• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Intel Readies Energy-efficient 35-Watt Core i9-9900T Processor

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
46,283 (7.69/day)
Location
Hyderabad, India
System Name RBMK-1000
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5700G
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix B450-E Gaming
Cooling DeepCool Gammax L240 V2
Memory 2x 8GB G.Skill Sniper X
Video Card(s) Palit GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER GameRock
Storage Western Digital Black NVMe 512GB
Display(s) BenQ 1440p 60 Hz 27-inch
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) ASUS SupremeFX S1220A
Power Supply Cooler Master MWE Gold 650W
Mouse ASUS ROG Strix Impact
Keyboard Gamdias Hermes E2
Software Windows 11 Pro
Intel succeeded in bringing down the TDP of its 8-core/16-thread "Coffee Lake-Refresh" silicon all the way down to a staggering 35 W, from its currently rated 95 W, which in real-world usage easily exceeds 110 W, given Turbo Boost, and other performance enhancements enabled by DIY motherboards. The new Core i9-9900T achieves its TDP with a combination of significantly lower clock-speeds, and an aggressive on-die power-management system. Its nominal-clock is down to 1.70 GHz from 3.60 GHz of the original i9-9900K, while 1~2 core Turbo Boost frequency is down to 3.80 GHz from 5.00 GHz of the original. The all-core Turbo clock-speed could be as low as 3.30 GHz. Intel hasn't tinkered with the L3 cache amount, which is still set at 16 MB, and the UHD 630 iGPU retains its EU count and clock-speeds. The chip features its 4-character product code of QQC0.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 

hat

Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
21,731 (3.43/day)
Location
Ohio
System Name Starlifter :: Dragonfly
Processor i7 2600k 4.4GHz :: i5 10400
Motherboard ASUS P8P67 Pro :: ASUS Prime H570-Plus
Cooling Cryorig M9 :: Stock
Memory 4x4GB DDR3 2133 :: 2x8GB DDR4 2400
Video Card(s) PNY GTX1070 :: Integrated UHD 630
Storage Crucial MX500 1TB, 2x1TB Seagate RAID 0 :: Mushkin Enhanced 60GB SSD, 3x4TB Seagate HDD RAID5
Display(s) Onn 165hz 1080p :: Acer 1080p
Case Antec SOHO 1030B :: Old White Full Tower
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty Pro - Bose Companion 2 Series III :: None
Power Supply FSP Hydro GE 550w :: EVGA Supernova 550
Software Windows 10 Pro - Plex Server on Dragonfly
Benchmark Scores >9000
Intel measures TDP at "base" clock, not Turbo... so I would expect this chip to take a lot more than 35w while Turbo is active. I speculate this is an attempt to take a stab at AMD's efficient Ryzen chips with misleading labeling and fine print.
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
4,883 (0.76/day)
Location
Hong Kong
Processor Core i7-12700k
Motherboard Z690 Aero G D4
Cooling Custom loop water, 3x 420 Rad
Video Card(s) RX 7900 XTX Phantom Gaming
Storage Plextor M10P 2TB
Display(s) InnoCN 27M2V
Case Thermaltake Level 20 XT
Audio Device(s) Soundblaster AE-5 Plus
Power Supply FSP Aurum PT 1200W
Software Windows 11 Pro 64-bit
Intel measures TDP at "base" clock, not Turbo... so I would expect this chip to take a lot more than 35w while Turbo is active. I speculate this is an attempt to take a stab at AMD's efficient Ryzen chips with misleading labeling and fine print.
Yup, 35W but make sure very board comes with MCE enabled and violate the TDP.
 

hat

Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
21,731 (3.43/day)
Location
Ohio
System Name Starlifter :: Dragonfly
Processor i7 2600k 4.4GHz :: i5 10400
Motherboard ASUS P8P67 Pro :: ASUS Prime H570-Plus
Cooling Cryorig M9 :: Stock
Memory 4x4GB DDR3 2133 :: 2x8GB DDR4 2400
Video Card(s) PNY GTX1070 :: Integrated UHD 630
Storage Crucial MX500 1TB, 2x1TB Seagate RAID 0 :: Mushkin Enhanced 60GB SSD, 3x4TB Seagate HDD RAID5
Display(s) Onn 165hz 1080p :: Acer 1080p
Case Antec SOHO 1030B :: Old White Full Tower
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty Pro - Bose Companion 2 Series III :: None
Power Supply FSP Hydro GE 550w :: EVGA Supernova 550
Software Windows 10 Pro - Plex Server on Dragonfly
Benchmark Scores >9000
Yup, 35W but make sure very board comes with MCE enabled and violate the TDP.
That 35w TDP is flying out the window at warp speed the instant Turbo is active anyway... with or without MCE.
 
Joined
Jun 10, 2014
Messages
2,890 (0.81/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 9 5900X ||| Intel Core i7-3930K
Motherboard ASUS ProArt B550-CREATOR ||| Asus P9X79 WS
Cooling Noctua NH-U14S ||| Be Quiet Pure Rock
Memory Crucial 2 x 16 GB 3200 MHz ||| Corsair 8 x 8 GB 1333 MHz
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1060 3GB ||| MSI GTX 680 4GB
Storage Samsung 970 PRO 512 GB + 1 TB ||| Intel 545s 512 GB + 256 GB
Display(s) Asus ROG Swift PG278QR 27" ||| Eizo EV2416W 24"
Case Fractal Design Define 7 XL x 2
Audio Device(s) Cambridge Audio DacMagic Plus
Power Supply Seasonic Focus PX-850 x 2
Mouse Razer Abyssus
Keyboard CM Storm QuickFire XT
Software Ubuntu
Intel has offered similar designs for years, not only as i7/i5 T variants, but also various Xeon CPUs with "many" cores, low TDP and very low clocks.
Some of these might be interesting for like a home firewall or server, but I would still probably go for a low TDP 4-core rather than a low TDP 8-core for that purpose.
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2018
Messages
134 (0.07/day)
dear chipzilla, "we don't care", take that cpu and shove it up to your ... you know.
stop keeping cpus in your factory stock and send them to the market, your chipzilla crap is way too overpriced.
 
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Messages
5,389 (0.98/day)
System Name Cyberline
Processor Intel Core i7 2600k -> 12600k
Motherboard Asus P8P67 LE Rev 3.0 -> Gigabyte Z690 Auros Elite DDR4
Cooling Tuniq Tower 120 -> Custom Watercoolingloop
Memory Corsair (4x2) 8gb 1600mhz -> Crucial (8x2) 16gb 3600mhz
Video Card(s) AMD RX480 -> ... nope still the same :'(
Storage Samsung 750 Evo 250gb SSD + WD 1tb x 2 + WD 2tb -> 2tb MVMe SSD
Display(s) Philips 32inch LPF5605H (television) -> Dell S3220DGF
Case antec 600 -> Thermaltake Tenor HTCP case
Audio Device(s) Focusrite 2i4 (USB)
Power Supply Seasonic 620watt 80+ Platinum
Mouse Elecom EX-G
Keyboard Rapoo V700
Software Windows 10 Pro 64bit
man, you make it run way slower and it consumes less energy? what a shock!!
wait, does that mean then if you overclock a cpu it will consume MORE energy and run hotter as well?!!!?
Wait, THATS why people have like custom water cooling loops or after market better performing coolers? it all makes sense now!
 

Space Lynx

Astronaut
Joined
Oct 17, 2014
Messages
15,800 (4.58/day)
Location
Kepler-186f
3.4ghz is non-boost speed? so at 3.4ghz it should run at 35 watts if turn off intel speedstep. honestly if the price is right, that is still a great gaming chip. my i7-7820hk cpu only runs at 2.9ghz due to overheating issues otherwise, and it plays all games on my laptop with gtx 1070 at 100hz 100 fps on medium ot high settings.

i have it underclocked to 36 watts as well. thats a lot of energy savings and most games won't be able to tell the difference
 

hat

Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
21,731 (3.43/day)
Location
Ohio
System Name Starlifter :: Dragonfly
Processor i7 2600k 4.4GHz :: i5 10400
Motherboard ASUS P8P67 Pro :: ASUS Prime H570-Plus
Cooling Cryorig M9 :: Stock
Memory 4x4GB DDR3 2133 :: 2x8GB DDR4 2400
Video Card(s) PNY GTX1070 :: Integrated UHD 630
Storage Crucial MX500 1TB, 2x1TB Seagate RAID 0 :: Mushkin Enhanced 60GB SSD, 3x4TB Seagate HDD RAID5
Display(s) Onn 165hz 1080p :: Acer 1080p
Case Antec SOHO 1030B :: Old White Full Tower
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty Pro - Bose Companion 2 Series III :: None
Power Supply FSP Hydro GE 550w :: EVGA Supernova 550
Software Windows 10 Pro - Plex Server on Dragonfly
Benchmark Scores >9000
3.4ghz is non-boost speed? so at 3.4ghz it should run at 35 watts if turn off intel speedstep. honestly if the price is right, that is still a great gaming chip. my i7-7820hk cpu only runs at 2.9ghz due to overheating issues otherwise, and it plays all games on my laptop with gtx 1070 at 100hz 100 fps on medium ot high settings.

i have it underclocked to 36 watts as well. thats a lot of energy savings and most games won't be able to tell the difference
No, 1.7 is the base speed and 3.3 is the all core turbo. TDP is measured at base clock speed, which is how the 9900k gets away with being "95w" and this chip is 35w. Once Turbo is active, kiss those figures goodbye.
 
Joined
Dec 27, 2013
Messages
887 (0.24/day)
Location
somewhere
1.7Ghz lol. I still think it's impressive how well Ryzen competes in efficiency even built on an objectively inferior process technology. So realistically we are looking at 50-60W usage at all core turbo? Still seems reasonable but should be sold as 65W, it's a very fine line to false advertising.
 
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
1,129 (0.21/day)
Location
Republic of Texas
System Name [H]arbringer
Processor 4x 61XX ES @3.5Ghz (48cores)
Motherboard SM GL
Cooling 3x xspc rx360, rx240, 4x DT G34 snipers, D5 pump.
Memory 16x gskill DDR3 1600 cas6 2gb
Video Card(s) blah bigadv folder no gfx needed
Storage 32GB Sammy SSD
Display(s) headless
Case Xigmatek Elysium (whats left of it)
Audio Device(s) yawn
Power Supply Antec 1200w HCP
Software Ubuntu 10.10
Benchmark Scores http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=1780855 http://www.hwbot.org/submission/2158678 http://ww
1.7Ghz lol. I still think it's impressive how well Ryzen competes in efficiency even built on an objectively inferior process technology. So realistically we are looking at 50-60W usage at all core turbo? Still seems reasonable but should be sold as 65W, it's a very fine line to false advertising.

Yeah, my guestimate is 50-65w depending on that all-core turbo final clock... something intel no longer advertises and can vary chip to chip...
You should check out anand's review of coffee lake laptop that intel is hiding in the Chinese education market... kabylake basically is better in everything that isnt avx512.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/13405/intel-10nm-cannon-lake-and-core-i3-8121u-deep-dive-review

This will probably be the only 10nm product, what actually comes to market will be 10nm+
The only reason intel didn't cancel 10nm after years of failure is they expect the same issues on the 7nm node they are having on 10nm.
Solve on one, solve for both, time not as wasted. Currently 14nm+++ s better than 10nm.
 
Joined
Aug 10, 2013
Messages
101 (0.03/day)
Location
Denmark
No, 1.7 is the base speed and 3.3 is the all core turbo. TDP is measured at base clock speed, which is how the 9900k gets away with being "95w" and this chip is 35w. Once Turbo is active, kiss those figures goodbye.

Thats how they both are doing, AMD are doing the same thing.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2016
Messages
3,595 (1.27/day)
That 35w TDP is flying out the window at warp speed the instant Turbo is active anyway... with or without MCE.
This CPU is made mainly for OEMs and they will know how to tune it to keep under certain limit they need (be it 35W or 45W). Don't worry too much. :)
 
Joined
Dec 5, 2017
Messages
138 (0.06/day)
This CPU is made mainly for OEMs and they will know how to tune it to keep under certain limit they need (be it 35W or 45W). Don't worry too much. :)

Yeah, you can always configure the BIOS to not allow the chip to exceed TDP. It'll be really funny to see how this chip performs when it actually has to stay within 35W...

Thats how they both are doing, AMD are doing the same thing.

Nope, not true. AMD's chips stay within TDP.

1.7Ghz lol. I still think it's impressive how well Ryzen competes in efficiency even built on an objectively inferior process technology. So realistically we are looking at 50-60W usage at all core turbo? Still seems reasonable but should be sold as 65W, it's a very fine line to false advertising.

With Ryzen, both the arch and the node are optimized for efficiency at moderate wattage targets... with Intel, especially with all the +'s added to 14nm, the focus is just raw frequency potential and throughput, density and efficiency be damned.
 
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
211 (0.08/day)
Location
behind you
Processor Threadripper 1950X (4.0 GHz OC)
Motherboard ASRock X399 Professional Gaming
Cooling Enermax Liqtech TR4
Memory 48GB DDR4 2934MHz
Video Card(s) Nvidia GTX 1080, GTX 660TI
Storage 2TB Western Digital HDD, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO SSD, 280GB Intel Optane 900P
Display(s) 2x 1920x1200
Power Supply Cooler Master Silent Pro M (1000W)
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Corsair K70 MK.2
Software Windows 10
This is backwards. Many things can't be done in parallel, and this limits the performance increase in multi-core CPUs. Fewer, faster cores are always preferable to more, slower ones if the whole CPU has the same throughput and all else being equal. This seems to me like a marketing ploy.
 

Space Lynx

Astronaut
Joined
Oct 17, 2014
Messages
15,800 (4.58/day)
Location
Kepler-186f
No, 1.7 is the base speed and 3.3 is the all core turbo. TDP is measured at base clock speed, which is how the 9900k gets away with being "95w" and this chip is 35w. Once Turbo is active, kiss those figures goodbye.

ok yeah 1,7ghz is a joke. nevermind. i will pass in full. looks like ryzen 3800x is still my next cpu after all! might as well go all in since it most likely will be my last silicon cpu.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2016
Messages
3,595 (1.27/day)
Yeah, you can always configure the BIOS to not allow the chip to exceed TDP. It'll be really funny to see how this chip performs when it actually has to stay within 35W...
It's made for SFF office machines, possibly for the more demanding users. I'm pretty sure it'll be fast enough.
This CPU is about getting the job done, not getting great benchmark results. :)
Nope, not true. AMD's chips stay within TDP.
No, they don't. They'll easily exceed TDP by around 10%. But that's just few Watts, so people don't care very much.
It's quite similar on Intel's side. Or at least it used to be until 8th gen.
8700K can go past TDP by as much as 30%. But it is a K CPU and Intel strongly advises you to get good PSU and cooler for these models.
8700 also seems to get past 65W, but I haven't seen decent tests, because - sadly - non-K CPUs don't get that much attention from reviewers.

Well, it's a price you pay for single-core performance. And Intel's 8th gen has lots of it.

The main problem here is efficiency and heat distribution. Heat increases faster than power draw (i.e. CPUs are less effective at high frequencies). That's the main problem with current lineup of the Blues.
With Ryzen, both the arch and the node are optimized for efficiency at moderate wattage targets... with Intel, especially with all the +'s added to 14nm, the focus is just raw frequency potential and throughput, density and efficiency be damned.
Well, the aim is making a fast CPU, so the high-end desktop CPUs are fast. Stop caring so much about how many "+" there are. :)
Intel can make efficient CPUs when it matters - in notebooks. Zen is not even close and the result is that low-voltage AMD solutions are still using old Excavator chips.

As you said: Zen is designed to be efficient in average situation. But Intel makes more purpose-built CPUs and they'll always have the edge in particular scenarios.
And when Intel catches up on node efficiency, it will be interesting to see AMD's response. We'll see how long the Zen strategy is going to work. :)
 
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
1,637 (0.64/day)
Location
Tanagra
System Name Budget Box
Processor Xeon E5-2667v2
Motherboard ASUS P9X79 Pro
Cooling Some cheap tower cooler, I dunno
Memory 32GB 1866-DDR3 ECC
Video Card(s) XFX RX 5600XT
Storage WD NVME 1GB
Display(s) ASUS Pro Art 27"
Case Antec P7 Neo
It's made for SFF office machines, possibly for the more demanding users. I'm pretty sure it'll be fast enough.
This CPU is about getting the job done, not getting great benchmark results. :)

No, they don't. They'll easily exceed TDP by around 10%. But that's just few Watts, so people don't care very much.
It's quite similar on Intel's side. Or at least it used to be until 8th gen.
8700K can go past TDP by as much as 30%. But it is a K CPU and Intel strongly advises you to get good PSU and cooler for these models.
8700 also seems to get past 65W, but I haven't seen decent tests, because - sadly - non-K CPUs don't get that much attention from reviewers.

Well, it's a price you pay for single-core performance. And Intel's 8th gen has lots of it.

The main problem here is efficiency and heat distribution. Heat increases faster than power draw (i.e. CPUs are less effective at high frequencies). That's the main problem with current lineup of the Blues.

Well, the aim is making a fast CPU, so the high-end desktop CPUs are fast. Stop caring so much about how many "+" there are. :)
Intel can make efficient CPUs when it matters - in notebooks. Zen is not even close and the result is that low-voltage AMD solutions are still using old Excavator chips.

As you said: Zen is designed to be efficient in average situation. But Intel makes more purpose-built CPUs and they'll always have the edge in particular scenarios.
And when Intel catches up on node efficiency, it will be interesting to see AMD's response. We'll see how long the Zen strategy is going to work. :)

My 2400G is rated for 65W, and best I can tell from monitoring tools, it might hit 70W for a few seconds, but it does average 65W or less over a long load, and that’s with it bumping the rated 3.9ghz max boost on all cores. Granted, I’m using a dGPU in it now, but it’s still performing very near the advertised speeds and TDP. I think most modern semi’s will boost past the norm for a little bit before they heat up, as even my rx480 will report a max TBP of 180W, but it usually averages under 110W in games (I undervolt). I think it’s one thing for a semi to boost past the rated TDP for a few seconds, it’s entirely another to just blow the rating out of the water with no regard. It seems more like false advertising at that point. I suppose intel wants you to think you’re getting bonus performance by overclocking for you? It’s not like the way the chip behaves is inherently bad—it’s just a bad point on the spec sheet.

And no arguement on Zen Mobile. AMD needs a better answer there. I think it’s the Infinity Fabric that kills them on mobile—it just can’t power down enough like the cores and GPU can.
 
Joined
Dec 5, 2017
Messages
138 (0.06/day)
It's made for SFF office machines, possibly for the more demanding users. I'm pretty sure it'll be fast enough.
This CPU is about getting the job done, not getting great benchmark results. :)

That's not the point... the point is that these chips either won't sustain their boost clocks or won't stay within TDP. Reviewers might test these CPUs using a CLC and a motherboard that couldn't care less about the TDP and give consumers an inaccurate picture of the performance.

No, they don't. They'll easily exceed TDP by around 10%. But that's just few Watts, so people don't care very much.
It's quite similar on Intel's side. Or at least it used to be until 8th gen.
8700K can go past TDP by as much as 30%. But it is a K CPU and Intel strongly advises you to get good PSU and cooler for these models.
8700 also seems to get past 65W, but I haven't seen decent tests, because - sadly - non-K CPUs don't get that much attention from reviewers.

You do realize that TDP is thermal design power, not power consumption, right? The amount of heat dissipated by the CPU is necessarily lower than the amount of power it draws. Additionally, TDP is a sustained value, not accounting for spikes.

The i7-8700 when used with adequate cooling will use the exact same amount of power as the i7-8700K, about ~120-125W according to Anandtech. If you try using the 8700 with the stock cooler, which is rated for 73W (as opposed to the chip's 65W), it hits 100C and throttles within 5 seconds under any kind of serious load. This causes a very serious impact to performance that is generally not reflected in reviews.

The main problem here is efficiency and heat distribution. Heat increases faster than power draw (i.e. CPUs are less effective at high frequencies). That's the main problem with current lineup of the Blues.

Well, the aim is making a fast CPU, so the high-end desktop CPUs are fast. Stop caring so much about how many "+" there are. :)
Intel can make efficient CPUs when it matters - in notebooks. Zen is not even close and the result is that low-voltage AMD solutions are still using old Excavator chips.

You seem to be taking this as emotionally charged when I'm simply analyzing why the chips compare to each other the way they do. I would hope Zen 2 is using relatively less dense libraries for TSMC 7nm and is geared (from a manufacturing standpoint) towards high transistor performance and high yield at the expense of efficiency, similarly to how Intel tweaked 14nm to be focused on high-performance compute instead of laptops.

As for why AMD isn't using Zen in the ultra-ultra-low-voltage chips yet: Raven Ridge is a 210mm^2 die which is unsuitable for these markets and wattage ranges, and I assume AMD doesn't see these markets as worth the money that'd have to go into designing a new die. AMD has indicated on roadmaps if I'm not mistaken that Zen will be going down to the 4-5W range by the end of 2020.

As you said: Zen is designed to be efficient in average situation. But Intel makes more purpose-built CPUs and they'll always have the edge in particular scenarios.
And when Intel catches up on node efficiency, it will be interesting to see AMD's response. We'll see how long the Zen strategy is going to work. :)

Let's not forget that Zen's clock potential was limited by its node, which AMD had no control over and was originally designed for cell phones. In the future AMD will be able to utilize the best-performing HPC nodes for high power products and the most efficient low power nodes for low power products.
 

Mussels

Freshwater Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
58,413 (8.21/day)
Location
Oystralia
System Name Rainbow Sparkles (Power efficient, <350W gaming load)
Processor Ryzen R7 5800x3D (Undervolted, 4.45GHz all core)
Motherboard Asus x570-F (BIOS Modded)
Cooling Alphacool Apex UV - Alphacool Eisblock XPX Aurora + EK Quantum ARGB 3090 w/ active backplate
Memory 2x32GB DDR4 3600 Corsair Vengeance RGB @3866 C18-22-22-22-42 TRFC704 (1.4V Hynix MJR - SoC 1.15V)
Video Card(s) Galax RTX 3090 SG 24GB: Underclocked to 1700Mhz 0.750v (375W down to 250W))
Storage 2TB WD SN850 NVME + 1TB Sasmsung 970 Pro NVME + 1TB Intel 6000P NVME USB 3.2
Display(s) Phillips 32 32M1N5800A (4k144), LG 32" (4K60) | Gigabyte G32QC (2k165) | Phillips 328m6fjrmb (2K144)
Case Fractal Design R6
Audio Device(s) Logitech G560 | Corsair Void pro RGB |Blue Yeti mic
Power Supply Fractal Ion+ 2 860W (Platinum) (This thing is God-tier. Silent and TINY)
Mouse Logitech G Pro wireless + Steelseries Prisma XL
Keyboard Razer Huntsman TE ( Sexy white keycaps)
VR HMD Oculus Rift S + Quest 2
Software Windows 11 pro x64 (Yes, it's genuinely a good OS) OpenRGB - ditch the branded bloatware!
Benchmark Scores Nyooom.
Coming soon to an overheating dell/mac near you
 

eidairaman1

The Exiled Airman
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
40,435 (6.61/day)
Location
Republic of Texas (True Patriot)
System Name PCGOD
Processor AMD FX 8350@ 5.0GHz
Motherboard Asus TUF 990FX Sabertooth R2 2901 Bios
Cooling Scythe Ashura, 2×BitFenix 230mm Spectre Pro LED (Blue,Green), 2x BitFenix 140mm Spectre Pro LED
Memory 16 GB Gskill Ripjaws X 2133 (2400 OC, 10-10-12-20-20, 1T, 1.65V)
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon 290 Sapphire Vapor-X
Storage Samsung 840 Pro 256GB, WD Velociraptor 1TB
Display(s) NEC Multisync LCD 1700V (Display Port Adapter)
Case AeroCool Xpredator Evil Blue Edition
Audio Device(s) Creative Labs Sound Blaster ZxR
Power Supply Seasonic 1250 XM2 Series (XP3)
Mouse Roccat Kone XTD
Keyboard Roccat Ryos MK Pro
Software Windows 7 Pro 64
Ok so a cpu for laptop huh? ;)
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
3,944 (0.65/day)
Location
Police/Nanny State of America
Processor OCed 5800X3D
Motherboard Asucks C6H
Cooling Air
Memory 32GB
Video Card(s) OCed 6800XT
Storage NVMees
Display(s) 32" Dull curved 1440
Case Freebie glass idk
Audio Device(s) Sennheiser
Power Supply Don't even remember
Thats how they both are doing, AMD are doing the same thing.

Wrong. Dead wrong.


TDP and consumption aren't 1:1, but they should be close unless you're just plain lying. Depending on your test app the 2700X uses 10W less than this (magically inline with TDP...).

78% higher consumption vs direct TDP comparison....just lol. Basically, 9900T is a joke, too, but on a grander scale. OEMs will have to limit it or it'll burn up whatever SFF they stick it in.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 28, 2016
Messages
3,595 (1.27/day)
OEMs will have to limit it or it'll burn up whatever SFF they stick it in.
So they will. Why worry so much? :)
You can choose between slower 8 cores or faster 4/6. Choice is good, right? :)

I'm really looking forward to reviews.
Based on clocks, single-thread performance of this CPU should be around that of Intel's mobile CPUs. Which means it should be faster than 1700X (and not far behind 2700)
1700X was released just 2 years ago and sucked 100W in full load. 35W or 65W - 9900T would be a fantastic achievement.
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
3,944 (0.65/day)
Location
Police/Nanny State of America
Processor OCed 5800X3D
Motherboard Asucks C6H
Cooling Air
Memory 32GB
Video Card(s) OCed 6800XT
Storage NVMees
Display(s) 32" Dull curved 1440
Case Freebie glass idk
Audio Device(s) Sennheiser
Power Supply Don't even remember
So they will. Why worry so much? :)
You can choose between slower 8 cores or faster 4/6. Choice is good, right? :)

I'm really looking forward to reviews.
Based on clocks, single-thread performance of this CPU should be around that of Intel's mobile CPUs. Which means it should be faster than 1700X (and not far behind 2700)
1700X was released just 2 years ago and sucked 100W in full load. 35W or 65W - 9900T would be a fantastic achievement.

Yeah....mmkay. Lay off the drugs. 2700 uses 62 watts LOL. Intel is a joke. If 1.7 = 35 tdp, then what what does 3(+) ghz equal? It sure isn't beating AMD.

This something of a 1700 nonX competitor if you keep consumption in check-ish. If they wanted low TDP, then all they had to do was disable HT.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 27, 2013
Messages
887 (0.24/day)
Location
somewhere
Well, the aim is making a fast CPU, so the high-end desktop CPUs are fast. Stop caring so much about how many "+" there are. :)
Intel can make efficient CPUs when it matters - in notebooks. Zen is not even close and the result is that low-voltage AMD solutions are still using old Excavator chips.
Huh, the 2500U in my HP Envy X360 is pretty efficient at 15W. According to HWINFO64 it doesnt go over 12W even when playing games. Though I admit the battery life isn't as great as I hoped for when in use. Something I've heard a lot about with the Ryzen mobile low power parts. Thinking it could be a software firmware issue?

So they will. Why worry so much? :)
You can choose between slower 8 cores or faster 4/6. Choice is good, right? :)

I'm really looking forward to reviews.
Based on clocks, single-thread performance of this CPU should be around that of Intel's mobile CPUs. Which means it should be faster than 1700X (and not far behind 2700)
1700X was released just 2 years ago and sucked 100W in full load. 35W or 65W - 9900T would be a fantastic achievement.
I had a 1700 on launch and in full load it was 3.3 GHz all core and stuck pretty close to the 65W TDP: around 70-75W peak in Prime95 iirc. My friend has a Laptop with a socketed 2700 and at stock he is almost bang on 65W at 3.4GHz all core.
 
Top