Intel Core i9-9900k 8c/16t, i7-9700K 8c/8t, i7-9600k 6c/6t 2nd Gen Coffee Lake CPU's + Z390

I saw this over on Guru3D earlier today, I only see value in it if it overclocks better than a 9900K, because I think most people with a 9900K will be overclocking it anyway if they've got decent cooling. How many more hundreds of Mhz is this gonna be more overclockable than a regular 9900K? I can't imagine more than about 200Mhz better (because I think they will have eaten into some of the overclock headroom with these chips even if they are better binned). What would that translate to: say 5.2Ghz on a 9900KS vs 5.0Ghz on a 9900K = 4% performance increase for those who are willing to overclock. That's not a lot really, hopefully they won't charge that much extra for it. It is more interesting for folks that don't overclock though, because stock performance is 300Mhz better, or 6% performance increase over stock for 8 core load - even that is not particularly significant, but it's better than a kick in the head. It's a "nice to have" and a curiosity, they shouldn't really charge that much extra for it, I don't know $50-$70 more??

 

A binned [email protected] at SL costs $589.99
Halfway between binned and stock 9900K should be around $50. But we don't know until the chips is out.

 

$90 premium then for a 9900K at 9900KS frequencies, that's a bit more than I thought 'reasonable' at $50-$£70 extra, but it's not a world away. Will probably be in that ballpark then.

 

Worst case maybe same as the difference between 8700K vs. 8086K. Remember AMD is soon out with new chips as well. Add $90 premium on top won't help them in increased sales.

 

Would be great if this thing could do 5.3-5.5Ghz all cores with the latter being a pipe dream for most of them. Still 5Ghz all cores is pretty great if that is what you're looking for. The 8086K was 5Ghz on a SINGLE CORE. This is all 8 cores out of box which is a decent deal. Intel binning chips again later in the life of a chip isn't a bad thing IMO. This is likely the R0 stepping with improved binning and efficiency.

 

I thought most 9900k's with proper power and cooling can OC all core 5.0ghz already?

I'd wait for the reviews and see if the 9900KS can sustain higher OC's than current 9900k's. Let's see what Silicon Lottery OC bin's of 9900k's are available today...

What happened? Has Intel been holding back the best binned 9900k's? I thought 9900k's OC'd much better than what SL is showing.

 

depends on the testing u do for the OC. SL is pretty stringent and stresses the cpus on prime95 for stability. most regular users would just run 1-2 CB and call it a day, i.e. "stable"

Sent from my Xiaomi Mi Max 2 (Oxygen) using Tapatalk

 

Yup, probably so, here's the % at each OC listed by SL:

As of 3/16/19, 100% of tested 9900Ks were able to hit 4.8GHz or greater.
As of 3/16/19, the top 89% of tested 9900Ks were able to hit 4.9GHz or greater.
As of 3/16/19, the top 38% of tested 9900Ks were able to hit 5.0GHz or greater.
As of 3/16/19, the top 8% of tested 9900Ks were able to hit 5.1GHz or greater.

It should be interesting to see what SL shows for the 9900KS bins %'s.

I pulled those numbers from each of the product pages, and note that 9900Ks is plural for 9900K.

 

It's also 1.312v with an AVX offset of 2 (unknown if they will work with an AVX offset of 0).

The Intel binned chips will work with lower voltage, AVX offset of 0 and should be stable in AVX small FFT prime95.

 

I'm running 5Ghz with 0 AVX offset at 1.28v BIOS with just 1.225v under load and I've seen plenty of others with even better results. Intel can certainly bin better 9900K CPUs and get better results with their improved stepping. Higher than 5Ghz all cores is easily achievable with the right cooling and chip.

 

See, that's what I thought, most people reporting here on NBR also say they can get 5.0ghz on all core OC on the 9900K already, and that was months ago - a year now? - perhaps the production since has been filtered with Intel keeping the best for the KS release?

It's nice though to get a new KS series using the same socket with more headroom, and hopefully for the same or lower price.

 

@iunlock got 5.5Ghz? 5ghz seems to be fairly common IMO. The 9900KS is just a binned chip like the 8086K so nothing special most likely.

 

I mean I have seen some websites talked about revamped Turbo Boost algorithm to yield significant gains in multi-core performance. We will have to see how this will pans out.

 

sounds to me like an unlimited turbo boost, as long as thermals / wattage are in check. cpu going gpu route?

Sent from my Xiaomi Mi Max 2 (Oxygen) using Tapatalk

 

Hardware Unboxed upgrades their GPU test bench with one of the worlds most expensive 9900K's just in time for the new AMD and Nvidia GPU testing.

The real star of this review is the watercooled motherboard.

And, maybe it will be this new motherboard + 9900K's last hurrah, because after the AMD 12c/24t 3900X CPU is benchmarked...

This 9900K Does 5.1 GHz Out Of The Box! Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Xtreme Waterforce 5G
Hardware Unboxed
Published on Jun 30, 2019

 

Intel's been bad again, raising up the price of the 9900K from $488 to $513 USD (MSRP) by adding an "S" for "Special Edition" as the 9900KS, and reducing the 9900KS warranty from 3 years to 12 months!!

All of this seems to have not made much if any difference to benchmarks run by Gamers Nexus with the good 'ole 9900K stock results beating out the 9900KS stock depending on the test - why? With such small improvements came large power draw increases as well as is typical when pushing the 9900K to top OC.

Why not get a nice 9900K and tune it for best performance with less power draw, and 3x the warranty? Maybe this will give Intel a good excuse to reduce the price of the 9900k?

Maybe it's time to switch to AMD what with the new 9900KS @ $513 price so close to the Ryzen 3900x price of $529? You could also get an 8c/16t AMD 3700x for $200 less @ $329 than the 9900KS.

Bitwit's own Intel 9900K beat out the new Intel 9900KS Sample sent to them...

Intel also sent out Qualification Samples (QS) 9900KS's to reviewers (in retail packaging), so Hardware Unboxed went out and bought retail 9900KS for their testing.

Intel has really hit rock bottom, scraping the bottom of the barrel to get any kind of upgrade differentiation from 14nm. There aren't enough +++'s left to get any kind of performance upgrade. The only good thing Intel did was bump up the TDP of the 9900KS to 127w - and yet that's still not representing the real power draw at 5.0ghz+ all cores gaining on 200w+.

Intel Core i9-9900KS Review, Winner of 2019's Most Boring CPU Award (Short)
Published on Oct 30, 2019


Intel i9-9900KS Review: Overclocking, Power, & Gaming CPU Benchmarks (Long)
Gamers Nexus
Published on Oct 30, 2019
Our Intel i9-9900KS review & benchmark covers the 9900K vs. 9900KS differences, overclocking, power consumption, MCE and TDP/frequency, and the AMD R9 3900X. Our benchmarks today look at the best processors for gaming, Adobe Premiere (video editing), Blender/3D art, and more. We talk about the Intel i9-9900KS vs. 9900K differences and whether it's "worth it," part of which requires a refresher on MCE and what "5GHz" means to various motherboard manufacturers. For future search phrases, we'll note that anyone wondering why their Intel i9-9900KS isn't 5GHz can find the answer in this video -- it's probably because turbo duration limits are being followed. Enabling MCE would "fix" this, sort of, but at costs discussed in the video. Our CPU benchmarks look additionally at the R9 3900X vs. Intel i9-9900KS, 9900KS stock vs. 9900KS 5.2GHz, and add some other CPUs like the R5 3600 or i7-8700K for perspective.


Well this is awkward...My golden sample 9900K BEAT the 9900KS (Short)
Bitwit
Published on Oct 30, 2019
The Intel Core i9-9900KS is here...but don't throw out your 9900K just yet (or ever).


TechYes Australia are getting restless, they want more than the 9900KS is offering, they want AMD level performance upgrades from Intel. AFAIK Intel's completely run out of "gas" and any such process upgrades from Intel are literally 2 years away...

i9-9900KS OVERCLOCKED Review - Intel Makes It's Own Silicon Lottery! (short)
Tech YES City
Published on Oct 30, 2019
Intel have launched their i9-9900KS, and.... well... it's just more of the same with higher clock speeds (a 5GHz gaurentee). Though that aside let's take it for a whirl in some games and productivity, and compare it to the Ryzen 7 3700X and Ryzen 9 3900X.


TechDeals remembers that the 3900x is a better gaming streamer for games that actually use 8 cores for gaming, as well as other multi-core advantages of the 3900x - VM's are a great one.

Intel i9-9900KS vs R9 3900X — Battle of the $500 CPU — Deep Dive Into Gaming & Non-Gaming Benchmarks (long)
Tech Deals
Published on Oct 30, 2019

Spoiler: TimeStamps

1:31 - i9-9900K vs i9-9900KS
1:59 - Ryzen 9 3900X
2:27 - Ryzen 7 3700X
3:21 - Which CPU Should You Buy?
4:14 - Intel CPU Upgrade Options
5:10 - Real World CPU Swaps
7:06 - Detailed "Which Should You Buy?" Discussion
8:17 - Twitch/Mixer Live Streaming CPU
10:00 - Intel has "HD Graphics"!
10:48 - Benchmarks - Test Bench Config
12:35 - Far Cry New Dawn
16:00 - Ghost Recon Breakpoint
19:51 - Shadow of the Tomb Raider
24:51 - Productivity Benchmarks
28:31 - Conclusion & Wrap Up

 

The Intel 9900KS is not a bad CPU, the main advantage being that it is essentially a binned 9900K, therefore you can run higher overclocks if you're thermally limited vs a normal 9900K. So if folks want to spend $40 more (or whatever the exact figure is) to get a 9900KS instead of a normal 9900K, then that's their judgement call, it might mean they don't need to spend so much on a cooling solution - you could take the 9900KS allow it to run with MCE on the motherboard so it sticks to 5Ghz and then undervolt it. It's not a very exciting CPU release, it's just got a more efficient voltage/frequency curve than a standard 9900K, it's a little better for a little more money.

That warranty shenanigans is a bit off though, that's not good. How important is that though, who's had a CPU fail on them, I've never had one fail in any laptops or desktops I've had for instance - gotta weigh up the pros & cons and make your purchase decisions.

 

In 20 years after shipping literally 10s of thousands Intel CPUs...2 have failed.

It is what it is...like @Robbo99999 says, a bit better for a bit more...no reason to make a fuss over it.

 

Could you possibly be any more of a drama queen? Seriously, this shtick is beyond tiresome.

 

If reducing the long term 9900K Intel warranty from 3 years to 12 months for the 9900ks is no big deal, then why did Intel take the trouble to reduce warranty - right after jacking up the 9900ks power rating and pushing the CPU out of the box to 5.0ghz all core Turbo?

Coincidence? Intel don't think so, and neither do I.

IMHO, Intel's bean counters ran the numbers and decided there was too much liability when stressing out the 9900k to the maximum power / Turbo as a 9900ks to risk keeping the warranty at the full 3 years, so Intel did the prudent thing and reduced their liability to 12 months.

Is a 9900ks really worth $25 more, 2 years less Intel warranty, for essentially nothing more than you can get with a 9900k OC? I don't think so.

But, I'm sure vendors will tell you not to worry, Intel doesn't know what they are doing - everything's just fine, how many would you like to order today?

 

Thanks, I think I got my point across without too much drama. Just a little bold + underline + italics. Sorry if it made your head spin. Look away if it's too much for you to handle.

hmscott said: ↑
"Intel's been bad again, raising up the price of the 9900K from $488 to $513 USD (MSRP) by adding an "S" for "Special Edition" as the 9900KS, and reducing the 9900KS warranty from 3 years to 12 months!!

You are paying more for the same performance on average, but getting 2 years less Intel Warranty Support with the 9900ks than with the 9900k that's been around for a full year.

After their first year of ownership those first 9900k buyers still have 2 more years of Intel Warranty Support. A year from now the first 9900ks buyers will be unsupported by an Intel Warranty - while those 9900k first adopters will still have one more year of Intel Warranty Support remaining.

Also, don't forget that Intel doesn't cover CPU's that were overclocked by the owner - you have to purchase an Intel OC warranty extension:

The Intel Performance Tuning Protection Plan
https://click.intel.com/tuningplan/purchase-a-plan
https://click.intel.com/tuningplan/
https://click.intel.com/tuningplan/faq

What is the Performance Tuning Protection Plan?
"The Performance Tuning Protection Plan (PTPP) is an additional plan to cover processor failures caused by operating the eligible processor outside of Intel’s published specifications."

The 9900k and 9900ks both cost $19.99 for the PTPP, but I guess that the 9900k gets 3 years of PTPP (duration of the normal warranty), while the 9900ks only gets 12 months of PTPP for the same $19.99?

I haven't read the details yet, check it out and let us know what you find.

It's really sad to see Intel scraping the bottom of the performance barrel, IMHO it's all downhill from here until 10nm or 7nm desktop CPU's start shipping in 2021 / 2022... or later?

The consensus of reviewers is don't bother with the 9900ks, get a nice 9900k cheap - maybe Intel will drop the prices soon - or after the holidays - or, better yet invest in a nice AMD 3900x or save $200 and get an AMD 3700x.
http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...-lake-cpus-z390.811225/page-152#post-10962216

 

The day AMD does what I do better than Intel does is the day I switch to AMD, I feel like many others would agree. Your long essays aren't fooling anyone, TLDR no one cares, its just a binned 9900KS and thats all.

 

You are in the Intel thread I created complaining about reviews by others I am posting about the Intel 9900ks release. And I agree, Intel's 9900ks release is disappointing and sad, but nonetheless it's all Intel's fault, don't blame the messengers - complain to Intel.

I am posting my opinion - one shared by all of the reviewers I posted and many others I didn't bother posting. It's not just my assessment of Intel's failure to deliver anything new, it's a consensus of opinion of many.

Others can spin the 9900ks positively as they surely will to sell product. I'm not here to sell any products. I'm doing the same I have always done, giving a real and true assessment of the facts and providing valuable advice on alternatives.

Do you have any contrary news about the 9900ks? Something we all missed that makes the 9900ks something of value and worth buying over the 9900k?

 

As many others have pointed out (and you've ignored) it's binned higher, allowing (theoretically) higher clocks at lower voltages.
At the end of the day, your opinion is just that, an opinion. It's irrelevant

 

It looks like the 9900ks's MSRP has already been ignored with much higher prices being demanded even from the usual suppliers:

Nathan Kirsch @LegitReviews
https://twitter.com/LegitReviews/status/1189537417369456641
"I can't find the @Intel Core I9-9900KS ($513 RCP) at all on Amazon. Newegg has it for $569.99 and has been sold out since being listed. The only store that I can find with it in-stock and ready for pickup today is @microcenter & they want $699.99 for it."
microcenter.com/product/615497/intel-core-i9-9900ks-coffee-lake-40-ghz-lga-1151-processor

Greg Salazar @GregSalazarYT
"Aaaand this is why I didn't even bother mentioning "$513" in my review. Anyone who honestly expects to pay this is living in the Matrix."
https://twitter.com/GregSalazarYT/status/1189551845775200256

Intel Core i9-9900KS Coffee Lake Ref 8-Core 4.0 GHz LGA 1151 (300 Series) 127W BX80684I99900KS Desktop Processor Intel UHD Graphics 630 - Out of Stock with no price.
https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i9-9th-gen-core-i9-9900ks/p/N82E1681911811

Intel Core i9-9900KS 4.0 GHz 8-Core LGA 1151 Processor
BH #INBCI99900KS • MFR #BX80684I99900KS
New Item - Coming Soon - $599.99
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...4i99900ks_boxed_core_i9_9900ks_processor.html

It's the same silicon for both the 9900k and 9900ks. The 9900ks being "binned higher" simply means Intel went through a testing process to weed out the 9900ks's that wouldn't do at least 5.0ghz all core reliably. That's it.

You may end up with a 9900ks that does all core 5.0ghz all core, but doesn't do 5.1ghz all core, or 5.2ghz all core, while a random 9900k might well do both, like Bitwit's testing found.

It's still a luck of the draw thing beyond 5.0ghz all core. And, as every reviewer has said the the luck of the draw 0mhz-300mhz difference is minor between the 9900ks and a 9900k OC'd - it's nothing worth getting excited about.

I'm not ignoring the difference between the 9900k and 9900ks, I'm noting that the potential difference is minuscule and negligible, and not noticeable in every day usage.

IMHO, it's not worth spending the extra money on the 9900ks or losing the 3 year warranty of the 9900k for a roll of the dice on a better 0mhz-300mhz higher OC. That's not just my opinion, it's also the opinion of all the reviewers I've seen weigh in on the 9900ks vs 9900k.

Here's a few more reviewers weighing in:

i9 9900KS & 9900K vs Ryzen 3800X & 3700X - 8 CORE BATTLE
Gear Seekers
Published on Oct 30, 2019
Intel teased the i9 9900KS a little earlier in the year saying that it would boast an all core boost frequency of 5GHz. We took a look at other 8 core 16 threaded CPUs, not 10 core or 12 core chips. This is an 8 core CPU Showdown. Nothing more nothing less. Lets see who's the best.


Meet Intel's FX 9590: The Core i9 9900KS
Greg Salazar
Published on Oct 30, 2019
Today is launch day for the Intel Core i9 9900KS. Is it anything you should consider for your next gaming rig? Is the price justified? The answer to both questions is probably 'no,' but I've got a lot more to say about this processor in the video. Thanks for watching!


INTEL i9 9900KS Release! REVIEW & OVERCLOCK to 5.4 GHz!
Level1Techs
Published on Oct 30, 2019

 

Here are the prices in several stores in Portugal. The lower price you can find is in the left side. The higher being on the right:
The 9900ks can only be found in one store here (top left side in the screenshot)

 

Cool, interesting, is the 9900ks in stock at that store - or is the price / entry a placeholder until stock shows up?

That's one "devil" of a price.

597 Euro equals $ 666.62 United States Dollars, that suggests to me that is simply a humorous placeholder price.

 

Just so you know and out of interest:
When i bought my 8700k a couple of months ago, i bought my 8700k for 435€ (with taxes) and the 9900k was about 570€ back then.

Yes the 9900Ks is in stock at the store online and in physical stores too from them!

Its not a placeholder... its the actual price of the CPU lol

https://www.pcdiga.com/processador-...paign=catalogo#utm_medium=cpc-destaque-search

The 666 part is kinda funny ahahha

 

Thanks for the info / link, I did a google translate and on that page it says "Delivery Due November 1" - Confusingly, that could mean due in house into inventory, or it could mean delivery to you by November 1.

€ 597.90
Delivery due November 1
Forecast for mainland Portugal. See + info here
Free Shipping Article
(Valid for Continental Portugal only)

Also interesting, they have the warranty as 3 years:

P / N: BX80684I99900KS EAN: 5032037167017 WARRANTY: 3 YEARS

Perhaps they are assuming the 9900ks has the same warranty period as the 9900k? Hopefully they will catch the change and update the page.

 

MC: $150 difference (& no $30 off mthrbrd combo = $180)

Newegg 494 (in stock) vs 570 (sold out)

 

the delivery that says there and doing a good translation:

If you order today 31, they deliver it to you day 1

the warranty is obligatory of 2 years, the store personally gives a extra year.

By law they need to give 2 years for particulars and 1 year for companies (In Portugal)

Intel can't mess with national laws. By law all electronics here have a warranty of 2 years but when purchasing you can always ask to read the small letters. Perhaps Intel has some small text inside the terms of the warranty... dunno

 

$650 here home in Norway. An ok price due awful Norwegian NOK vs. $. But we have an awesome free 5 years warranty here home.

And the price hike and lack of chips follow same paths as AMD’s latest and greatest

 

Got my 9900KS delivered this morning and she is installed!

This thing runs ridiculous low voltage at 5Ghz all cores. Haven't even began overclocking, instead I shaved voltage down to minimum it would run stable. CB20 ran 5Ghz all cores at just 1.160v in the BIOS.

I think my 9900K died from my shorting out (dead F5 rip) F5 and luckily Intel refunded all $630 from my initial purchase a year ago. Picked up the 9900KS for less than that on Newegg. Gonna get to overclocking this beast.

 

Good stuff! CB20 is pretty tame though, could you let me know how much voltage you need for non-AVX Prime95 for say a 20 or 30min run? (Yeah, so that's with AVX turned off, to be clear). That would give me an idea (would allow me to extrapolate) how much voltage it would need more along the lines of what I deem stable.

 

Definitely will get to that soon. I am still playing around. I typically start with CB20 as my quick and dirty see what it can do test and then run Realbench Stress Test for at least an hour or so which uses AVX.

 

Load voltage or voltage set in BIOS, and what level of loadline calibration? Maximus XI boards support reading cpu on-die sense as vcore. It's also important to have HWinfo64 running to check for CPU L0 errors (these happen when the hyperthreaded virtual cores/registers get corrupted so its very rare to get them with HT disabled, instead you just get a clock watchdog timeout).

 

Sorry that is load voltage. I read it under load to see what I am actually seeing after vdroop. I am using LLC7 (8 is max but that will cause overshoot). 0 error logged/was watching that. My brother got his 9900KS this morning too to replace his 8700K (bad bin IMO) and he is getting similar but not quite as good results. He is running so far 5.2Ghz all cores at 1.31v. I am now passing 5.2Ghz all cores at 1.275v. Testing 5.3Ghz now to see if I can get it to pass CB. This is all with 0 AVX offsets.

 

Overshoot doesn't happen even at LLC8, if you mean the voltage target, rather than transients. The problem is some people refer to overshoot as transients (this is correct) but some refer to it as sensor readings or RMS voltage (this is incorrect; a RMS voltage higher than what is set in BIOS would require a negative loadline). But transients at LLC8 are just god awful and cause an extreme loss of stability due to minimum voltage dropping too low, and transient spikes are horrible too. A 0 mOhm loadline means that the voltage target is the same as the BIOS voltage. Transient spikes however happen even at LLC3. When we refer to overshoot, we usually refer to RMS voltage being reported wrong by bad voltage Super I/O sensors--e.g. sensors reporting a voltage higher than what you set in BIOS. This is caused by power plane impedance, as anytime you measure voltage far from the CPU pins/socket itself, there is an increase in resistance, which causes a voltage "drop" from where you're reading, which, for some weird reason, causes the MEASURED voltage to rise! (I do not understand this).

https://www.overclock.net/forum/27686004-post2664.html

Sensors that read on-die voltage like VR VOUT (Gigabyte, some MSI and Asrock boards with a VRM controller that supports on-die monitoring) will only show VRM target voltage and cannot show transients at all. Obviously, the VRM controller is not affected by power plane impedance since the reading is coming right from the controller inductor itself.

On most boards, going beyond 50% vdroop reduction (if default loadline for 8 core SKU is 1.6 mOhms, then 50% reduction is 0.8 mOhms) causes a large increase in transient dips and peak to peak, compared to lower steps. Only the Z390 dark maintains a low increase in transients going from 50% reduction to 75% reduction. LLC5 / LLC High is 50% on your Maximus, and on Z390 Gigabytes. 75% is LLC6 / Turbo. The increase in transient -dips- on these boards can mean that your min vcore required for high current load stability can *increase* at LLC6 compared to LLC5 !

I believe the Super I/O chip has a 16mv resolution, while the socket measurement chip (ITE 8792E) has a 12mv resolution.
The IR 35201 has a 2mv (!) resolution (VR VOUT, if supported), but none can measure transients, which last for around 40 microseconds.

Here's what is going on (measured with a XI Gene).

https://elmorlabs.com/index.php/2019-09-05/vrm-load-line-visualized/

I recommend using LLC5, not LLC7. LLC5 will have much better transients, and although you will have to raise your bios voltage, your temps will drop (lower RMS voltage) and your end load voltage might still be stable *10-15mv lower* than now from your vcore sensor after the reduction in LLC and increase in bios voltage.

Remember what determines long term stability during stress tests (like, my CPU was stable for 2 hours suddenly it randomly crashed? what? why?) is your *VMIN*. Not your RMS. Vmin is how low the voltage goes during a transient dip. If your RMS is unstable, you will insta-crash or BSOD rather quickly.

 

Congratulations on getting a 9900ks so quickly. Was it $569 at newegg as a pre-order or did you get it for the MSRP of $513?

Does the 9900ks warranty actually show 12 months on your box / warranty card? Can you extend it via newegg extended warranty?

Was your F5 is older than a year? If so good thing your Intel 9900k warranty was greater than 12 months so you could get that full refund.

AFAIK the Intel rule for user warranty extends to the Boxed Edition of their CPU's, and the OEM tray CPU's are warranted through the vendor. Did you add that 9900k yourself to the F5 using a boxed CPU?

Is that 9900ks being used in your desktop instead of the F5? How well did your 9900k in your desktop compare to the new 9900ks?

Again, congrats on the new 9900ks and thanks for sharing your experience here.

 

Finally cracked the 5500CB club, something my 'old' 9900K couldn't achieve even at ridiculous voltage. https://imgur.com/a/uFHZ9jT Either way it's a binned 9900K with some hardware for spectre and meltdown. Will hold me over until next gen.

 

My 9900K was a boxed CPU bought from the store, I paid Newegg markup of $569 but it included the $20 overclocking warranty which is usually sold separately. Yes it's a 1 year warranty, this is included in a special packet in the box with Intel packaging, so is the OC warranty, so that means 1 year max overclocked or not. I paid with my Amex card which extends the manufacturer warranty on almost anything for an additional year through a third party warranty department and they are great. I've used the AMEX perk in the past on a couple items and they've always simply refunded my purchase. So I have 2 years coverage which more than likely will get me to my next CPU.

 

That's a nice chip. Just take care of it by remembering not to run a too aggressive loadline through it.
I actually erased all my LLC Turbo bios profiles and replaced them with LLC High this morning. And my chip is average.

 

Broke 5600CB today with her at 5.3Ghz all cores 1.350v BIOS and 4.9Ghz Cache.

Best buy has been selling them all day in and out of stock for $524. I played a few hours of BFV this morning at 5.3Ghz all cores and it was absolutely beautiful. Butter smooth, hot a hitch. 1.350v in BIOS results in around 50C in game. I have very little to complain about.

I do think I will run 5.1Ghz all day at 1.230v BIOS which has been Realbench tested for an hour in stress test. I still need to validate 5.2Ghz and 5.3Ghz, but passing BFV at 5.3Ghz is a very good sign for my use case.

 

https://wccftech.com/intel-10th-gen-comet-lake-desktop-cpu-family-400-series-platform-leak/

Prediction is early 2020 we see Comet Lake desktop. Intel rep said the 9900KS will only be produced/available from now until holiday. This is a last Hurrah product for Coffee Lake-R. Unless something crazy happens with 14nm+++ CML I will be skipping that entirely. I want DDR5, PCIE 5.0, and 10 or 7nm Intel with a Golden Cove Core.

 

Amazon's current top selling 16 CPU's November 1 2019 - after 5pm, first day of sales for the 9900KS - it's at #10, with the 9900k at #5 !



Best Sellers in Computer CPU Processors
https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Computers-Accessories-Computer-CPU-Processors/zgbs/pc/229189

Best Sellers in Computer Motherboards
https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Computers-Accessories-Computer-Motherboards/zgbs/pc/1048424

Ahhh, this may be why the 9900ks isn't up higher in the rankings, it's backordered - more stock due November 3rd:

More disconcerting are the 2 vultures waiting with inventory looking to scalp with inflated prices set at $699.99 and $939.00.

Microcenter still has the 9900ks in stock in some stores and they've dropped the price to $569, with the 9900k dropped to $449.

Newegg is on Notify for the individual CPU, but they have plenty of 9900ks motherboard bundles
https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?d=9900ks

Still no inventory at bhphoto.com

 

I hate scalpers.

Amazon was in stock all day at their scalping price, then they just lowered it to $524.99 which was in stock for awhile, then I slowly watched it sell out in the last hour lol. BH, well it's BH lol they historically take preorders for tech parts and then don't have stock for weeks or months it seems. I would avoid ordering there unless a last resort. I would have gone to Microcenter myself since I like the local store approach but on launch day there was trying to get an unbelievable $699.99. They quickly lowered that to $599, and now are at $569 but they will price match Newegg and Amazon $524.

 

And no matter how I say this, it is going to sound like an attack (not how its meant, just how it is going to sound). But here goes:

Was getting that couple percent performance increase worth the price?

Now, I did hear the 9900KS had or was going to have some of the security mitigations in it. I haven't looked it up to see if those rumors were true. If so, how do the two chips compare clock for clock? Do you have the software mitigations in place for the 9900K and if you do, then how does it compare? (So meaning 9900K w/o mitigations and w/ compared to 9900KS with).

Also, did you see the rumor that due to power delivery, comet may have needed a re-tape for why it may not appear Q1 2020? That of course is rumor mill town and means nothing, but...

 

Yes, the 9900ks has more mitigations built in, and I have been waiting for a report to notice that they can't be turned off. The 9900ks just released so lets wait and see how this works out.

BTW, the 9900k "P0" stepping with the ability to disable the mitigations in the OS for benchmarking might be disappearing as well, as I heard there is an "R0" stepping 9900k with the same mitigations the "R0" stepping 9900ks has enabled / locked on in the CPU as well. There's probably still time to get the last P0 9900k's shipping without the new migrations locked in.

Here's more info:

"Furthermore, there have been reports that the Core i9-9900KS has lower IPC performance than the Core i9-9900K, which means the latter will perform better clock-for-clock. Tom's Hardware was the one to point this out with a pre-production chip, and there may actually be a reason for the IPC dropoff. As it turns out, the Core i9-9900KS uses a new stepping – Stepping 13 – of the 14nm++ process, which comes with hardware-based mitigations for the security flaws found in Intel chips over the past few years, including Spectre and Meltdown.

Core stepping basically refers to a revision of the original CPU design, so new steppings can offer things like bug fixes or improvements to the manufacturing process. The Core i9-9900KS uses the new R0 stepping, which is different from the P0 stepping of the Core i9-9900K. The R0 stepping is said to come with additional in-silicon security mitigations that can affect performance, which might possibly account for the performance drop in certain games.

I should also point out that Gigabyte listed the Core i9-9900K as transitioning to the R0 stepping earlier this year, so it's possible that later versions of the chip would see a small drop in performance too, which might help the Core i9-9900KS appear more competitive in comparison."
https://www.hardwarezone.com.sg/review-intel-core-i9-9900ks-review-gaming-cpu-specs

If you care about such things, one way or the other, best to check your CPU / box detailed markings before ringing it up.

Also, don't forget:

CPUID Information for Intel® Processors Identification Utility
https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...cessors/processor-utilities-and-programs.html

"Note that the CPU stepping reported in the identification utility is not the same as the Stepping field reported in Product Specifications page of the processor. The Stepping field reports the manufacture design stepping for the processor."

Hmm, I wonder if the QS 9900ks's shipped by Intel to reviewers were P0 stepping, or final 9900ks production level silicon R0 stepping or something in between? That would make a slight to potentially serious difference in performance results.

That's why Hardware Unboxed went to the trouble of purchasing their own production / retail stepping of their 9900ks for their testing.

Intel Core i9-9900KS Special Edition review: Is this really Intel's fastest gaming CPU?
By Koh Wanzi - 30 Oct 2019
https://www.hardwarezone.com.sg/review-intel-core-i9-9900ks-review-gaming-cpu-specs/conclusion-1014

"... Not quite the best gaming CPU in the world
The Intel Core i9-9900KS is best thought of as just another flavour of the Core i9-9900K. There's already the Core i9-9900KF, which lacks any integrated graphics, so the Core i9-9900KS is more or less just a higher clocked version of both its siblings. Intel is touting this as the best processor for gaming, and while the specifications certainly look promising on paper, it doesn't quite deliver.

It's by no means a poorly performing CPU, and it's still faster than what AMD's Ryzen 3000 processors have to offer in 1080p gaming. Unfortunately, it fails to convincingly beat the Core i9-9900K in games, so it falls short on what is supposed to be its biggest selling point. After all, while AMD's Ryzen processors handily trounce Intel's mainstream chips in heavily-threaded workloads, Intel has still managed to hold on to its lead when it comes to games. The Core i9-9900KS should extend that lead, but it fails to live up to that promise.

To be sure, it serves up slightly better encoding and rendering performance, but the gains are small – it is after all still just a top-binned Core i9-9900K – and not quite enough to get excited about. It's not clear whether the lacklustre gaming performance is due to the hardware mitigations for the security flaws I mentioned earlier, but if it is, it's just another example of how the fallout from those flaws continue to trouble Intel even now. The only consolation is that these mitigations will soon come to the Core i9-9900K, which could dampen its performance and therefore put the Core i9-9900KS in a better light.

The all-core 5.0GHz boost does sound great, and there are fortunately no issues with the cores boosting to their rated speeds, unlike with AMD. But it seems like this much-touted feature is most useful for sprucing up headlines, and it doesn't quite translate into any significant gains in the real world. Furthermore, the Core i9-9900KS only comes with a 1-year warranty, down from the usual 3 years for Intel. The chipmaker says this is because of the limited volume of the chip, but you can't help but wonder if the aggressive speeds have somewhat tempered Intel's expectations for the CPU's longevity.

At a recommended price of US$513, the Core i9-9900K is slightly more expensive than the 12-core Ryzen 9 3900X, which costs US$499. AMD's processor still offers better value, mostly owing to its superior multi-threaded performance. Furthermore, its gaming numbers aren't that far behind either, especially if you game at more demanding, GPU-limiting settings, at which point the difference practically disappears.

The Core i9-9900K debuted at US$488, and it's still listed for around that price on Amazon. It still seems like the better choice to me if you want the absolute best gaming CPU. What's more, you get a 3-year warranty with it. The Core i9-9900KS is no doubt a cool proposition and 5.0GHz on all cores is really nice. But it just doesn't seem like a smart choice given all the good options available right now, unless you just want the bragging rights to a specially-binned Core i9-9900K.

Intel needs every advantage it can get to push back against a resurgent AMD and the Core i9-9900KS just isn't it."

It looks like some places have started discounting the 9900k below MSRP:

Intel Core i9-9900K Desktop Processor 8 Cores up to 5.0 GHz Turbo unlocked LGA1151 300 Series 95W - 471.99 USD
https://techinstrument.com/products...5-0-ghz-turbo-unlocked-lga1151-300-series-95w
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B005404P9...&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1?tag=techinstrumen-20

There's a bunch of them now settling on 471.99 USD - including Walmart - before tax of $46.02, sort by "Item price" after link:
https://www.google.com/shopping/pro...X&ved=0ahUKEwiRrb225czlAhWBuZ4KHWJEBgAQ6SQIIA

 

Well mine was basically a free upgrade from Intel after they refunded my dead 9900K. I paid more for my 9900K at launch and after my refund and 9900KS shipped overnight I put money into my pocket, so yes it was worth it. I would also say it's worth it at $524.99 for any new Intel 9900K consumers. It's a no fuss out of box 5Ghz, with room to overclock. The 9900KS is Intel's equivalent of the 3800x and 3600x with a maybe a bit more offered in terms of overclock headroom/voltage reduction.

Mine will boot 5.4Ghz and runs Cinebench and games at 5.3Ghz with 0 offsets. I run daily 5.1Ghz at 1.230v BIOS. Considering my 'golden' 9900K did 5.0Ghz at 1.260v BIOS I am pretty happy. I said it earlier in this thread, it's a binned 9900K. Considering a lot of recent 9900K struggle to hit 5GHz at a reasonable voltage, yes it is 100% worth the price. Plenty of people reporting they can't hit 5Ghz, even at absurdly high voltages. And those that do get it stable regularly report 1.3v+.

On the topic of paranoia about performance loss and what not due to the hardware level fixes isn't proven, and my performance testing shows no loss or gain in that area. Clock for clock it appears to be performing identically. But luckily we don't have to take my word,we can take a proven and reliable benchmark tester in the community.

https://twitter.com/phoronix/status/1189529910307627010

"The other good news with the Core i9 9900KS besides the raw performance is improved hardware mitigations for Spectre V2 and MDS."




My recommendation is to spend the extra $50 and get a good chip out of box. Then tweak for some more fun.

By the way they are in stock and shipping at $524.99 from Best Buy right now.

 

The new 9900k R0 Stepping is also available alongside the 9900ks - which will give the new R0 Stepping 9900k's the same Mitigation improvements. He must have tested a 9900k he already had on hand:
https://twitter.com/phoronix/status/1189529910307627010

davidbepo @davidbepo Nov 2
yeah, i already saw it note that Comet Lake also has this

Bichoï@bichoi98 Nov 2
Yes.... But this shall mean that the 9900ks is a new silicon... Not any binned 9900k...

davidbepo @davidbepo Nov 2
incorrect 9900KS is binned 9900K [R]0 stepping this means the new silicon is also in new 9900K [R0]


This means you can buy a 9900k @ the ever increasing discount of $471 vs $50+ more for the 9900ks and get the same improvements(?) like the improved context switching time showing for the 9900ks:

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel-corei9-9900ks&num=1

"I was indeed able to confirm a difference in the relevant tests. Like in the time to perform a context switch, it's multiple times faster with the Core i9 9900KS than with the Core i9 9900K -- at least with the 9900K stepping as of launch day last year, if Intel quietly added those mitigations to a newer 9900K stepping. The context switching time of the Core i9 9900KS is now aligned with the Ryzen 9 3900X."

So he tested a launch day 9900k P0 stepping sample, he needs to follow up with a current 9900k R0 Stepping to see if the context switching matches the R0 Stepping release version of the 9900ks.