Sunday, May 26th 2019

Intel Pushes the Panic Button with Core i9-9900KS

With 7 nm AMD Ryzen 3000 processor family expected to make landfall early-July, and "Ice Lake" nowhere in sight, a panicked Intel announced the development of the Core i9-9900KS 8-core/16-thread LGA1151 processor. Based on the 14 nm "Coffee Lake Refresh" silicon, this processor has a base-frequency of 4.00 GHz, up from 3.60 GHz of the original; and an all-core Turbo Boost frequency of 5.00 GHz, identical to the original i9-9900K, which has its max-turbo set at 5.00 GHZ, too. A revamped Turbo Boost algorithm is expected to yield significant gains in multi-core performance. The company didn't reveal TDP, pricing, or availability.
Add your own comment

170 Comments on Intel Pushes the Panic Button with Core i9-9900KS

#1
lynx29
Nah, if they were pushing the panic button they would lower prices.
Posted on Reply
#2
R-T-B
lynx29, post: 4054601, member: 153071"
Nah, if they were pushing the panic button they would lower prices.
Pretty much. That, and words like "panic" bug me because they pander to sensationalism rather than good journalism (outside of editorials anyhow). But meh, the modern web has lower standards I think.

As I recently told w1zzard, it bugs me, but I totally get why he has editors doing it. Adapt or die, as they say.
Posted on Reply
#3
R0H1T
Intel doesn't lower prices, the last time they did was just around the time Dell & others were getting dollar bill kickbacks!

What they do is kill the SKU instead.
Posted on Reply
#4
Wavetrex
12c vs 8c and slightly higher IPC, there's just no competition.
They can push clocks to the moon, it will still lose.

GG Intel.
Posted on Reply
#5
randomUser
They are most likely buying back their CPU binned for 5GHz by siliconlottery and reselling it worldwide instead of just USA.

Surely 5GHz all core out of the box very nice. My 9900k can't handle 5GHz even at 1.36vCore.
Posted on Reply
#6
Zubasa
Wavetrex, post: 4054622, member: 182738"
12c vs 8c and slightly higher IPC, there's just no competition.
They can push clocks to the moon, it will still lose.

GG Intel.
Doesn't matter, there will still me plenty of people who insist Intel is more stable or more security etc.:roll:
FYI Intel is still milking record profits.
This chip is not even a penny cheaper.
Posted on Reply
#7
GoldenX
lynx29, post: 4054601, member: 153071"
Nah, if they were pushing the panic button they would lower prices.
*gasp* How could you say that!
Posted on Reply
#8
Wavetrex
Zubasa, post: 4054631, member: 30988"
FYI Intel is still milking record profits.
They can milk all they want I couldn't care less.

What's important is that soon there will be a real option.
1800X and 2700X were good, but as Lisa Su said, it wasn't good enough, they still lost the mainstream performance competition.

And as a personal note , going from 6c to 8c wasn't a good enough option for me. Now with 12, the story changes. And at that price it's a no brainer !
(Yes I know there's HEDT etc. with 10+, but way too expensive overall).
Posted on Reply
#9
dicktracy
A slight clock bump on the same product is hardly a panic... and for Intel users, Zen 2 would be a side-grade at best for gaming. I'm still sitting here waiting for something to blow away those ancient Skylake cores out of the water but Zen 2 doesn't look like that candidate and desktop Ice Lake is delayed LMAO. All in all, there is still no big performance leap for CPUs in 2019.
Posted on Reply
#10
R0H1T
Don't expect anything major from ICL either, the next 10% "IPC" lift from Intel will be due to the patched KBL, CFL systems vs hardware mitigation on ICL or TGL.
Posted on Reply
#11
chaosmassive
lynx29, post: 4054601, member: 153071"
Nah, if they were pushing the panic button they would lower prices.
lowering price is sign of weakness, lack of confidence in their product, and its the last thing they want to do
Posted on Reply
#12
lexluthermiester
I'm going to have to agree with the above comments, this is not Intel pressing the "panic" button. This is them recognizing AMD has something good that will give them solid competition and responding with a bit of a sweet CPU. It would be sweeter to reduce the pricing as well..

chaosmassive, post: 4054681, member: 159641"
lowering price is sign of weakness, lack of confidence in their product, and its the last thing they want to do
No, it would be simply acknowledging solid competition.
Posted on Reply
#13
Nkd
lol 200w tdp? Intel already runs around their TDP number, which is only the base clock. I think 9900k standard runs way above its rated TDP on all core turbo. I am sure fanboys will just hide behind their fantasy TDP number lol. Ryzen 9 3900x is day one purchase for me! Sold my 9900k in anticipation few weeks ago.
Posted on Reply
#14
cucker tarlson
They're selling a higher sku for a higher price.Tell me when there's something interesting e.g. an actual price cut.
Btw this news editor is pretty clickbaity I noticed.
Posted on Reply
#15
Nkd
dicktracy, post: 4054643, member: 173119"
A slight clock bump on the same product is hardly a panic... and for Intel users, Zen 2 would be a side-grade at best for gaming. I'm still sitting here waiting for something to blow away those ancient Skylake cores out of the water but Zen 2 doesn't look like that candidate and desktop Ice Lake is delayed LMAO. All in all, there is still no big performance leap for CPUs in 2019.
really? 12 core at less power to match IPC and kick ass in productivity is not enough? While AMD brings you more core 15% IPC lift in 2 years, dont tell me you think that is nothing while intel sat on its ass. Zen 2 doesnt look like a candidate to you? Yea 4 more cores than competition for same price is nothing I guess. Atleast thank AMD for bringing some competition and giving intel a run

Wavetrex, post: 4054622, member: 182738"
12c vs 8c and slightly higher IPC, there's just no competition.
They can push clocks to the moon, it will still lose.

GG Intel.
pentium 4
Posted on Reply
#16
champsilva
Explain me how a company who is setting record after records, keeping the price sky rocking is pushing the panic button?

imo, intel should set $380 for 9900K, would be a better deal than 9900KS.
Posted on Reply
#17
lexluthermiester
Nkd, post: 4054693, member: 42675"
lol 200w tdp?
That is an assumption and not a great one. Far more likely to be sub-150W TDP.
Posted on Reply
#18
cucker tarlson
Nkd, post: 4054693, member: 42675"
lol 200w tdp? Intel already runs around their TDP number, which is only the base clock. I think 9900k standard runs way above its rated TDP on all core turbo. I am sure fanboys will just hide behind their fantasy TDP number lol. Ryzen 9 3900x is day one purchase for me! Sold my 9900k in anticipation few weeks ago.
65w 2700 draws 50w idle,80w single threaded and 140w multithreaded.that's 2.15x of what's advertised.
Posted on Reply
#19
lexluthermiester
Nkd, post: 4054693, member: 42675"
Ryzen 9 3900x is day one purchase for me! Sold my 9900k in anticipation few weeks ago.
Ok, that's just silly. You sold a solid performer for a CPU that is an unknown performer? Granted we all know it's going to be competitive, but how do you know that you didn't loose out? Risky gamble IMO.
Posted on Reply
#20
Mussels
Moderprator
The TDP on this vs the 65W 3700x should be hilariously bad
Posted on Reply
#21
lexluthermiester
Mussels, post: 4054711, member: 1746"
The TDP on this vs the 65W 3700x should be hilariously bad
True. Even with an OC the 3700X should run cooler.
Posted on Reply
#22
R0H1T
cucker tarlson, post: 4054709, member: 173472"
65w 2700 draws 50w idle,80w single threaded and 140w multithreaded.that's 2.15x of what's advertised.
140W for just the CPU, non AVX workload? I'm sure you have the data for that :rolleyes:
Posted on Reply
#23
cucker tarlson
R0H1T, post: 4054725, member: 131092"
140W for just the CPU, non AVX workload? I'm sure you have the data for that :rolleyes:
Tpu review
9900k and 2700x have three same power draw except for single threaded where 9900k draws noticeably less
Posted on Reply
#24
Xzibit


Tom's Hardware
the Core i9-9900K gets super hot faced with Prime95 and AVX instructions (205W stock, 250W overclocked), exceeding the specified TDP.

We measured 137W (232W) during the Cinebench test, and we topped 145W (241W overclocked) under the larger Blender workload. We even pushed past 120W (198W overclocked) with various CAD plug-ins for Creo and SolidWorks.
Posted on Reply
#25
R0H1T
So you don't know what you're talking about :confused:
cucker tarlson, post: 4054727, member: 173472"
Tpu review
9900k and 2700x have three same power draw except for single threaded where 9900k draws noticeably less
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment