Friday, September 20th 2019

New Information on Intel's Upcoming i9-9900KS Processor Outed - 127 W TDP

by
Raevenlord
 Discuss (87 Comments)
Intel's upcoming 5 GHz-on-all-cores Core i9-9900KS will certainly be a beast of a processor for the company - in more ways than one. The 8-core, 16-thread 5 5 GHz all-core turbo CPU will be Intel's best-performing consumer CPU for a while. The steps taken to ensure that have been the only ones Intel could do with their current CPU design and fabrication process - increase the TDP and improve all-core boost frequency, which should allow the CPU to perform incredibly well in peak performance.

The question that remains, of course, is how long the CPU will actually be able to keep its 5.0 GHz all-core frequency when it's engaged. The 127 W TDP as outed by an ASUS BIOS is a monstrous amount for an 8-core CPU, and I don't envy the heatsinks that will have to keep it in check. All in all, this seems to be nothing more than a CPU binned for Intel's purposes of becoming the best CPU for gaming and "home user relevant applications".
Source: Tom's Hardware

Related News

Add your own comment

87 Comments on New Information on Intel's Upcoming i9-9900KS Processor Outed - 127 W TDP

#26
the54thvoid
Intoxicated Moderator
robalNo amount of ridicule will change the fact that it will the fastest CPU for gaming.
Whether buying one is a sane thing to do is another question...
No doubt the fastest. But I think people here are having a little fun at Chipzilla's expense. AMD got it for their hideously power hungry FX 5Ghz CPUs. And this 9900 is not anywhere near as silly but it highlights a certain lack of creativity. There is no doubt Intel don't feel comfortable about their superior product anymore. And that's a good thing.
Posted on Reply
#27
Arc1t3ct
So basicaly a cherry picked 9900K with a decent factory overclock and the best gaming performance on the market right now. If the price is right, it's definitely worth considering. The TDP is a non issue IMO.
Posted on Reply
#28
Vayra86
So basically, for gaming, this CPU is the min-max sledgehammer for that last 1% on FPS you MIGHT be missing...sometimes.

Intel's last bastion on MSDT, its a pretty small one indeed. Anyone with less than 2x the purchase price in GPU hardware of this CPU, need not apply.

The 8086k is a thing of beauty compared to this one... at least that guy was notably more efficient. This KS is just on more steroids.
Posted on Reply
#29
Animalpak
Vayra86The 8086k is a thing of beauty compared to this one... at least that guy was notably more efficient. This KS is just on more steroids.
I read same words of complaining, whining and bitching about that processor ( like this 9900KS too ) over and over again when was about to be launched...


And still i will read the same complaints when intel will release its next flagship processor.
Posted on Reply
#30
Aerpoweron
My 9900K draws 240W when i do my scientific calculations. That is 2.5 times more then the official TDP.

If i scale that to the 9900KS, then it should draw 317W. Assuming that the Mainboard vendors still ignore the Intel specs of the boost times, as they do now.

Does anyone know, if Intel has significantly improved the heat transfer out of the CPU-Die? So this CPU is might be an upgrade from my 9900K when intel has done that.
Posted on Reply
#31
trparky
AerpoweronDoes anyone know, if Intel has significantly improved the heat transfer out of the CPU-Die?
Doubt it.
Posted on Reply
#32
Paganstomp

Soooo... turn off half the cores while gaming and use full cores while benchmarking with LN2 then? IDK. It is getting colder here in NY with winter on the way. Could use a new space heater. :D
Posted on Reply
#33
TheoneandonlyMrK
AerpoweronMy 9900K draws 240W when i do my scientific calculations. That is 2.5 times more then the official TDP.

If i scale that to the 9900KS, then it should draw 317W. Assuming that the Mainboard vendors still ignore the Intel specs of the boost times, as they do now.

Does anyone know, if Intel has significantly improved the heat transfer out of the CPU-Die? So this CPU is might be an upgrade from my 9900K when intel has done that.
Makes the 127watt Tdp a joke, i mean to me it is acceptable that the 9900k had a base clock tdp noted but exceeded it while boosting.

This however is total balls, selling a cpu on the caveat that it Will boost to 5ghz on all cores almost all the time yet claiming it's Tdp is that of it at 4ghz ,is ridiculous, how many are ever going to see that Tdp, and it just makes buying a cooler for it less clear for those not in the know.

Anyone buying this With a brain wont put a 130 watt cooler on it.
Posted on Reply
#34
Rahmat Sofyan
another 14nm+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ product . .

drunklake ?
Posted on Reply
#35
Keullo-e
S.T.A.R.S.
theoneandonlymrkMakes the 127watt Tdp a joke, i mean to me it is acceptable that the 9900k had a base clock tdp noted but exceeded it while boosting.

This however is total balls, selling a cpu on the caveat that it Will boost to 5ghz on all cores almost all the time yet claiming it's Tdp is that of it at 4ghz ,is ridiculous, how many are ever going to see that Tdp, and it just makes buying a cooler for it less clear for those not in the know.

Anyone buying this With a brain wont put a 130 watt cooler on it.
Custom loop would be my weapon of choice with this.
Posted on Reply
#36
Aerpoweron
Chloe PriceCustom loop would be my weapon of choice with this.
Well, only if Intel has improved the heat transfer out of the Die. Der 8auer told me 230W to 240W is the maximum the Die can transfer. Even i can confirm that, when i have a power draw of 240W, the core runs at 110°C. With a 320mm AIO from Corsair.
Posted on Reply
#37
Keullo-e
S.T.A.R.S.
AerpoweronWell, only if Intel has improved the heat transfer out of the Die. Der 8auer told me 230W to 240W is the maximum the Die can transfer. Even i can confirm that, when i have a power draw of 240W, the core runs at 110°C. With a 320mm AIO from Corsair.
How the hell it can run at 110C when it has tjmax of 100C, then it should throttle?
Posted on Reply
#38
Vario
Vayra86So basically, for gaming, this CPU is the min-max sledgehammer for that last 1% on FPS you MIGHT be missing...sometimes.

Intel's last bastion on MSDT, its a pretty small one indeed. Anyone with less than 2x the purchase price in GPU hardware of this CPU, need not apply.

The 8086k is a thing of beauty compared to this one... at least that guy was notably more efficient. This KS is just on more steroids.
IIRC, pre 8086K, almost all the 8700Ks overclocked well then they started cannibalizing high bin 8700K for the 8086K.
Posted on Reply
#39
Vayra86
AnimalpakI read same words of complaining, whining and bitching about that processor ( like this 9900KS too ) over and over again when was about to be launched...


And still i will read the same complaints when intel will release its next flagship processor.
Naturally, what else did you expect? People applauding that Intel can OC from the factory and do some binning? I mean... come on. These are cheap, easy halo products that add nothing to the product stack whatsoever in a larger sense. They have no future and only serve a 'premium' segment nobody truly needs.

But note, we never saw this on any of the 'normal' top end MSDT parts before Intel lost the plot. We also don't see the whining when it comes to AMD's top end Ryzen. Find the differences...

In fact, the whining coincides quite precisely with Kaby Lake, which turned out to run hot, and run obsolete faster than we could enjoy it proper. But lo and behold, Intel did manage to add another half dozen pluses behind their 14nm node...
Posted on Reply
#40
Keullo-e
S.T.A.R.S.
Vayra86Naturally, what else did you expect? People applauding that Intel can OC from the factory and do some binning? I mean... come on. These are cheap, easy halo products that add nothing to the product stack whatsoever in a larger sense. They have no future and only serve a 'premium' segment nobody truly needs.

But note, we never saw this on any of the 'normal' top end MSDT parts before Intel lost the plot. We also don't see the whining when it comes to AMD's top end Ryzen. Find the differences...

In fact, the whining coincides quite precisely with Kaby Lake, which turned out to run hot, and run obsolete faster than we could enjoy it proper. But lo and behold, Intel did manage to add another half dozen pluses behind their 14nm node...
I liked Kaby Lake, since they OC'd much better than Skylake. 7600K @ 4.7 and 7700K @ 5.1 with an Alphacool AIO.
Posted on Reply
#41
trog100
Chloe PriceHow the hell it can run at 110C when it has tjmax of 100C, then it should throttle?
they increased it to 115 C.. :)

trog
Posted on Reply
#42
Keullo-e
S.T.A.R.S.
trog100they increased it to 115 C.. :)

trog
In ARK it says that the tjunction of 9900K is 100C.
Posted on Reply
#43
trog100
Chloe PriceIn ARK it says that the tjunction of 9900K is 100C.
i think its a motherboard thing.. intel allowed the option..

trog
Posted on Reply
#44
trparky
And here I start sweating bullets when temperatures reach 80 to 85c. If I saw my chip running at 110 to 115c I'd be seriously freaking out.
Posted on Reply
#45
Keullo-e
S.T.A.R.S.
trog100i think its a motherboard thing.. intel allowed the option..

trog
Seems that you're correct, weird that they even increased that.
Posted on Reply
#46
zlobby
Tomgang127 watt for 8 cores and knowing intel this is just for the base clock of 4 GHz, so for 5 GHz all core this CPU is properly having a TDP of around 200 watt give or take a bit. Yawn nothing new here. Its just a binned I9 9900K with a factory overclock.

I aint falling for this one intel either.
200W sounds like a too conservative number.
Posted on Reply
#47
Tomorrow
9900K(F) baseclock is 3.6Ghz @ 95W
9900KS baseclock is 4.0Ghz @ 127W

That means +400Mhz = +32W
So if they would disclose allcore boost TDP it would be a 207W TDP CPU (2x400Mhz+200Mhz = 32W+32W+16W)
And that's a conservative estimate. The closer to 5Ghz the further the CPU is running out of it's efficiency curve thus TDP is even higher. Linear calculation gives 207W.
I would not be suprised if the real number would be 250W+
Posted on Reply
#48
Aerpoweron
Chloe PriceHow the hell it can run at 110C when it has tjmax of 100C, then it should throttle?
That's interesting, i just checked the intel ark. And it states it has a Tj of 100°C. But i am sure i saw a few weeks ago that it was 115°C
Tomorrow9900K(F) baseclock is 3.6Ghz @ 95W
9900KS baseclock is 4.0Ghz @ 127W

That means +400Mhz = +32W
So if they would disclose allcore boost TDP it would be a 207W TDP CPU (2x400Mhz+200Mhz = 32W+32W+16W)
And that's a conservative estimate. The closer to 5Ghz the further the CPU is running out of it's efficiency curve thus TDP is even higher. Linear calculation gives 207W.
I would not be suprised if the real number would be 250W+
And the 9900K can only handle 230 to 240W in heat transfer out of the Die. So until Intel has made the Die thinner, it will heat up like crazy. Thinking they will increase the Tj to 125°C
Posted on Reply
#49
trparky
AerpoweronThinking they will increase the Tj to 125°C
Yikes. :fear:
Posted on Reply
#50
trog100
looking how hot my under-volted 9900k gets if i run it at 5 g with all cores/threads firing i just dont see how intel can pull off 5 g all cores out of the box..

i will believe it when i see it.. he he..

as a gaming cpu i run mine at 5 g with HT off... 8 real cores is plenty for gaming..

trog
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Apr 25th, 2024 14:52 EDT change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts