Intel Core i9-14900KS Draws as much as 409W at Stock Speeds with Power Limits Unlocked

[lexluthermiester]

Prefetching is only one example and that is from the Northwood days. SMT is most useful for workload with low utilization of the functional units or in other words low IPC. OLTP databases are a good example.

If Intel has ditched SMT for newer architectures, it certainly isn't due to performance reasons. Rather, the primary driver would be slightly simpler validation and reduced attack surface for code in shared environments, i.e. cloud providers' infrastructure.

If by SMT you mean Symmetric-Multi-Tasking, then no they didn't get rid of it. If I understand correctly(and I admit I might not), they simply changed the way it was implemented without changing the effective functionality.

 

[HBSound]

Question - So, the smaller format ITX motherboards with 24 Pin + 8 Pin CPU Power. Can not handle the complete power of the 14900KS?

 

[Dr. Dro]

Question - So, the smaller format ITX motherboards with 24 Pin + 8 Pin CPU Power. Can not handle the complete power of the 14900KS?

This CPU does not have any higher power footprint than the i9-13900KS. It's the same reason, they're exceptional quality bin CPUs. But it is very, very high indeed, provided you uncap it. I personally run mine with a 288 watt cap. It performs plenty enough in multithreaded workloads and to its fullest extent under light to moderate loads such as gaming. I reckon it'll have the same problems the i9-14900K has, namely, it trades more aggressively boosts for longer term stability. See this for reference:

 

[lexluthermiester]

Question - So, the smaller format ITX motherboards with 24 Pin + 8 Pin CPU Power. Can not handle the complete power of the 14900KS?

Sure they can, but you will not get the maximum boost clocks. You'll still get the base clocks and the Intel boost spec, but nothing beyond.

 

[HBSound]

Sure they can, but you will not get the maximum boost clocks. You'll still get the base clocks and the Intel boost spec, but nothing beyond.

Thank you

This CPU does not have any higher power footprint than the i9-13900KS. It's the same reason, they're exceptional quality bin CPUs. But it is very, very high indeed, provided you uncap it. I personally run mine with a 288 watt cap. It performs plenty enough in multithreaded workloads and to its fullest extent under light to moderate loads such as gaming. I reckon it'll have the same problems the i9-14900K has, namely, it trades more aggressively boosts for longer term stability. See this for reference:

Thank you

 

[DaddyDanjer]

Ok someone has to hook one of these up to their loop and see what it can really do. Only $95

The Ice Tub™ 3.0

The Best At-Home Ice Bath. Presenting a cold water therapy immersion experience you can enjoy from the comfort of your own home – for your best muscle recovery yet. Our compact and lightweight tub is designed to deliver the benefits of cold water therapy to your everyday routine. Used by Wim...

ice-tub.com

View attachment 334607

Ice Tub for the win!!

 

[A Computer Guy]

And you'll need a custom loop for that much heat output. What are you planning? For that much heat I would do 2x280mm rads or a 240 & 360.

Somehow when I read that it's doesn't seem like enough.

It doesn't make sense to compare an E core to a logical thread, if you disable SMT you are inevitably making that core less efficient, I don't mean just power wise but also performance wise. It's a serious regression architecturally. The whole purpose of SMT was to increase the utilization of resources that would otherwise be idle.

With the numerous issues with SMT and security some folks might disagree with the architectural regression argument.

yet an optimized 7800x3d with 30-40 watts in gaming equals it. who the fuck is still buying intel for gaming who has clue?

Isn't a 12600K still good for gaming with a good GPU and costs significantly less including with paired motherboard?

 

[dgianstefani]

Question - So, the smaller format ITX motherboards with 24 Pin + 8 Pin CPU Power. Can not handle the complete power of the 14900KS?

You'll get the full single core boost clock, just maybe not when you fully load all 24 cores synthetically.

 

[absoluteUnit]

only basement-living bench boys who run cinebench and blender all day will draw 400 watts from the CPU. enthusiasts who buy this are doing it for gaming, where power draw is almost always going to be ~150 watts or lower.

 

[Recon5]

This is how I feel for Intel.

https://imgur.com/r4erYrx

 

[absoluteUnit]

yet an optimized 7800x3d with 30-40 watts in gaming equals it. who the fuck is still buying intel for gaming who has clue?

enjoy dropping frames with your AM-DIP.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Somehow when I read that it's doesn't seem like enough.

2 280 rads or a 240 and 360? Either one is enough for a 64core Threadripper under full load so an OC'd 14900 should be no problem.

 

[AleXXX666]

How many motherboards have VRMs that can handle this pig?

just connect it directly to 380 V with "star" connection, 3 phase is enough lol

 

[Vya Domus]

With the numerous issues with SMT and security some folks might disagree with the architectural regression argument.

Those security issues wont go away if you disable SMT.

 

[londiste]

If by SMT you mean Symmetric-Multi-Tasking, then no they didn't get rid of it. If I understand correctly(and I admit I might not), they simply changed the way it was implemented without changing the effective functionality.

SMT in this context means simultaneous multithreading.

 

[lexluthermiester]

SMT in this context means simultaneous multithreading.

Ok, same thing different name.

 

[chrcoluk]

I also feel that Intel is missing the point with this chip. If you want a "Gaming King" to challenge the 7800X3D why not release a 8 P-Core only (no E-Cores) at >6.2 Ghz and a "reasonable" power draw?

I think ditching HTT and keeping e-cores would yield a better result (keep the e-core clocks 3ghz max, and dont need more than 8) HT is horrible inefficient, and e-cores have obsoleted it.

Hoping the rumours are true HT is ditched in upcoming CPUs.

 

[lexluthermiester]

I think ditching HTT and keeping e-cores would yield a better result (keep the e-core clocks 3ghz max) HT is horrible inefficient, and e-cores have obsoleted it.

What is this? Are you kidding?

Hoping the rumours are true HT is ditched in upcoming CPUs.

That is beyond silly. It's just a rumor but why would you hope for that? That's crazy talk...

 

[Deleted member 237813]

enjoy dropping frames with your AM-DIP.

what?

 

[bug]

I mean, I'm ready for stones thrown for thinking that overclocking is pointless, and for saying that I much more prefer modern CPUs that run to the max out of the box, with the ability to be further limited if cooling is restricted. I don't miss tinkering in the BIOS for that extra 100 MHz one single bit.

It wasn't always that bad. My first overclock was an Am5x85 (AMD's name for their 80486 counterpart). It was as easy as changing the FSB from 33 to 40MHz and bam! all of a sudden I was running the more expensive, 160MHz CPU!
For modern CPUs, yeah, you almost need a PhD.

 

[lexluthermiester]

It wasn't always that bad. My first overclock was an Am5x85 (AMD's name for their 80486 counterpart). It was as easy as changing the FSB from 33 to 40MHz and bam! all of a sudden I was running the more expensive, 160MHz CPU!
For modern CPUs, yeah, you almost need a PhD.

Yeah, OCing is MUCH more complicated these days. It's no longer a simple process like BITD.

 

[Carlyle2020hs]

I totally agree, although I can't imagine anyone buying a Keep Spending CPU and then clocking it down or limiting it in any other way. That's what the non-prefix 14900 is for.

The 14900´s VID is trash. Same goes for the trash bin called "14700k".

And you have to deal with the VIDs beeing not the same. KS chips VIDs are aligned.

No disabling waste-cores and hypertreading would help to get that _hitty silicone to run 6 Ghz all-core.

But a 13900ks could. Without any need to tweak PLL voltages i might add.

Now imagine a 14900ks running 6 Ghz all-core without the need to turn off hyperthreading
or
wanting to use the least amount of wattage possible during gaming at 14900k speeds.

If you can, the KS is for you.

in conclusion:
The KS is for people hunting for the best p-cores possbile.
Either to overclock or to use less voltage at any given Mhz if compared to the rest of intels offerings.

And yes, if compared to the red team a 14900ks looks rather pathetic.
But that´s because intel has no imagination on how to sell it.
They easily could have disabled the waste cores completely and sell a 8x p-core only gaming beast that would loose to 60% but would win 40% by quiet a margin during gaming benchmarks.

Those 40% leads beeing almost all competetive online-games mind you. So intels marketing could have brandished that as a win over amd.

 

[pavle]

Why is 14900K a 350W CPU?

That is a good question. If you look at power tests, maximum power for it seems to suggest that and it's always better to honestly tell the max. value than intel's average usage numbers so one can choose the proper cooling system.

 

[AusWolf]

The 14900´s VID is trash. Same goes for the trash bin called "14700k".

And you have to deal with the VIDs beeing not the same. KS chips VIDs are aligned.

No disabling waste-cores and hypertreading would help to get that _hitty silicone to run 6 Ghz all-core.

But a 13900ks could. Without any need to tweak PLL voltages i might add.

Now imagine a 14900ks running 6 Ghz all-core without the need to turn off hyperthreading
or
wanting to use the least amount of wattage possible during gaming at 14900k speeds.

If you can, the KS is for you.

in conclusion:
The KS is for people hunting for the best p-cores possbile.
Either to overclock or to use less voltage at any given Mhz if compared to the rest of intels offerings.

In other words, the KS is for people who like chasing (pointless?) numbers, not performance-per-Watt, or performance-per-dollar. Got it.

And yes, if compared to the red team a 14900ks looks rather pathetic.
But that´s because intel has no imagination on how to sell it.
They easily could have disabled the waste cores completely and sell a 8x p-core only gaming beast that would loose to 60% but would win 40% by quiet a margin during gaming benchmarks.

Still winning in almost all competetive online-games mind you.

I'm not sure. An e-core-less version would have to be way cheaper, which is not a good bargain for Intel. In my opinion, the timing is wrong. By not releasing this thing at the same time as the rest of the line-up, they're losing lots of potential buyers who aren't looking for arbitrary numbers, for example GHz, but want the best of the best in a generation.

 

[lexluthermiester]

In other words, the KS is for people who like chasing (pointless?) numbers, not performance-per-Watt, or performance-per-dollar. Got it.

Yuppers. It's effectively the Extreme Edition version.