Friday, September 27th 2019

Intel Core i9-9900KS to Cost around $600

Australian e-tailer MWave has put up their product page for the Intel Core i9-9900KS processor that Intel announced earlier this year, but with no actual product in sight. The merchant's listing is showing an AUD 899 price for SKU BX80684I99900KS, which converts to USD 605. The new Intel processor, is basically a binned eight-core Coffee Lake Core i9-9900K, which runs at 4.0 GHz base clock (up by 400 MHz) and 5.0 GHz all-core Turbo (300 MHz increase). Single-core maximum Turbo remains at 5.0 GHz (just like on the Core i9-9900K).

Just earlier this week, ASUS posted a BIOS update note, mentioning in it that the Core i9-9900KS will have a 127 W TDP. It looks like Intel can definitely defend the gaming performance crown with the Core i9-9900KS, mostly thanks to its high clock speeds. However, since most of the improvements are in multi-core workload boost clocks, and single-threaded clocks are identical to 9900K, I'm having some doubts whether the processor can really make any substantial difference — it's definitely not going to beat the $100 cheaper Ryzen 9 3900X in Cinebench, and the 127 W TDP limit might mean that the 5.0 GHz all-core Boost will end up being active only for a short amount of time.
Add your own comment

73 Comments on Intel Core i9-9900KS to Cost around $600

#1
Ferrum Master
single-threaded clocks are identical to 9900KS
You mean 9900K?
Posted on Reply
#2
Tomgang
So bacisly 100 grand over i9 9900K for a few 100 ekstra MHz on a binned factory overclock i9 9900K.

Thanks but no thanks.
Posted on Reply
#3
dont whant to set it"'
Worth it under a high perf. custom water-cooled loop in a top spec new build I'd say.
Posted on Reply
#4
lynx29
:roll: oh intel, you make me so happy I went Ryzen recently.
Posted on Reply
#5
W1zzard
Ferrum Master, post: 4123390, member: 90058"
You mean 9900K?
Fixed, thanks
Posted on Reply
#6
ratirt
Intel is scrambling now. I think that is good. Intel show us what you are made of and get something new going.
Posted on Reply
#7
Vayra86
Disgusting price point & product.
Posted on Reply
#8
Turmania
Both Intel and AMD seems to be in a race to shoot their own foot. Their answer for more performance is increase the power consumption and price.
Posted on Reply
#9
notb
Tomgang, post: 4123391, member: 154607"
So bacisly 100 grand over i9 9900K for a few 100 ekstra MHz on a binned factory overclock i9 9900K.

Thanks but no thanks.
And yet, there clearly is some demand for such product at similar price:
https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/products/9900k50g
At Silicon Lottery you'll have to pay $580 for a 9900K that overclocks to 5.0GHz.

Intel asks $25-ish more, but for that we get (compared to SL):
- global availability,
- Intel warranty compliant with local law,
- a decent chance that the CPU will OC even higher.

When you buy a 5GHz 9900K from SL, that's very likely all that it can give. They sell 5.1GHz models for a lot more.

Moreover, how exactly is that different from what AMD has been doing?
3800X is basically a "binned factory overclocked" 3700X.
+300MHz base, +100MHz boost. AMD asks $70 for that.
Posted on Reply
#10
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
Vayra86, post: 4123436, member: 152404"
Disgusting price point & product.
In this day and age, I would not spend $600 USD on an 8c part.
Posted on Reply
#11
Arc1t3ct
It's a bit higher than what i was expecting to be honest but still very reasonable for what it is. I wonder what the percentage of high end gamers is, compared to content creators, within the PC desktop market.
Posted on Reply
#12
Crackong
$100 over standard 9900k.
That's a bit too much for the 2 minutes "Go in to the BIOS -> put MCE on" operation.
Posted on Reply
#13
PanicLake
Arc1t3ct, post: 4123452, member: 190440"
It's a bit higher than what i was expecting to be honest but still very reasonable for what it is. I wonder what the percentage of high end gamers is, compared to content creators, within the PC desktop market.
Reasonable for what it is?
- Recycled technology
- Still 8 core
- High price compared to competition
- Still has security issues that haven't been fixed
- other things that at the moment doesn't come to mind.
Posted on Reply
#14
ratirt
notb, post: 4123442, member: 165619"
And yet, there clearly is some demand for such product at similar price:
https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/products/9900k50g
At Silicon Lottery you'll have to pay $580 for a 9900K that overclocks to 5.0GHz.

Intel asks $25-ish more, but for that we get (compared to SL):
- global availability,
- Intel warranty compliant with local law,
- a decent chance that the CPU will OC even higher.

When you buy a 5GHz 9900K from SL, that's very likely all that it can give. They sell 5.1GHz models for a lot more.

Moreover, how exactly is that different from what AMD has been doing?
3800X is basically a "binned factory overclocked" 3700X.
+300MHz base, +100MHz boost. AMD asks $70 for that.
AMD doesn't call it the best? There are better models out there from AMD's. 3800x doesn't cost $600+. AMD doesn't advertise 3800x as special or premium (KS is advertised like that) instead it is just a regular processor lineup in the AMD's portfolio.
These are from the top of my head I could think of as of now. I'm sure there is more.
Posted on Reply
#15
fynxer
notb, post: 4123442, member: 165619"
And yet, there clearly is some demand for such product at similar price:
https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/products/9900k50g
At Silicon Lottery you'll have to pay $580 for a 9900K that overclocks to 5.0GHz.

Intel asks $25-ish more, but for that we get (compared to SL):
- global availability,
- Intel warranty compliant with local law,
- a decent chance that the CPU will OC even higher.

When you buy a 5GHz 9900K from SL, that's very likely all that it can give. They sell 5.1GHz models for a lot more.

Moreover, how exactly is that different from what AMD has been doing?
3800X is basically a "binned factory overclocked" 3700X.
+300MHz base, +100MHz boost. AMD asks $70 for that.
What I see is that it is Silicon Lottery that will be suffering. The chance for them to find 9900K 5GHz+ in the future will drop significantly since Intel will remove them in production.

There is also a significant lower chance in the future for an ordinary customer to get lucky and get an 9900K 5GHz+ unless he pays +$100 for the 9900KS.

Intel has not only done this to compete with AMD, they also wanted to prevent Silicon Lottery and ordinary buyers of 9900K to get more value than that they paid for.
Posted on Reply
#16
Arc1t3ct
PanicLake, post: 4123456, member: 188909"
Reasonable for what it is?
- Recycled technology
- Still 8 core
- High price compared to competition
- Still has security issues that haven't been fixed
- other things that at the moment doesn't come to mind.
I see this as a gaming specific component, so...

- Recycled technology: How? It's just a new addition to the current lineup
- Still 8 core: It's more than enough for gaming
- High price compared to competition: What competition? The 9900K? Amd can't compete with either in gaming
- Still has security issues that haven't been fixed: Yep, Just like all other Intel CPUs
- other things that at the moment doesn't come to mind.: There are MANY but NONE related to this part's intended market. Gaming...
Posted on Reply
#17
trog100
i dont think intel care if people buy this thing or not.. they simple want to reinforce their claim that they have the worlds fastest gaming cpu..

trog
Posted on Reply
#18
ratirt
trog100, post: 4123473, member: 21545"
i dont think intel care if people buy this thing or not.. they simple want to reinforce their claim that they have the worlds fastest gaming cpu..

trog
Or both. Squeeze a bit more cash and claim the fastest gaming CPU in the world. It all kinda goes together.
Posted on Reply
#19
PanicLake
Arc1t3ct, post: 4123469, member: 190440"
I see this as a gaming specific component, so...

- Recycled technology: How? It's just a new addition to the current lineup
- Still 8 core: It's more than enough for gaming
- High price compared to competition: What competition? The 9900K? Amd can't compete with either in gaming
- Still has security issues that haven't been fixed: Yep, Just like all other Intel CPUs
- other things that at the moment doesn't come to mind.: There are MANY but NONE related to this part's intended market. Gaming...
Gaming differences are so marginal that all your counterpoints are just blatant fanboyism...
In a blind test, I'll assure that you and many other won't be able to distinguish 9900k from 3900x while playing games.
Posted on Reply
#20
Kokotas
So much for AMD finally bringing competitive products with competitive prices to the table. One would think that Intel would at least try to hit back by lowering their prices but apparently they choose to deny that AMD poses any threat by increasing them instead. Had it been a $500 price tag, I would have gotten this in a heartbeat but now it just makes no sense.
Posted on Reply
#21
yakk
E for effort & price.
Posted on Reply
#22
kapone32
This kind of makes sense if you are moving up from an I5. If I was going to do a build I would check to see if this brings down the price of the 9900K if not then there is no reason at all to get this in my opinion. I am confident that this will be in the $800 range in Canada placing it $50 more than the 3900X (which you can find any of ). With this release it shows how desperate Intel is now to take back the perception of top performer. I want to definitely see reviews of this vs the 9900K.
Posted on Reply
#23
ratirt
Kokotas, post: 4123482, member: 190825"
So much for AMD finally bringing competitive products with competitive prices to the table. One would think that Intel would at least try to hit back by lowering their prices but apparently they choose to deny that AMD poses any threat by increasing them instead. Had it been a $500 price tag, I would have gotten this in a heartbeat but now it just makes no sense.
they cant lower the price because if they had done that they would lose money. Remember, the 9900 are monolithic. These chips don't use chiplets like AMD does. Making one requires more cash and there are way more flaws in the production. (the bigger the chip more faulty ones you get) Even though the 14++++ (not sure how many + now) is matured now it is still a huge chip.
Besides you are looking at this the wrong way. If Intel didn't feel threatened by AMD, Intel wouldn't release KS version of 9900K. Gamin is a marketing scheme to attract customers since this is the only area where Intel is better than AMD. Although by a tiny bit. What Intel can do now is to exploit this advantage, even though small, is the only thing Intel can do at the moment and Intel does it. What else is there aside that marginal gaming advantage?
Posted on Reply
#24
laszlo
no matter how expensive is they'll sell them very fast for sure.
Posted on Reply
#25
ratirt
laszlo, post: 4123493, member: 6256"
no matter how expensive is they'll sell them very fast for sure.
With the number they will produce for sure :) meaning small number of KS processors.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment