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

Yeah, there's some truth in that. Micro$lop and AMD are both extra stupid like that... referring to consoles and the draconian imposition of product limitations. To be fair, consoles are probably the only reason AMD even exists today. They found a space where they could survive and if not for them having done so, they probably would have been out of business a long time ago. So, there is a silver lining to that cloud.

Apple just takes it over the top to the point that death is the only viable solution to rid the world of their filth. They offer a Procrustean approach to literally everything, where they are god and decide everything for their muppet subjects. And, sadly, the mentality of most gamer-boys is far too accommodating for that disgusting MO. Their overtly cookie-cutter approach to everything they touch makes anarchy look like the pinnacle of heroism. There is absolutely no room for their kind of control freak foolishness in my land of the free and home of the brave. They can bite me, LOL.

The notion of Apple liking AMD makes me very uneasy. If AMD likes them back it's going to be much harder for me to respect them. They should shun Apple and try to distance themselves from being associated with their garbage.

 

It's kind of obvious AMD isn't going to shun Apple (although it would be a dream come true!) because they need all the business they can get. I like AMD and respect their hardware, I love the though of having HBM and Async Compute in my PC, but I hate all the downsides it comes with, to the point that they stand no chance in any market segment besides used components. If you ask me, they do seem to be becoming competent in the desktop PC space, "catching up" to Intel (although 9900K will stop that soon), releasing Polaris and Vega (which IMO have great potential to improve to be good in their current forms, but lets wait until Navi/Turing/9000 series products are all launched to see) and slashing prices to the point you can buy a decent gaming CPU for under $150, but there comes Intel, swooping in to get market share, dropping its own prices, becoming competitive, like the good ole' days

 

If AMD wants to beat Intel at their own game, they will focus on making excellent CPU and memory overclocking a high priority and not get caught up in the stupidity of automated clock controls and the functional limitations that go along with such foolishness. Taking that control away from end users and pretending the CPU can robotically give everyone what they want and expect, or believing that will be good enough shows there is a disconnect with part of their potential target market. This is one of the major things holding them back now. If that changes and pushing Ryzen and TR CPUs to 5.0GHz and higher and memory to beyond 4000MHz ever gets as easy as it is with Intel CPUs it is going to get crazy in the enthusiast space. The fact that they cannot today is detrimental to their universal acceptance. If that does happen, we will see Intel go into real panic mode at that point. At this time it remains to be seen if they have the talent and technical ability. It seems like their inside of the box approach to consoles (fixed configuration) is affecting their thought processes in the PC realm and their Procrustean strategy is their most serious character flaw.

 

So my message to AMD is: Give me a Threadripper 2990WX successor that can match these CPU and memory clock speeds and do it with water cooling at ambient temperatures and I'll start thinking about shutting the door on Intel. (This is my daily driver 24/7 CPU clock speed, not my benching mode.)

And, don't say the expectation is unrealistic with that many cores and threads. If @Trafficante can push his 7980XE to 5.1GHz stable with an ordinary water loop, there is no excuse for AMD not offering the same from their flagship.

 

Intel Core i7-9700K 8 Core/8 Thread CPU Benchmarked With 5.5 GHz All Core Overclock on Water Cooling – Running on Z370 Motherboard
By Hassan Mujtaba, 11 hours ago
https://wccftech.com/intel-core-i7-9700k-performance-benchmarks-5ghz-overclock/

"Intel’s 9th Generation Core i7-9700K has been spotted running at overclock frequencies on a Z370 motherboard. The processor was not only seen running at overclocked speeds but also got some performance benchmarks with all cores overclocked beyond 5 GHz.


Intel Core i7-9700K Overclocked To 5.5 GHz Across All Cores on Water Cooling – Gets Benchmarked on Z370 Platform
The Intel Core i7-9700K processor is an 8 core and 8 thread part. The chip will have 12 MB of L3 cache and as you might tell, it has lower threads than the Core i7-8700K but comes with higher core count. In terms of clock speeds, the chip has a base clock of 3.6 GHz and boosts up to 4.9 GHz in single, 4.8 GHz in dual-core, 4.7 GHz in four core and 4.6 GHz in 6/8 core operations. The TDP for this part is maintained at the same 95W.
..."

 

Well, looks like we're gonna be getting a few hundred Mhz higher clockspeed headroom on these new chips for overclocking - maybe 2 or 3 hundred Mhz more. But what's 2 or 3 hundred Mhz more when you're already at 5Ghz - well that's about 6% extra performance in clock speed increase alone - not too bad, plus we have the extra physical cores from these new chips too which is the most important aspect.

 

There aren't any HT enabled CPU's in the new i7 line-up...here's why?

CPU Vulnerabilities, Meltdown and Spectre, Kernel Page Table Isolation Patches, and more
http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...atches-and-more.812424/page-106#post-10785283

""Two recently disclosed hardware bugs affected Intel cpus:

- TLBleed

- T1TF (the name "Foreshadow" refers to 1 of 3 aspects of this
bug, more aspects are surely on the way)

Solving these bugs requires new cpu microcode, a coding workaround, *AND* the disabling of SMT / Hyperthreading.

SMT is fundamentally broken because it shares resources between the two cpu instances and those shared resources lack security differentiators. Some of these side channel attacks aren't trivial, but we can expect most of them to eventually work and leak kernel or cross-VM memory in common usage circumstances, even such as javascript directly in a browser.

There will be more hardware bugs and artifacts disclosed. Due to the way SMT interacts with speculative execution on Intel cpus, I expect SMT to exacerbate most of the future problems.

A few months back, I urged people to disable hyperthreading on all Intel cpus. I need to repeat that:

DISABLE HYPERTHREADING ON ALL YOUR INTEL MACHINES IN THE BIOS.

Also, update your BIOS firmware, if you can."

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...atches-and-more.812424/page-107#post-10785339

"It is interesting that "coincidentally" Intel's next 9xxx CPU's are all coming out without HT, except for the "enthusiast" i9-9900k.

I've actually run without HT for many years, not recently, to reduce thermals and increase headroom for OC. I didn't miss it.

There were (are?) applications that run better without HT enabled, although I haven't tested for this for a long time. This will likely change as people will be testing to quantify the loss after disabling HT.

I wouldn't worry too much about it, 4c, 6c, 8c CPU's have enough cores for the most part to run without HT and get the same perceptible performance.

Benchmarks will show the difference, but living in the real world of user perception, you likely won't notice - if you do, turn it back on. "

 

Well they've still got HT enabled on their upcoming i9 chip, so I think that dispels the argument that all these security vulnerabilities have put them off HT. I think more to the point they can afford to have HT disabled on 6 and 8 core CPUs while still achieving good performance, which further allows them to segment the market into a greater number of saleable products - more money/profit, I think that's the driver for i7 not having HT anymore.

 

Intel have / had HT in higher core count CPU's for years, so I don't think they needed to remove the HT for performance reasons. If you remove the HT variations you are reducing salable product choices, Intel loves way too many choices so they can confuse the buyer into buying something, anything, at any price level.

The i9 keeps the HT so Intel can maintain a top consumer CPU for bechmarking, for enthusiasts that will disable protections for performance anyway.

 

By definition, disabling HT on the i7 lineup has allowed them to have the i9 CPU which is the same but just with HT enabled - so this decision has actually expanded their lineup & offerings, profit driven decision and not a security related one in my view.

 

Subtracting is adding? Must be the "new" math

What about the missing 6c / 12t sku to pair with the 6c / 6t sku? -1

And, the 4c / 8t sku to pair with the 4c / 4t sku? -1

The 8c / 16t is paired with the 8c / 8t, so that's normal - that's not a subtraction, so +0

Intel is missing at least 2 sku's they would have "normally" offered, but have removed the +HT sku's, which is a *big* ommission, a big deal for Intel that has been carrying that feature for a long long time.

There's gotta be a reason, and "simplifying" the product lineup doesn't at all sound like Intel, right?

Nah, Intel's trying to avoid exposure to law suits down the road: "You knew your HT feature was compromised, but knowingly kept shipping security compromised CPU's?"

There is no mitigation available for HT enabled, so Intel really had no choice.

Intel can defend shipping CPU's compromised with bugs with mitigation, even if they cause a performance hit.

HT is gone because the only safe HT is no HT.

 

That's ok, we'll beg to differ.

 

Brief roundup of all innovations made by three major companies in 2018
https://www.reddit.com/r/AyyMD/comments/9aghc8/brief_roundup_of_all_innovations_made_by_three/

 

LOL! - on the image.

I guess the thoughts and views of that post don't necessarily agree with a previous post? What happened to, "I've actually run without HT for many years, not recently, to reduce thermals and increase headroom for OC. I didn't miss it." - hmscott 26-aug-2018

 

Isn't AMD's mainstream processors still the Ryzen 8 cores? If not what is AMD's High end processors then? Is there something I have missed?

 

Not at all, I also said " not recently" Back then I didn't miss it when I ran without it.

With adequate cooling and daily driver OC, disabling HT isn't *necessary* so I don't bother doing it any longer. It's not helping all the time, but HT is not hurting any longer (for my use) so no need to tune HT off.

I stopped worrying about disabling HT when my workflow didn't run client apps that responded with worse performance with HT enabled. That's another story, finding slow performance in those apps and determining it was due to HT enabled.

I still disable HT (when possible) when testing new CPU's OC'ing for highest performance, to see if disabling HT reduces temps / power enough to bring more OC headroom.

For the most part HT's still not going to be noticeable either way, but I haven't tested for a while. I haven't tried disabling HT on Windows 10 - or Coffeelake...

Maybe someone can test on their 8700K, disable HT and live on it for a couple of days and see if you notice any difference - re-enable HT when you think you found some day to day operation being slowed by disabled HT, and let us know what you find.

Maybe losing HT now is a big deal in day to day use, and the i7 9xxx CPU's are far worse performing for the loss of HT?

 

Intel's 2018 innovation is inventing new and exciting ways to enforce segmentation while they continue treading water.

 

Exactly, and charge 140 more or so for it.

 

courtesy of dayman on hardocp. 9900k or 9700k https://hardforum.com/threads/intel...e-lake-refresh.1963540/page-4#post-1043805241

a bigger die than 8700k after a delid, soldered.

 

Would be damn strange if the die was same size
29mm2 more die area to fit additional cores from 4 to 6 cores (2 cores )


The 9900K die size will be approximately 180mm2 vs. 122mm2 for 4 core 7700K. Or around 19% bigger die vs. 8700K.

 

its really sad to know about 30% of that area is for iGP which we can't use. i have a 2.5mm copper vapor chamber on the way and i'll check results to see how well it fares in the laptop vs shim in terms of heat transfer to outer pipes.

 

hmscott thats exactly what i use to think. disable HT and get more temp room for OC or just to run cooler, too bad intel has reign dominate for way too long a lot of software i use are either single threaded, or they make use of HT quite well. booting up with lots of stuff at load, firefox/chrome, video encoding, and some others, HT improves performance but quite a bit. looking at around 10-15% and i'd rather not lose those.

even if we're able to have lower temp for OC, going from 4.8 to 5ghz for example, is only like 2-3% boost in single threaded application but loses out in multi threaded ones.

 

"used to think"? It was for real. Disable HT, get higher OC, did it a lot way back when. Even worse the data processing apps used for one client took longer to run jobs with HT enabled, found other apps / games that responded the same.

Back then most apps were still 1-thread or 2-threads, so disabling HT so you could get higher single core / dual core performance was a really helpful tuning tweak.

HT doesn't double the performance for all apps, but for some it does. 12% and less about the worst case average, and you won't notice that in day to day use, which is what I also noticed with HT off long ago.

I haven't run without HT recently, but new owners of the 9th gen i7 CPU's may be doing just that coming up quickly with no other option, if Intel really do ship without HT capabilities in the i7 9th gen.

The i7-8700k has 12 threads, the i7-9700k is rumored to have 8 threads.

Intel Progress, Masters of the Future!!

 

Yeah, next time check out the AMD CPU specifications before posting?

All of the Ryzen / ThreadRipper / Epyc AMD CPU's with SMT "Hyperthreading" have 2x the threads of the rumored HT challenged 9th Gen i7 9xxx CPU's.

So the 8 core Ryzen / ThreadRiper AMD CPU's have 16 threads, the 16 core AMD ThreadRipper / Epyc CPU's have 32 threads, and the ThreadRipper / Epyc 32 core AMD CPU's have 64 threads.

While the new Intel 9th gen i7 9xxx CPU's have no HT, so those Intel CPU's only have cores with no hyperthread's, 8 cores, 8 threads... and that's as high as it goes.

 

no need to cherry pick and do stuff out of context. there is 9900k and for people who dont want to spend extra or feel they'll be thermal limited they can go 8c/8t. no need to start bashing camp when AMD still can't catch up in both frequency and IPC, we are more mature than that.

 

[QUOTE="ole!!!, post: 10788796, member: 454055" no need to start bashing camp when AMD still can't catch up in both frequency and IPC, we are more mature than that.[/QUOTE]
But that has always been AMD's MO, they generally deliver a slightly less or equal product to Intel/Nvidia at a cheaper price, ususally offering a better price/perf ratio (Generally)

 

I don't get it that people call Threadripper mainstream cpu's. Have never been.



Cores is still cores. Not threads

 

Not even sure there is a need to compare. Intel and AMD serve different enduser interests. There is also the question of foundry capacity.

Sure they keep pressure on Intel's innovation. From where I, as an enduser, want to go AMD won't get me there. At least not now based on the current offerings and the gaming software ecosystem which really doesn't care if AMD's is bigger. Boils down to how we will use our tools.

 

they would once in the lead, any business would. but that is beside the point i was trying to make. hmscott sometimes takes things out of context of what people say or gets very defensive at times for no good reason when we try to have a proper discussion, in the end i bring up AMD when he brings up intel just to poke at him.

 

Is Hyper-Threading a Fundamental Security Risk?
Joel Hruska on August 27, 2018 at 9:00 am
http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...atches-and-more.812424/page-109#post-10788499

 

Intel has their "generally" shoots themselve's in the foot moments like their toothpaste TIM material, or worse - like removing HT from i7's, that's gotta be a head shot for sure.

AMD ThreadRipper CPU's do the same service for games and day to day use like Ryzen, but have more cores for professional work too. And that scalable architecture continues upwards with Epyc. Continuity in design and implementation, something Intel still hasn't learned.

The Ryzen 2700x 8 core / 16 thread SMT is for everyone, it may not generate 5.0ghz on air (5.0ghz on phase change) but it does 4.35ghz on auto-tune and gives plenty of FPS at 1440p / 2560p - not everyone is stuck at 1080p like Nvidia RTX, so the Ryzen 2700x is a great choice vs Intel's 8 core 8 thread option.

And, AMD doesn't have the SMT / HT bugs like Intel, and far less exposure to the mitigations slowdowns, so on balance, AMD has a future unlike current and back 12 years Intel CPU's.

AMD Ryzen™ Threadripper™ X Series CPUs – The Ultimate Processor for Enthusiasts and Gamers
AMD
Published on Aug 31, 2018
The AMD Ryzen™ Threadripper™ X Series CPUs – more for gamers and creators.
Learn more: https://www.amd.com/en/products/ryzen-threadripper

 

Except you're forgetting, Threadripper isn't for *every*one, its purely a HEDT product with its roots in a mainstream CPU, same thing with then Intel X series, the difference is that Threadripper is aimed at more of that audience due to its pricing

 

You didn't watch the video again did you?

You can limit yourself if you like, but the ThreadRipper 1/2 series are for anyone that's an enthusiast and wants the cores for work or play.

There are plenty of enthusiasts that got the X series from Intel, and the ThreadRipper series are even better value / more cores and threads / for more processing performance.

And the Ryzen 2700x is 8 core / 16 thread but if you need more storage / PCI lanes the ThreadRipper 1900x 8 core / 16 thread or 1920x 12 core / 24 thread is only a small jump in price.

It's more of a continuum with Ryzen / ThreadRipper / Epyc, scaling to meet your needs, at costs that encourage more cores and threads than Intel offers, with the AMD options costing less - and far less. No need to limit your cores / threads due to costs, like with Intel.

 

And you didn't seem to read my comment.

 

What part?

The part that said HEDT - DON'T PROCEED!! TOO EXPENSIVE - TOO MUCH CORES TO HANDLE!! ?

I think I read that right and responded accordingly...

Don't be afraid, the high core count AMD CPU's are fine, jump in and partake in the joyous future of high core count CPU's!!

There's no "segragation", you aren't limited to buy only one series of CPU. You can get ThreadRipper!! You could even get Epyc!! Or, enjoy 8c/16t Ryzen instead of 8c/8t Intel.

Maybe you didn't say what you think you said? Try again.

 

No, the part where I said it wasn't for everyone, just the people in the HEDT market. I thought it was pretty obvious, but I guess not.
I have no current interest in Ryzen despite the security benefits, when it can perform as well or better than Intel in games, let me know.

 

Expect all i9-9900K will manage 5.0GHz on ALL cores. As a minimum overclock.

This is what AMD offer... From their Unlocked mainstream Cpu. They had to eat of the OC headroom to offer more clock speed vs. first gen. This is called progress!

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_7_2700X/19.html

 

Yes, l did understand your pov, I tried in various ways to help you change your pov by offering other views.

Here's another one:

HEDT used to be 6 core, then 8 core, then 10 core and up.

Now 6 core 12 thread / 8 core 16 thread AMD isn't HEDT, it's mainstream.

Times are rapidly changing, get more cores, keep up.

 

I don't think I've ever seen a 8 core Threadripper, can you say you have?

 

imo securities patches arent as important to consumers than it is to corporation and enterprises. hackers dont target you specifically they target companies. as long as you have a decent common sense in web browsing, u are mostly safe majority of the time.

i do not want to patch for that 0.00001% of time when i get hack for a big 10-15% performance hit, thats just dumb. without the patch intel is still plenty fast, will wait to see what 9900k can do vs 8700k

 

Google?

Prices have dropped since this build...

Frys's has the 1900x for $365, but there are cheaper offers, like $316 @ Jet.com:
https://www.google.com/shopping/product/16396892515989139111?q=AMD Ryzen™ Threadripper™ 1900X TR4 Processor best price&prds=scoring

Note this is near the release time for TR1, and the temperature sensors were reading 27c hotter than actual, so don't faint when you see the temps.

Building the $1850 "Entry Level" Threadripper PC! 1900X + 1070 Ti
Paul's Hardware
Published on Nov 2, 2017
Building the $1850 "Entry Level" Threadripper PC! 1900X + 1070 Ti

Spoiler: Parts...cheaper entry level too...

PARTS LIST (pcpartpicker) - http://bit.ly/2lIvyyt
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X (8-core/16-thread, $525) - http://amzn.to/2wcT4Ug
Enermax LIQTECH TR4 240mm AIO Liquid CPU Cooler - http://amzn.to/2zeAkZD
ASRock X399 Taichi ATX TR4 Motherboard - http://amzn.to/2vK9bcu
Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (4x4GB) DDR4 3000 CL15 - http://amzn.to/2eQeuUI
SanDisk SSD PLUS 240GB Solid State Drive - http://amzn.to/2uXRJDD
Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 Ti 8GB Graphics Card - http://amzn.to/2AezDhi
Fractal Meshify C Case: http://amzn.to/2w6naND
Corsair CX750M 2017 750W 80+ Bronze Power Supply - http://amzn.to/2wd0GGt

For the Even-More-Entry-Level $1750 Version, use a Noctua CPU Cooler and GTX 1070 GPU:
Noctua NH-U12S TR4-SP3 120mm CPU cooler ($70) - http://amzn.to/2AdvVV2
Zotac GTX 1070 Mini ($400) - http://amzn.to/2ze6aFY

Many thanks to Enermax, ASRock, Fractal, G.skill, Kingston, Zotac and Corsair for providing products shown in this video.

Testing the $1850 Entry Level Threadripper PC!
Paul's Hardware
Published on Nov 12, 2017
Testing the $1850 Entry Level Threadripper PC!

Spoiler: Details...

▼THREADRIPPER BUILD PARTS LIST▼
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X (8-core/16-thread, $525) - http://amzn.to/2wcT4Ug
Enermax LIQTECH TR4 240mm AIO Liquid CPU Cooler - http://amzn.to/2zeAkZD
ASRock X399 Taichi ATX TR4 Motherboard - http://amzn.to/2vK9bcu
Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (4x4GB) DDR4 3000 CL15 - http://amzn.to/2eQeuUI
SanDisk SSD PLUS 240GB Solid State Drive - http://amzn.to/2uXRJDD
Zotac GeForce GTX 1070 Ti Mini 8GB Graphics Card - http://amzn.to/2zxlOMG
Fractal Meshify C Case: http://amzn.to/2w6naND
Corsair RM850i 850W 80+ Gold Power Supply - http://amzn.to/2wd0GGt

Many thanks to Enermax, ASRock, Fractal, G.skill, Kingston, Zotac and Corsair for providing products shown in this video.

Builderphill 9 months ago
"You can buy one intel cpu for the same price as the whole pc lmao"

It's an odd pairing of parts, but I'm sure you can spec out the perfect AMD ThreadRipper build for yourself.

More google hits:
https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1...i=mOiJW96IKZKb_Qbc24voBA&q=threadripper+1900x

More Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/results?sp=CAI%3D&search_query=threadripper+1900x

 

*yawn* I guess I was wrong, but its a useless product.

 

Wow, with such long term in depth research, how can I deny your conclusion?

I guess the 100k's of happy ThreadRipper owners must all be wrong? Shall I give them your name so you can set them all straight?

 

*cough* https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i7-870...?ie=UTF8&qid=1535766185&sr=8-1&keywords=8700k

https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-Processor-Wraith-Cooler/dp/B07B428M7F *cough* woopsie looks like I dropped a few things!

 

Oh and don't forget, good motherboards are half the price and you dont need no ridiculous cooler

 

What's your pointless point? Explain your point?

 

At least the overclock enthusiasts avoid it. One of the Ryzen models with almost none submissions on the bot https://hwbot.org/benchmark/cineben...Id=processor_5501&cores=8#start=0#interval=20

 

Again, its a pretty obvious point, an 8 core Threadripper is an ultimately useless product

 

Just because you don't understand how to use it doesn't mean it's useless.

By your same reasoning the Intel 9700k is even more useless than the ThreadRipper 1900x.

The Intel 9700k @ $430 has no HT threads, so it's only 8 cores / 8 threads instead of the ThreadRipper 1900x 8 cores / 16 threads @ $316.

 

It's plain and simple, put the CPU in the socket, lock it in, apply paste, apply cooler, apply OS, and Voila
And yes, the 9700K is a useless product with the 9900K likely only being a $100 more, and the slightly weaker 8700K only $100 less