Tuesday, April 23rd 2019

Intel Expands 9th Gen Core Desktop and Mobile Processor Families

Today, Intel launched the most powerful generation of Intel Core mobile processors ever: the new 9th Gen Intel Core mobile H-series processors, designed for gamers and creators who want to push their experience to the next level. "Our new 9th Gen platform is designed to delight gamers, creators and performance users by giving them more of what they want. We are bringing desktop-caliber performance with up to 5 GHz and 8 cores in a range of thinner systems and new level of connectivity with Wi-Fi 6 (Gig+) so users can game or create where they want," said Fredrik Hamberger, general manager of the Premium and Gaming Laptop Segments at Intel.

There are 580 million enthusiast PC gamers and 130 million PC-based content creators today who care about raw performance as much as they do responsiveness of their PC. They require PCs that can handle everything from demanding AAA games to taxing creative workloads like editing, rendering and transcoding massive 4K video - all while on the go. The 9th Gen Intel Core mobile processors deliver desktop-caliber performance in a mobile form factor and feature amazing performance; the fastest, most reliable wireless with Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200 (Gig+); the most versatile wired connectivity with Thunderbolt 3; and support for Intel Optane memory technology.
At the top of the stack is the 9th Gen Intel Core i9-9980HK processor, the first Intel Core i9 mobile processor with up to 5 GHz with Intel Thermal Velocity Boost, 8 cores and 16 threads, and supporting 16 MB of Intel Smart Cache. The 9th Gen Intel Core mobile processors are designed for the most demanding workloads to deliver:
  • A full range of processors including Intel Core i5, i7 and the unlocked Intel Core i9-9980HK for even more performance.
  • Up to 33% overall performance leap compared with a 3-year old PC.
  • Up to 28% increased responsiveness.
  • Continuous performance optimization with Intel Dynamic Tuning for all types of laptops.
9th Gen Intel Core mobile processors deliver desktop-caliber AAA gaming you can take anywhere, even while recording and streaming. With optimized performance on battery and Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200 supporting multi-Gigabit Wi-Fi speed - based on the latest Wi-Fi standard offering low latency and ultra-fast connection speeds - laptop gaming gets a whole lot better. Gamers will be able to:
  • Play immersive AAA gameplay with up to 56% FPS improvement on games like "Total War: Warhammer II".
  • Experience up to 38% faster turn time on games like "Civilization 6".
  • Game, record and stream without compromise and broadcast HD live streams up to 2.1 times faster, gen-over-gen.
  • Break the gigabit barrier with the latest Wi-Fi 6 standard running on the Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200 (Gig+) solution offering almost three times faster throughput and up to 75% latency reduction - pair it with Wi-Fi 6 (Gig+) routers based on Intel technology to unleash a great gaming experience.
9th Gen Intel Core mobile processors power faster video editing to tackle heavyweight creative tasks on the go. New Intel Optane memory H10 with solid-state storage provides the responsiveness of Intel Optane memory with the capacity of a QLC NAND SSD, speeds application and content loading, and Thunderbolt 3 enhances home and office creation via fast single-wire access to multiple 4K monitors, additional external storage and system charging. 9th Gen Intel Core mobile processors will deliver:
  • Up to 54% faster 4K video editing versus a 3-year-old PC.
  • With up to 1TB of total storage, Intel Optane memory H10 with solid-state storage will have the capacity users need for their apps and files.
  • Up to 63% faster content creation versus a 3-year-old PC via Intel Optane memory H10 with solid-state storage versus a standalone TLC NAND SSD.
  • Intel Wi-Fi 6 (Gig+) lets you share your 10GB multimedia files in less than one minute (almost three times faster than standard 2×2 AC Wi-Fi). When connected to a new Wi-Fi 6 (Gig+) router powered by Intel technology it is now possible to create, edit and share faster than ever before.
Starting April 23, 2019, laptops powered by the 9th Gen Intel Core mobile processors will launch from OEMs including Acer, ASUS, Dell, HP, Lenovo and MSI, as they introduce the most compelling laptops for gaming and content creation.

New Desktop Processors
New additions to the 9th Gen Intel Core desktop processor family were also introduced today. The 9th Gen Intel Core desktop processor lineup now includes more than 25 total products with options ranging from Intel Core i3 up to Intel Core i9 with amazing performance and flexibility to meet a range of consumer needs from everyday productivity to gaming to content creation. The family also brings Pentium Gold and Celeron products to market for entry-level computing, giving consumers even more options to find the right desktop to fit their specific need and budgets. New capabilities include:
  • Up to 47% more FPS while gaming.
  • Up to 2.1 times faster video editing compared with a 5-year old PC for 4K and 360 video editing experiences.
  • Intel Wi-Fi 6 (Gig+) with gigabit Wi-Fi speeds delivering almost three times faster than standard 2×2 AC, and 40% faster than Intel Wireless-AC (Gigabit).
  • Up to 8 cores and 16 threads, up to 5 GHz maximum turbo frequency, up to 16 MB Intel Smart Cache and up to 40 platform PCIe lanes.
Add your own comment

46 Comments on Intel Expands 9th Gen Core Desktop and Mobile Processor Families

#26
Darmok N Jalad
HwGeekIntel CPU 2018-2021 Roadmap Leaks Out – Up To 10 Core Comet Lake-S Desktop CPUs in 2020, 14nm Rocket Lake-S in 2021, No 10nm LGA Parts Till 2022
wccftech.com/intel-desktop-mobile-cpu-roadmap-leak-14nm-comet-lake-10nm-ice-lake-tiger-lake/

We all know that AMD can go upto 16 cores, and we also know how hard was for Intel to make Core i9 9990XE 14C 5.0Ghz, this can give you an Idea that there is no more Clock speed bump to save Intel with New Refresh.
If true, then Intel is going to have to make architectural adjustments to get more IPC. I believe their 14nm is actually pretty dense compared to competitors’ 14nm, but I suspect we are starting to see a combination of node and architecture limits. Much like the first two versions of Ryzen seem architecturally limited to current clocks. Zen 2 will likely be revised for better clockspeed headroom.
Posted on Reply
#27
notb
HwGeekIntel CPU 2018-2021 Roadmap Leaks Out – Up To 10 Core Comet Lake-S Desktop CPUs in 2020, 14nm Rocket Lake-S in 2021, No 10nm LGA Parts Till 2022
wccftech.com/intel-desktop-mobile-cpu-roadmap-leak-14nm-comet-lake-10nm-ice-lake-tiger-lake/

We all know that AMD can go upto 16 cores, and we also know how hard was for Intel to make Core i9 9990XE 14C 5.0Ghz, this can give you an Idea that there is no more Clock speed bump to save Intel with New Refresh.
There's a slide missing. ;-)
"Intel client commercial" means CPUs put into OEM desktops.
DIY desktop processors for gamers/enthusiasts have a separate roadmap. If needed, Intel should be able to provide 10nm CPUs for enthusiast market (it's tiny).

Personally I think it's fake, but it actually looks fine.
Intel won't be able to counter 16-core Ryzen with this, but that's a marketing excercise. Everything else is within range.
Ice Lake-U in May is a fantastic information. It'll be interesting to see how limited 10nm supply is.
Posted on Reply
#28
DarthJedi
notbThere's a slide missing. ;-)
"Intel client commercial" means CPUs put into OEM desktops.
DIY desktop processors for gamers/enthusiasts have a separate roadmap. If needed, Intel should be able to provide 10nm CPUs for enthusiast market (it's tiny).

Personally I think it's fake, but it actually looks fine.
Intel won't be able to counter 16-core Ryzen with this, but that's a marketing excercise. Everything else is within range.
Ice Lake-U in May is a fantastic information. It'll be interesting to see how limited 10nm supply is.
What 10nm? Intel is dead if this is true, and it can't be. They've announced Cove for mid 2019. If Zen 2 catches up per-core performance, Intel will suffer as long as they fail to deliver something 10% faster. Core count also. If Zen 2 desktop gets 16 cores, at the per-core level of 9900K 5GHz, Intel won't sell HEDT either, let alone 9990XE.
Posted on Reply
#29
notb
naxeemWhat 10nm? Intel is dead if this is true, and it can't be.
Intel has been dead so many times over the last 2 years that I don't notice any more.
If Zen 2 catches up per-core performance
Yeah, "if". :-)
Intel will suffer as long as they fail to deliver something 10% faster.
On the contrary. It's AMD who has to show something 10% faster (or better: 50%).
Intel has the brand, the features, the ULV market, the ecosystem and - obviously - partnership contracts.
If Zen 2 desktop gets 16 cores, at the per-core level of 9900K 5GHz, Intel won't sell HEDT either, let alone 9990XE.
If Zen 2 gets 16 cores at per-core level of 9900K, it'll need a separate 8-pin on the SoC, because AM4 will melt from the current needed.

Lets say they'll manage to keep the 2700X single-core performance and that 7nm DUV is 30% more efficient.
2700X all-core boost draws around 170W. 170*2*0.7 = 238. You know... AMD once had a CPU with TDP like that. It didn't end well for them.

As for HEDT: no one buys it anyway. Who cares?
Posted on Reply
#30
TheGuruStud
notbIntel has been dead so many times over the last 2 years that I don't notice any more.

Yeah, "if". :)

On the contrary. It's AMD who has to show something 10% faster (or better: 50%).
Intel has the brand, the features, the ULV market, the ecosystem and - obviously - partnership contracts.

If Zen 2 gets 16 cores at per-core level of 9900K, it'll need a separate 8-pin on the SoC, because AM4 will melt from the current needed.

Lets say they'll manage to keep the 2700X single-core performance and that 7nm DUV is 30% more efficient.
2700X all-core boost draws around 170W. 170*2*0.7 = 238. You know... AMD once had a CPU with TDP like that. It didn't end well for them.

As for HEDT: no one buys it anyway. Who cares?
Yeah, sure, 170W. A crappy 1700 OCed to 4.0 ghz at 1.395V uses that much maxed out (mostly stress testing). You're really confusing AMD with intel, here lol.
A 2700X system from the wall only pulls about 190 lulz.
Posted on Reply
#31
Unregistered
If intel can't bring out any new competitive parts, then they'll bring out new non-competitive parts... if anything just to keep selling something new.
Posted on Edit | Reply
#32
notb
TheGuruStudYeah, sure, 170W. A crappy 1700 OCed to 4.0 ghz at 1.395V uses that much maxed out. You're really confusing AMD with intel, here lol
What can I say? Ryzen XFR is very good. Didn't you praise it earlier?
www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_7_2700/17.html
www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_7_2700X/18.html
After OC both CPUs draw roughly the same (with similar performance as well). But 2700X gets awfully close on its own. And that's the power draw we should look at, since it corresponds to performance that Ryzen is praised for.
Looking at the specs and idle figures, I'd say the rest of the PC draws around 40W. This leaves 170W for the Ryzen.
If you don't believe TPU reviews, here's another one:
www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review,7.html

Oh my. Are you one of the people that believe Ryzens stay under the TDP and only Intel CPUs boost beyond? Poor you...
Posted on Reply
#33
DarthJedi
notbIntel has been dead so many times over the last 2 years that I don't notice any more.

Yeah, "if". :)

On the contrary. It's AMD who has to show something 10% faster (or better: 50%).
Intel has the brand, the features, the ULV market, the ecosystem and - obviously - partnership contracts.

If Zen 2 gets 16 cores at per-core level of 9900K, it'll need a separate 8-pin on the SoC, because AM4 will melt from the current needed.

Lets say they'll manage to keep the 2700X single-core performance and that 7nm DUV is 30% more efficient.
2700X all-core boost draws around 170W. 170*2*0.7 = 238. You know... AMD once had a CPU with TDP like that. It didn't end well for them.

As for HEDT: no one buys it anyway. Who cares?
AMD needs to match, that's it. I buy loads of machines every generation. This year I'm on hold. I'm waiting for Zen 2 to either go with 9990XE or similar from AMD. If AMD can reach 5GHz 9900K performance and drop 16 cores, I won't think twice, I'll build 2 such machines. If AMD manages to get to the level of 4.7GHz (Hz for Hz AMD and Intel are draw now, they just can't catch the clock ATM) that'll also be reason to go AMD. Anything less than 4.7 and I'm staying on Intel.
Keep in mind workstation and server cost for Intel is huge. Rome is already better per socket.

Not sure where you draw your data from, but powers you mention are a joke. 7nm TSMC gives 50% less power requirements. So, even if AM4 was limited to 300W, they could double the core count power-wise.
Posted on Reply
#34
TheGuruStud
notbWhat can I say? Ryzen XFR is very good. Didn't you praise it earlier?
www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_7_2700/17.html
www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_7_2700X/18.html
After OC both CPUs draw roughly the same (with similar performance as well). But 2700X gets awfully close on its own. And that's the power draw we should look at, since it corresponds to performance that Ryzen is praised for.
Looking at the specs and idle figures, I'd say the rest of the PC draws around 40W. This leaves 170W for the Ryzen.
If you don't believe TPU reviews, here's another one:
www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-review,7.html

Oh my. Are you one of the people that believe Ryzens stay under the TDP and only Intel CPUs boost beyond? Poor you...
Do you have some sort of reality distortion field when looking at websites, so you can't read numbers? Here, let me simplify it for you:

Ok, ABSOLUTE worst case scenario (blender/cinebench), and we'll even use the guru3d link. Look at CPU+SoC power in wprime (101). Look at the increase from wprime to cinebench in the graph above (33). Add the difference. 101+33= what? SURE AS SHIT AIN'T 170! Typical loads are gonna be like 105-115.

Bye, ban yourself from using the internet.
Posted on Reply
#35
medi01
naxeemIntel is dead if this is true
Nvidia sells cards that are half speed or less for the same price as 570, so, hold your horses.

AMD might gaining (so needed) market share is all that can come out of it.
Note how Ryzen gains are largely driven by Intel chip shortages.
Posted on Reply
#36
DarthJedi
medi01Nvidia sells cards that are half speed or less for the same price as 570, so, hold your horses.

AMD might gaining (so needed) market share is all that can come out of it.
Note how Ryzen gains are largely driven by Intel chip shortages.
Ok, let's be clear: not that the company is dead itself , but they've lost the battle for the 2019-2020. All until they make 10nm reality.
Of course, if AMD fails to catch up, nothing changes. Intel will slowly keep loosing server market.
Posted on Reply
#37
notb
TheGuruStudDo you have some sort of reality distortion field when looking at websites, so you can't read numbers? Here, let me simplify it for you:

Ok, ABSOLUTE worst case scenario (blender/cinebench), and we'll even use the guru3d link. Look at CPU+SoC power in wprime (101). Look at the increase from wprime to cinebench in the graph above (33). Add the difference. 101+33= what? SURE AS SHIT AIN'T 170! Typical loads are gonna be like 105-115.

Bye, ban yourself from using the internet.
So people believe in HWiNFO figures? Is this the reason of all this power draw misunderstanding?

Anyway, in guru3d test 2700X system pulled 199W in Cinebench, getting 1828 points.
8700K system pulled 150W getting 1402 points.

Now, you tell me, based on HWiNFO readouts, that the rest of the system draws around 55W under load.
That means 8700K itself used 95W (its TDP! ding ding ding!).
This also means 2700X itself used 144W (not exactly its TDP).

Moreover,
1802/144 = 12.7 [pts/W]
1402/95 = 14.8 [pts/W]
which makes the i7 quite a bit more efficient.

Do you agree with all that? :-)
Posted on Reply
#39
ShurikN
Well on one hand its a huge issue if they get stuck on 14 for 2 more years, AMD wll undoubtedly get a massive market share in all 3 major segments.
On the other side it's wccf, and I don't remember if their leaks have ever come remotely true.
Posted on Reply
#40
TheLostSwede
News Editor
Now, now ladies, please try to be civilised to one another, no need for this bickering and name calling.
Posted on Reply
#41
efikkan
notbThere's a slide missing. ;-)

"Intel client commercial" means CPUs put into OEM desktops.

DIY desktop processors for gamers/enthusiasts have a separate roadmap. If needed, Intel should be able to provide 10nm CPUs for enthusiast market (it's tiny).
It depends on what you mean by tiny. Yes, OEM volumes are much larger, but the OEM builds are mostly low-end CPUs with low margins, so in terms of profits the "enthusiast" and workstation markets are quite important.

It has been rumored for a while that Intel will be prioritizing server and ultra low voltage chips on 10nm, and if it's accurate that 10nm never will be widely deployed, then I'm fine with it as long as HEDT is included. Low-end and lower mid-range CPUs don't really need 10nm yet, so if the 10nm production volume will remain limited, it's better to focus on those chips that need the new node.

What remains unclear to me is what changes Comet Lake (and "Rocket Lake") will bring. Will this be another tweaked Skylake, or is it a backported Ice Lake/Sunny Cove?
Posted on Reply
#42
notb
efikkanIt depends on what you mean by tiny. Yes, OEM volumes are much larger, but the OEM builds are mostly low-end CPUs with low margins, so in terms of profits the "enthusiast" and workstation markets are quite important.
Every company will fight for a 1% revenue growth. That's what shareholders expect.
But this 1% has to make sense.
At the moment enthusiast segment likely is profitable - even if small compared to OEM.
If AMD forces the prices down, Intel won't be interested anymore. They won't fight for the profit margin that AMD has right now.
Intel makes a lot of stuff. They can easily enter new markets. They'll find a better investment.
It has been rumored for a while that Intel will be prioritizing server and ultra low voltage chips on 10nm, and if it's accurate that 10nm never will be widely deployed, then I'm fine with it as long as HEDT is included. Low-end and lower mid-range CPUs don't really need 10nm yet, so if the 10nm production volume will remain limited, it's better to focus on those chips that need the new node.
We really don't know what "limited" means - other than the fact that Intel simply can't replace all their products with 10nm successors.
It could turn out that Intel 10nm will outsell AMD 7nm anyway.

If AMD's market share grows, they'll be faced with the same problem.
Posted on Reply
#43
efikkan
notbWe really don't know what "limited" means - other than the fact that Intel simply can't replace all their products with 10nm successors.

It could turn out that Intel 10nm will outsell AMD 7nm anyway.

If AMD's market share grows, they'll be faced with the same problem.
Excellent point.
Also, Intel is pretty deeply committed to ship Ice Lake-SP, which is already postponed. Canceling it would have huge financial consequences for Intel, so making it even if it means eating up most of the 10nm capacity is probably the best idea, and the best use of "limited" 10nm production volume.
Posted on Reply
#44
voltage
Vayra86H is for Hot
K is for much Klock
F is for freaking avoid the ...ucker

Bottom line, not much changed, this is just 8th gen all over again with more cut down parts in the stack.

I'll see myself out
yawn...
Posted on Reply
#45
Nihilus
Sort of curious to what overclock that 9350kf could get.
Posted on Reply
#46
jmgbjr
ShurikNThat 9980HK will boost to 5GHz for about 0.5 of a second and then throttle.
.5 seconds before your battery dies
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Apr 25th, 2024 19:29 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts