance you will be missing (or not) if you don't upgrade that item on your (non-top of line) setup
- how much money you will be saving by not buying that item for your PC, instead going for a cheaper one

As long as the review is done correctly and provides a minimum amount of comparison parts on the same test circumstances, then it is quite valid and useful. (in this case, there's several cpus there to compare with... if the setup was the same (or most close to it as possible) in each case, then it's good data).
Posted on Reply
#8
Chloe Price
"dwade said:
The world's first gaming 8 core CPU. Thanks Intel!
First gaming 8-core? Haven't heard of Ryzen before..?
Posted on Reply
#9
dwade
"Chloe Price said:
First gaming 8-core? Haven't heard of Ryzen before..?
Ryzen is not a gaming CPU which is why even the i5 8400 makes short work of it.
Posted on Reply
#10
Chloe Price
"dwade said:
Ryzen is not a gaming CPU which is why even the i5 8400 makes short work of it.
Can you specify what is a gaming CPU? Does it need to have RGBs and be branded with a "gaming" brand?

I can play games fine with my 5820K even that it's not a "gaming" CPU. :rolleyes:
Posted on Reply
#11
Xx Tek Tip xX
"dwade said:
The world's first gaming 8 core CPU. Thanks Intel!
Thanks intel? More like thanks amd if it wasn't for ryzen 8700k would be 4c4t and a refreshed 7700k so wake up.
Posted on Reply
#12
Xuper
"dwade said:
The world's first gaming 8 core CPU. Thanks Intel!
Cut Your nonsense comment.There is no gaming CPU.Any CPU can play any games.
Posted on Reply
#13
dwade
"Chloe Price said:
Can you specify what is a gaming CPU? Does it need to have RGBs and be branded with a "gaming" brand?

I can play games fine with my 5820K even that it's not a "gaming" CPU. :rolleyes:
5820k games well because Intel can add more cores without compromising gaming performance. And the 5820k is a HEDT; it's supposed to do well in gaming.
Posted on Reply
#14
Xx Tek Tip xX
@dwade He asked you to define what a "gaming" cpu is not to support the fact his 5820k can game he's already established that if you can't read.
Posted on Reply
#15
Tomorrow
"dwade said:
Ryzen is not a gaming CPU which is why even the i5 8400 makes short work of it.
Wonder how all those Ryzen owners are running their games on a CPU that does not suppport it. Damn HaXX0rs i bet...
Posted on Reply
#16
Xx Tek Tip xX
"Tomorrow said:
Wonder how all those Ryzen owners are running their games on a CPU that does not suppport it. Damn HaXX0rs i bet...
Yeah they also don't pay extra for hyperthreading or have locked variants of the top cpus like their 2700s etc
Posted on Reply
#17
Darksider92
"Ed_1 said:
That review is not good IMO.
For one it should of been a higher end GPU but given that and the said early MB bios support seems good performance to me.

Once we see more reviews we will get a better idea.
Price will matter as 8700K are still out there.
does it really matter?
i7 with no HP that is super dumb move from Intel.
the 8700k will still be the chip for gamers,this is just an overpriced crap.
the only good thing about is that it's soldered.
enough said
Posted on Reply
#18
Xuper
This review mentioned 95'c , I assume it's overclocking mode during AIDA64 Test.NOT really good when they're using Corsair H80i GT.
Posted on Reply
#19
RejZoR
"Chloe Price said:
I'd still go for 8700K instead, rather have 12 threads with 6 cores than 8 threads with 8 cores.
Depends what you're doing really. For gaming, it still might be better without HT. If you also do compute, then yes.
Posted on Reply
#20
NdMk2o1o
"dwade said:
Triggered easily by facts I see.
You spout crap not facts, as noted by nearly ALL of your comments sticking your nose up intels rear and bashing amd.

Tpu should have an age limit so kids like this can't come on here, though I suppose it will be bed time soon anyway. Now let the grown ups talk buddy boy.
Posted on Reply
#21
lexluthermiester
The over-all scope of these numbers do not thrill or impress. If this is Intel's answer to AMD's latest offerings, it's not a great one. Intel needs to do better to compete.
Posted on Reply
#22
Xx Tek Tip xX
"NdMk2o1o said:
You spout crap not facts, as noted by nearly ALL of your comments sticking your nose up intels rear and bashing amd.

Tpu should have an age limit so kids like this can't come on here, though I suppose it will be bed time soon anyway. Now let the grown ups talk buddy boy.
If you want to see bashing amd take a look at his profile, It's either an intel employee or some triggered kid.
Posted on Reply
#24
laszlo
just another cpu in the wild...8 core to fight back amd 16 core...

for an average user i don't see any reason for purchase as even a 4c8t-6c12t will do what is needed as we're quite short of programs & games who can use more ...

will be good however for lowering the prices for both cpu makers but perf.wise i'll go with 6c12t anytime if i had to chose
Posted on Reply
#25
lexluthermiester
"dwade said:
Ryzen is not a gaming CPU which is why even the i5 8400 makes short work of it.
Can you do math? It doesn't seem like you can, because the numbers shown in that and many other reviews show Ryzen CPU's are very good gaming CPU's.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment