Thursday, September 5th 2019

Intel Core i9-9900KS to be Available from October

Intel's panic response to the 3rd generation Ryzen processor series, the Core i9-9900KS, will be generally available in October. The company will extensively market it as the best processor money can buy for gaming, and the specs to support that claim are formidable - 8-core/16-thread, with an all-core Turbo Boost frequency of 5.00 GHz. Intel will also actively publicize the growing clamor against real-world boost frequencies of 3rd gen Ryzen processors falling short of what's advertised, as detailed in the slide below. "5 GHz means 5 GHz" could be a prominent catchphrase of the chip's marketing, highlighting the all-core boost clocks. This chip is based on the existing 14 nm++ "Coffee Lake Refresh" silicon, but is likely its topmost bin.

Intel didn't, however, specify the TDP or pricing of the processor. The TDP is bound to be higher than that of the i9-9900K, as it would take a lot more power to sustain 5.00 GHz across all 8 cores. Intel may also try to retake the $499 price-point. The company may time the launch of this chip to closely follow AMD's flagship Ryzen 9 3950X 16-core/32-thread processor launch, which is due later this month. Intel's performance numbers for the i9-9900KS focus squarely on gaming and applications relevant to home users or PC enthusiasts. The i9-9900KS ships in a similar-looking acrylic case as the i9-9900K, with "Special Edition" branding on the front face. The retail package continues to lack a cooling solution.
Source: Guru3D
Add your own comment

159 Comments on Intel Core i9-9900KS to be Available from October

#76
trparky
As long as the VRM setup is decent, which if you ask Hardware Unboxed, it is, the marketing name on the product is just that. A marketing name. All of those other names serve only to milk more money out of people who think that they need a really high-end motherboard. OK sure, you might want to get one of those really high-end boards if you plan on getting the Ryzen 9 3950X but if you plan on getting a Ryzen 5 3600X that Prime board will be more than capable of handling your needs.
Posted on Reply
#77
Steevo
Turmania, post: 4111295, member: 182201"
Used to be the cost of a system for AMD was a lot cheaper.but problematic memory pickings and even a mid range x570 now costs about 250 USD! Not to mention a small whining fan on those chips!which will break in 2-3 years max.I bought a gigabyte z390i and itx board for 160 the AMD equivalent x570 is 230! Where is the cost and system saving on that? Please explain.
You don't need X570, I know being an Intel person you are used to being forced to upgrade everything at once.... But.



X570 does nothing tangible beyond niche application, epeen, and using 30-40 more W of power. Perhaps take your blinders off?

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-9-3900x-tested-on-cheap-b350-motherboard/2.html
Posted on Reply
#78
Xmpere
So nobody knows?.... okay
Posted on Reply
#79
trparky
Steevo, post: 4111316, member: 19251"
You don't need X570
Yep, AMD is providing us far more value than Intel is. At this point, unless you absolutely need the best of the best performance that Intel claims to provide you're by far better off getting a cheap B450 board or one of the many still in-stock X470 boards. X570 really brings nothing to the table except for PCIe4 which for a majority of users it will make no difference in performance.
Posted on Reply
#80
Turmania
Steevo, post: 4111316, member: 19251"
You don't need X570, I know being an Intel person you are used to being forced to upgrade everything at once.... But.



X570 does nothing tangible beyond niche application, epeen, and using 30-40 more W of power. Perhaps take your blinders off?

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-9-3900x-tested-on-cheap-b350-motherboard/2.html
Such a shame a stated 65W CPU consumes more power and runs hotter than an ancient i9 9900k made in 14nm process.I guess there are many mislead or un-informed souls out there who are blinded to the naked truth.bottom line is there has been a huge scam and many fell into it. All the performance gain from an 2700x to a 3700x is about 10%. And this is on so much loved 7nm process.
Posted on Reply
#81
trparky
Turmania, post: 4111331, member: 182201"
runs hotter than an ancient i9 9900k
Wow, now you're really reaching. When the AMD provided in-box CPU cooler is more than capable of cooling their processors for 95% of users, you don't need to spend upwards of $75 to $150 more for a processor cooling system like you're forced to do when you buy any K-class Intel processor. That's where you save some serious cash!

The Intel fanboism that's coming off of @Turmania is seriously stinking up this thread. Go ahead, pay more money for that so-called "best of the best performance" from Intel; I don't care. Now that I look back on my 8700K purchase decision I now see that I made a big mistake.
Posted on Reply
#82
Darmok N Jalad
Turmania, post: 4111331, member: 182201"
Such a shame a stated 65W CPU consumes more power and runs hotter than an ancient i9 9900k made in 14nm process.I guess there are many mislead or un-informed souls out there who are blinded to the naked truth.bottom line is there has been a huge scam and many fell into it. All the performance gain from an 2700x to a 3700x is about 10%. And this is on so much loved 7nm process.
That’s not what I’m seeing in the graph below:
Posted on Reply
#83
Turmania
trparky, post: 4111337, member: 170376"
Wow, now you're really reaching. When the AMD provided in-box CPU cooler is more than capable of cooling their processors for 95% of users, you don't need to spend upwards of $75 to $150 more for a processor cooling system like you're forced to do when you buy any K-class Intel processor. That's where you save some serious cash!

The Intel fanboism that's coming off of @Turmania is seriously stinking up this thread. Go ahead, pay more money for that so-called "best of the best performance" from Intel; I don't care. Now that I look back on my 8700K purchase decision I now see that I made a big mistake.
You keep on saying that a lot. But this thread was about going to be newly introduced I9 9900KS. yet many uninformed or should I dare to say in more political term, Some mislead souls, complaining about power usage and or heat levels and dare to say mislead information about 95W TDP values. I just wanted to inform that a supposedy same core and same thread cpu from AMD which has a 65W rating is more power hungry and runs hotter, nevermind its made from newly 7nm process and or not reaching its rated clocks. I am not talking about myself but more for your average user Joe.

Darmok N Jalad, post: 4111344, member: 170588"
That’s not what I’m seeing in the graph below:

Posted on Reply
#84
Steevo
Turmania, post: 4111347, member: 182201"
You keep on saying that a lot. But this thread was about going to be newly introduced I9 9900KS. yet many uninformed or should I dare to say in more political term, Some mislead souls, complaining about power usage and or heat levels and dare to say mislead information about 95W TDP values. I just wanted to inform that a supposedy same core and same thread cpu from AMD which has a 65W rating is more power hungry and runs hotter, nevermind its made from newly 7nm process and or not reaching its rated clocks. I am not talking about myself but more for your average user Joe.
That is for a X570 board which provides PCIe4, where is the equivalent Intel product?

There is none....... why we must be comparing apples and oranges. If we compare like to like AMD uses less power, is cheaper, and offers the same performance. So...... Average Joe user would choose a B or X4xx series board and a 3700 and spend their savings on a better GPU.
Posted on Reply
#85
John Naylor
Why is doing any normal response to market conditions labeled as a "panic response" ?

When folks use nm, cores. whichlake and this and that technical jargon ... all I see is that they don't want to tak about performance.

If ya using PhotoShop for Photo Editing the only thing you concern yourself is this.... https://tpucdn.com/review/amd-ryzen-9-3900x/images/photoshop.png
If ya using Premiere for video editing the only thing you concern yourself with is this.... https://tpucdn.com/review/amd-ryzen-9-3900x/images/premiere-pro.png
If ya using Office Suites to get woirk done the only thing you concern yourself with is the differences (0.1 seconds) between the two are too small to be relevant
If ya using Brain Neuron Simulation the only thing you concern yourself with is this.... https://tpucdn.com/review/amd-ryzen-9-3900x/images/digicortex.png
If ya using Brain Neuron Simulation the only thing you concern yourself with is this ... https://tpucdn.com/review/amd-ryzen-9-3900x/images/relative-performance-games-2560-1440.png

If ya talking about nm, cores and codenames ... it's ony because you don't want to talk about the above. If I buy a tool, how many volts, amps , handle material, yada tada yada, the only thing that matters is which one finishes the job faster, what it costs me and how long before I gotta get a new one.
Posted on Reply
#86
GoldenX
Why is there no word on the TDP so close to launch?
Posted on Reply
#87
Steevo
John Naylor, post: 4111369, member: 156078"
Why is doing any normal response to market conditions labeled as a "panic response" ?
They don't have any new products, they are merely binning cores for a premium, which other companies already do, to lay claim to ground that doesn't matter to 99.9 percent of customers, with a chip that will undoubtedly have cooling issues for the majority of consumers who buy it for the epeen. It's the Prescott of today, aimed at users who don't understand GHz and IPC.
Posted on Reply
#88
kapone32
John Naylor, post: 4111369, member: 156078"
Why is doing any normal response to market conditions labeled as a "panic response" ?
Because one could glean (not saying correctly) that they are releasing this to take the Wind out of the Sails for the 3950X
Posted on Reply
#89
Turmania
Steevo, post: 4111368, member: 19251"
That is for a X570 board which provides PCIe4, where is the equivalent Intel product?

There is none....... why we must be comparing apples and oranges. If we compare like to like AMD uses less power, is cheaper, and offers the same performance. So...... Average Joe user would choose a B or X4xx series board and a 3700 and spend their savings on a better GPU.
Your avg.Joe would have no idea how to update the bios to run a new gen cpu he will have to take it to the service or buy an old cpu. In any case a lot more money and time lost nevermind the inconvenience caused.
Posted on Reply
#90
Steevo
Turmania, post: 4111380, member: 182201"
Your avg.Joe would have no idea how to update the bios to run a new gen cpu he will have to take it to the service or buy an old cpu. In any case a lot more money and time lost nevermind the inconvenience caused.
so the average Joe capable of making these decisions and building his own computer won't know how to update a bios but is somehow going to figure out how to cool a CPU and know about coolers for the Intel right.......

a lot of the board's support CPU less bios updates so I suppose asking someone to download or have firmware downloaded onto a USB and inserting a USB into a computer is beyond the scope of their intelligence but not building the machine fine-tuning tweaking overclocking.....the reality that you live in does not match the one that I've seen on these forums or experienced in real life.
Posted on Reply
#91
Turmania
Steevo, post: 4111390, member: 19251"
so the average Joe capable of making these decisions and building his own computer won't know how to update a bios but is somehow going to figure out how to cool a CPU and know about coolers for the Intel right.......

a lot of the board's support CPU less bios updates so I suppose asking someone to download or have firmware downloaded onto a USB and inserting a USB into a computer is beyond the scope of their intelligence but not building the machine fine-tuning tweaking overclocking.....the reality that you live in does not match the one that I've seen on these forums or experienced in real life.
that is why we call them avg. I hope you understand it.
Posted on Reply
#92
trparky
Turmania, post: 4111347, member: 182201"
You keep on saying that a lot. But this thread was about going to be newly introduced I9 9900KS. yet many uninformed or should I dare to say in more political term, Some mislead souls, complaining about power usage and or heat levels and dare to say mislead information about 95W TDP values. I just wanted to inform that a supposedy same core and same thread cpu from AMD which has a 65W rating is more power hungry and runs hotter, nevermind its made from newly 7nm process and or not reaching its rated clocks. I am not talking about myself but more for your average user Joe.
Oh, 30 Watts more. Big deal. You still pay more money for an Intel chip than if you go with an AMD chip since one won't need to buy a third-party CPU cooler that costs upwards of $150. That's money that one can either put towards a better GPU or just plain stuff into their pocket. Sure, go ahead and buy that 9900KS... the only damn way you're going to be able to keep that heat pump on a chip cool is if you go with exotic cooling. It's been said that even a 240mm radiator is barely able to keep a 9900K cool. Some of the benchmarks I've seen show temps as high as 80C which is way too damn hot, and that's with the fans ramped up.

All I hear is Intel this and Intel that from you, your Intel fanboyism is shining through here big time.
Posted on Reply
#93
Steevo
Turmania, post: 4111402, member: 182201"
that is why we call them avg. I hope you understand it.
the average Joe then would really be somebody who goes to Best buy and buys a cheap computer to play Farmville. The average user for the CPU in question wouldn't be the average Joe, they would know what they want, have a budget and buy a B or X4Xx board, X3800, and the best GPU they could afford.
Posted on Reply
#94
Turmania
As an Itx user, I'm more focused and or interested in power consumption and heat output figures. I'm looking at a ryzen 3700x with rated 65W TDP and a newly announced X570 chipset with it. 330USD and 250USD respectively. I check review sites and not only it does not compete with even an i7 9700k for around the same price in games but it uses more power and more heat. Considering I can get a z390 Itx MB for around 150 USD. It does not even make financial sense.I just have to dish extra 30 USD on a cpu cooler which will match AMD offering and there are some cases that even boxed AMD coolers won't fit.so they have to as well. Then I check more into the review what do I see? Boost not boosting accordingly to the product specs and tons of software and bios issues to go with it.and all this for what? For around 10% more performance and power efficiency gain from one gen older 2700xband this is all with much hyped 7nm process.If I was a serious AMD fan I would make my feelings known to the company.I won't even bother with the GPU side. 2060super consumes less power than rx5700. 2070super consumes less power than rx5700xt.and again 7nm process tech....so you can call me Intel fanboy or whatever but it wont change the facts...
Posted on Reply
#95
trparky
You do realize that if it weren't for AMD lighting a fire under Intel's ass that we'd still be sitting here with the same old warmed-over quad-cores that we've had for decades. And not only that but if it weren't AMD nipping at nVidia's heels there wouldn't be anything to stop nVidia from charging us all a small mint to buy one of their GPUs. Face it, if it weren't for AMD we'd all be paying a hell of a lot more for a hell of a lot less.

With that being said, my next build in a year or two will be an all AMD build simply because I cannot condone giving more money to those greedy bastards that are Intel and nVidia.
Posted on Reply
#96
Turmania
Competition is good I do hope nvdia as well will join and heat up the cpu market just like Intel with GPU. But more importantly the competitors has to have ethics and bound to it. No good when giving false statements on TDP and boost clocks. And expect to get away with it.
Posted on Reply
#97
Steevo
Turmania, post: 4111428, member: 182201"
As an Itx user, I'm more focused and or interested in power consumption and heat output figures. I'm looking at a ryzen 3700x with rated 65W TDP and a newly announced X570 chipset with it. 330USD and 250USD respectively. I check review sites and not only it does not compete with even an i7 9700k for around the same price in games but it uses more power and more heat. Considering I can get a z390 Itx MB for around 150 USD. It does not even make financial sense.I just have to dish extra 30 USD on a cpu cooler which will match AMD offering and there are some cases that even boxed AMD coolers won't fit.so they have to as well. Then I check more into the review what do I see? Boost not boosting accordingly to the product specs and tons of software and bios issues to go with it.and all this for what? For around 10% more performance and power efficiency gain from one gen older 2700xband this is all with much hyped 7nm process.If I was a serious AMD fan I would make my feelings known to the company.I won't even bother with the GPU side. 2060super consumes less power than rx5700. 2070super consumes less power than rx5700xt.and again 7nm process tech....so you can call me Intel fanboy or whatever but it wont change the facts...
it seems like you have your finger firmly on the pulse of comparing apples and oranges good luck with that.
Posted on Reply
#98
Turmania
Steevo, post: 4111442, member: 19251"
it seems like you have your finger firmly on the pulse of comparing apples and oranges good luck with that.
please explain
Posted on Reply
#99
trparky
Turmania, post: 4111440, member: 182201"
No good when giving false statements on TDP and boost clocks.
And AMD has admitted that there is indeed an issue with boost clocks and that there is a fix on the way.
Posted on Reply
#100
danbert2000
Turmania, post: 4111428, member: 182201"
As an Itx user, I'm more focused and or interested in power consumption and heat output figures. I'm looking at a ryzen 3700x with rated 65W TDP and a newly announced X570 chipset with it. 330USD and 250USD respectively. I check review sites and not only it does not compete with even an i7 9700k for around the same price in games but it uses more power and more heat. Considering I can get a z390 Itx MB for around 150 USD. It does not even make financial sense.I just have to dish extra 30 USD on a cpu cooler which will match AMD offering and there are some cases that even boxed AMD coolers won't fit.so they have to as well. Then I check more into the review what do I see? Boost not boosting accordingly to the product specs and tons of software and bios issues to go with it.and all this for what? For around 10% more performance and power efficiency gain from one gen older 2700xband this is all with much hyped 7nm process.If I was a serious AMD fan I would make my feelings known to the company.I won't even bother with the GPU side. 2060super consumes less power than rx5700. 2070super consumes less power than rx5700xt.and again 7nm process tech....so you can call me Intel fanboy or whatever but it wont change the facts...
x570 for ITX is pointless. And the 3700x will definitely still use less power than a 9700k. Some of those figures upthread were total system power draw, the CPU specific power draw tops off around 90-100 W.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment