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

I wouldn't go so far to say the 9700K (8c/8T) is useless. For gamers, it may be sufficient since many games still don't adequately incorporate hyper threading. The case for hyperthreading becomes more important for video rendering and so forth. That is why the 2990wx performed so well on multi-threaded benchmarks:

 

It's all a lot more nuanced than you suggest, although if that's what you think that explains your answers.

The 8 core / 16 thread 1900x ThreadRipper on TR4 socket has 4 generations of CPU support, tons of PCI lanes, and a long life of use ahead of it.

The AMD ThreadRipper 1900x + TR4 motherboard is an incredibly useful long life pairing, and is a great first entre into ThreadRipper at very nice pricing at this point in time.

IDK if the 1900x 8c/16t part will get a 2nd generation upgrade like the 1950x => 2950x, so the entry point to ThreadRipper after TR1 disappears from the shelves might be 12c/24t. Act now, before entry / prices go up!

And, yes the 9700k is a poor choice without HT at launch with all the other options available. Maybe when the 9700k flops EOL it will be available at a nice close out price for someone that just wants OC to 5.5ghz on 8 cores for gaming?

 

Also...

https://linustechtips.com/main/topi...ck-speed-or-more-cores-with-less-clock-speed/

Specifically,look at this post:

"Getting more work done is always better... READ: Both are equally important.

You're reliant on core count only to the point where the engine calls for physical cores (hyperthreading is handled by the OS, not the engine) and logical cores will complement them for scheduling purposes (seldom do they undertake calculations). Once you reach the number of cores the engine can utilize, you need to focus on frequency so that those cores can do more within a second or clock cycle. It's why the 1500X, 1600, and 1800X have the same gaming score as engines largely utilize four cores (plus their SMT which is allocated by the OS) as they aren't able to fully saturate the pipeline.

Ryzen is in a weird spot with its inter-CCX latency where a multi-threaded function needs to talk across a larger gap versus a monolithic die like Intel's consumer and enthusiast platforms (mesh/X299 notwithstanding).

One thing to consider is that all games using multiple cores are largely single-threaded and sequential, i.e. multiple core usage does not equate to multi-threaded functions. You can multi-thread certain things that aren't crucial like weather or AI (though most in-game AI is stupid as f#ck) in certain games, but combat has to be single-threaded as a stop or wait in the function could cause issues with the outcome of an action. "

Also,

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13124/the-amd-threadripper-2990wx-and-2950x-review/2

Specifically, AMD's insistence on compatibility with previous motherboards is creating a serious bottleneck:

 

"The serious bottleneck" of the 2990WX doesn't show up on Linux... it's Windows OS breaking down under so many cores / threads.

The CCX communication is where the AMD CPU's scale from Ryzen, through ThreadRipper to EPYC which has more memory lanes and interconnects.

Intel has lost their way by sticking with a monolithic die, instead of breaking up the components into smaller dies that have better manufacturing yield.

That's mainly why Intel is failing at 10nm and AMD is winning at 7nm, the architecture differences make AMD's success.

AMD is already branching into active die interposer communications to improve communication latencies.

Intel announced another 1-2 year delay of 10nm shipments.

AMD announced early shipment and availability for 7nm products...

I'd say AMD's CCX's are pretty sweet.

 

Better question is how do we shove the stake in Count Microsoft? That OS is garbage and getting worse by the update. Wonder if Redmond, WA still thinks Windows Visa is cool.

 

GrandesBollas: Look!! Over there!! Did you see that!!?
(...leaves the discussion rapidly in the opposite direction...)

 

Amen to that. The Windoze OS X abortion is a hot and steamy deep dish colon loaf in digitized form. And, the Digi-Nazis are legends in their own minds... to the point they have become reprobate and unable to comprehend any difference between what is good and what is bad.

 

Early shipment and availability for 7nm products... Can mean May or it can mean June or July. Even later. None know the shipment date

See... The first generation Ryzen processors shipped out in March 2017. Ryzen 2nd Generation chips in April. If we follow the trend You can't be 100% sure the 3rd gen Ryzen will be shipped out May 2019 due the shrink to 7nm And 7nm can also mean ... Lack of chips.

Edit.
Remember last gen AMD graphics when released/shipped out? Not many got one the first months.

 

No, early like this year, 2018 - instead of 2019.

You're too used to Intel's "early" release - like announced and delayed 3x, pushed out 5 years and back 1 month - so it's "early".

Or, shipping a basket of 8700k's "early", and then going dark for 3 months.

AMD's early is earlier than "1st" announced.

Not like Intel's undying chain of broken promises that end in disaster... 10nm - next stop... disappointment.

 

Coming MAY, JUNE or July is next year Aka 2019

 

There are a number of releases for AMD's 7nm products, starting in December 2018.

Expanding our High-Performance Leadership with Focused 7nm Development
Posted by mark.papermaster in AMD Corporate on Aug 27, 2018 3:00:08 PM
https://community.amd.com/community...mance-leadership-with-focused-7nm-development

"...I look forward to providing more details on those innovations as we prepare to introduce the industry’s first 7nm GPU later this year and our first 7nm CPUs next year."

I didn't say AMD 7nm CPU's, I said:

"AMD announced early shipment and availability for 7nm products..."

 

What's up with all of the off-topic crap about AMD in a thread devoted to Intel products? A little, a little there... understandable... like the random post about Windoze OS X trash. But, how many posts about AMD do we have now?

 

Yep

Hooray that AMD kicked Intel up the backside to make it, >18 months after Zen, and as much as it stinks how little innovation we got from Core 2nd gen thru 7th gen... the 9900K will be the fastest 8 core when it's released, 1900x/TR4 will not be anywhere near it

And I don't think an 8 core 7nm zen will beat it by that much, if at all, whenever it comes out

 

The 9700k pricing matches closer, still higher, than the 1900x and 2700x, and has a better chance of competing with what AMD has released, right now.

Oh, wait, the 9700k only has 8 threads vs 2700x / 1900x with 16 threads... nevermind.

The 9900k might bring out another release from AMD now (2800x?), before the 7nm series releases, or AMD might wait till the 7nm release.

I'd recommend buying the 9900k asap if you are an Intel fanboi, and build for a 3-4 year hold, while Intel polishes up their 10nm release for high performance CPU's alongside their datacenter CPU's in 2020.

I would assume Intel will gradually produce 10nm product starting in the low end consumer range in late 2019, similar to the i3-8121U 10nm Dual Core no iGPU release.

Intel has yet to figure out how to get the iGPU to work at 10nm, as well as larger area dies like the high performance CPU's and commercial datacenter CPU's.

It may take Intel a couple of years from initial 10nm release in 2020 to get the 10nm chipset / 10nm high performance CPU on the same process due to yield / capacity issues on 10nm - until then the motherboard chipset is stuck at 22nm (z270 / z370) / 14nm (z390?) - and I'd wait until the 10nm / 10nm build to upgrade from the 9900k.

About 3-4 years from now?

 

If you want the better overall performance cpu next month (assuming there's stock of it), the choice will be clear. But it won't be the same cpu that you buy for maximum value. Value goes down as you rise up the product stack, the same happened with the 1700 vs 1800x.

And neither option would be a 1900x (requiring a more expensive X399 motherboard) which only offers more pcie lanes over AM4, valued by an extraordinarily small niche

 

That's exactly the problem Intel has created by dropping HT on the i7 gen 9 CPU's, they've opened up the 9700k to competition in multi-core performance and price against the AMD's 8 core / 16 thread CPU's.

The 1900x discussion is relevent enough for those that want a motherboard that doesn't run most of it's storage through the motherboard chipset, and would rather get full performance through the CPU direct connections ThreadRipper provides.

If you want to connect up more than 1 3GB/sec IO device Intel z370 just doesn't offer anything performance competitive in IO until you get to the x299 series motherboards, and x299 hit's their limits too quickly too - well under the IO of ThreadRipper.

It's not so niche considering so many people are buying multiple M.2 PCIE SSD's and find they can't get full performance from more than 1 at a time.

The 8 core / 16 thread 1900x might not be top CPU, but it does get you into the ThreadRipper TR4 motherboards with more IO direct connections to the CPU.

If you want more CPU, there are several ThreadRipper CPU's to choose from above the 1900x: 1920x 12 core / 24 thread, 2920x 2nd generation 12 core / 24 thread, 1950x 16 core / 32 thread, 2950x 2nd generation 16 core / 32 thread, 2970wx 24 core / 48 thread, and the 2990wx 32 core / 64 thread.

That's what is great about starting with the 8 core / 16 thread 1900x, it's cheap, it's a real ThreadRipper with full IO - unlike the Intel X series now canceled "starter" CPU's.

Your TR4 Motherboard has 2 generations of CPU's to choose from, and 2 more generations of CPU upgrades to look forward to.

 

I wager the interest in a better gaming cpu (which the 9700K will be IMO, even over 2700x) outnumbers the interest in superior chipset I/O by at least 999 to 1.

 

Speaking of AMD in this Intel thread... @hmscott will be happy to see I own an AMD product now. Even though it's not something particularly special... at least it was cheap and that was the goal.

Samsung Notebook 5 (NP550XTA-K01US) BGA Turdbook Hater's Review

 

No need to "wager" anything, most people don't wake up to the IO limits until they add their 2nd M.2 NVME, long after they've passed their parts return period - they are stuck with Intel's PCI limitations.

"The X399 chipset will support multi-GPU rendering (Crossfire and SLI) with up-to four mechanical x16 PCI Express slots (Gen 3.0) and, connected from there onwards, endless possibilities in your configuration, say, 16x/16x/8x/8x Gen 3.0."

"The Ryzen Threadripper processor has an I/O of 64 PCIe 3.0 lanes. The interlink between the Threadripper processor and X399 chipset is a 4x PCIE Gen 3 link - and then your X399 chipset will also offer an additional 20 (!) PCIe Gen 2 lanes and 12 (!) SATA3 ports. Again, four lanes function as an interconnect to the chipset. In the above screenshot, you can check how that works out compared to Ryzen / X370. "
https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-threadripper-2950x-review,4.html

The rest of us that research our purchases rather than buy on emotional impulse, and wait for things to shake out after release, are indeed the minority.

That's one of the reasons I post - to help out those that don't stop and think first before acting.

Intel is going to release more 14nm++++ CPU's and since they can't get much more performance through process, they will try to regain some performance through hardware updates to mitigate the S&M vulnerabilities in releases @ 14nm for the next couple of years.

So even if you are dedicated to Intel - you might want to wait a bit past the 9xxx series that rely on software / firmware mitigations, and wait for the Intel hardware fixed sku's:

Intel's Whiskey Lake Brings In-Silicon Meltdown and Foreshadow Fixes
by Paul Alcorn August 29, 2018 at 5:10 PM
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/whiskey-lake-mitigations-in-silicon-intel,37723.html

"...We expect that Intel's other new processors, like the much-anticipated 9000-series models, will also have in-silicon mitigations, but we're awaiting confirmation."

Image by Anandtech

Nothing has been mentioned anywhere from Intel about the Coffee Lake based 9xxx series CPU's getting any in hardware mitigations to reduce the performance hits of S&M variant vulnerabilities.

When these 9th gen CPU's were planned as 10nm Ice Lake releases, there was mention of in hardware mitigations. After 10nm failed to deliver, and Intel needed to quickly switch to another rebake of Coffee Lake as 9th gen, I doubt there was time to rejigger the design to include hardware mitigations.

It's possible the firmware on the 9th gen Coffee Lake CPU will be updated to the latest microcode level at bake in, but that's not an improvement in performance, and more than likely it won't let you disable those firmware mitigations.

As always it's a good idea to wait for product (9xxx) shipments to arrive and get reviewed by independent reviewers and owners before ordering...

 

When all else fails, I find best results from restating my prior arguments without acknowledging their sheer irrelevance, and adding an accusation of fanboi

 

"I'd recommend buying the 9900k asap if you are an Intel fanboi, and build for a 3-4 year hold, while Intel polishes up their 10nm release for high performance CPU's alongside their datacenter CPU's in 2020." - that was many posts, and hours ago.
http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...e-lake-cpus-z390.811225/page-33#post-10789362

So you are saying you are an Intel fanboi?

It's true, you'd have to be a fanboi to ignore the AMD advantages over Intel right now, and to not reward AMD for getting Intel off their asses and finally breaking free of the 10 years of 4c/8t slow crawl of performance improvements.

Who cares if Intel puts out more security flawed 14nm CPU's with a little more performance costing a lot more? Let Intel innovate for a few years and break out of their 14nm box into 10nm with real performance improvements from a new CPU architecture before rewarding Intel with your hard earned $'s.

AMD deserves the support now for what they've already done, and over the next few years continue to reward AMD to give them the money needed to keep motivating Intel over the long haul.

Continuing as an Intel Fanboi isn't going to motivate or improve Intel, it'll let them fall back on their laurel's again, snoozing away another 10 years.

You don't want that do you?

 

Not many fanboys here in my view (beyond the obvious!). I'd recommend Intel CPUs for high refresh rate gaming, but AMD CPUs are good for everything else. One of my concerns with AMD though, are their CPUs as snappy for Windows use as the 6700K/7700K/8700K? We all know that these are the best high refresh gaming CPUs at the moment, precisely because they're very responsive with their ring bus architecture and have enough cores & higher enough freqency for gaming (especially when overclocked) - but my hunch is that these low latency characteristics help with the general snappiness in the Windows environment for everyday desktop use (they have excellent/best Mozilla Kraken web browsing benchmark scores for example). So, that last statement make me more hesitant to recommend AMD even outside of gaming. Would be interesting to hear from someone who owns examples of both types of systems to comment on the 'snappiness' factor in the general Windows environment (web browsing, general office use, etc).

 

Whose statement? What statement? Quote from where? You didn't provide a quote or link to a source.

There are lots of reviews and reports of interactive use with AMD Ryzen, ThreadRipper, and none of them mention any problems with interactive use.

The more they load up their Ryzen and ThreadRipper systems with work, gaming and streaming while encoding - a popular example - the user browsing and other interactive work moves along the same way as usual.

So if you have a specific review or report that mentions problems, please do post it so we can all see it.

 

Not saying 'problems', just I have a hunch that AMD CPUs are generally less snappy for general desktop use than the Intel camp, especially when it comes to the best Intel gaming CPUs. The following link is one of the pieces that formed that impression (and those Intel CPUs aren't even overclocked in that test):
https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_ryzen_7_2700x_review,12.html
Also, just the very low RAM latency seen on these Intel gaming CPUs (Aida 64) - even when compared to the non-gaming Intel CPUs and in particular compared against AMD. (no, I've not provided a supporting link for that last statement, info is out there, I'll let people search for that if they want).

 

Throwing FUD like that isn't nice. Continuing to do so without providing supporting quotes is lame:

"no, I've not provided a supporting link for that last statement, info is out there, I'll let people search for that if they want"

If you have a poorly thought out idea like that and you can't find any supporting reports from reality it's not real.

Why ask people to waste time looking for something that doesn't exist?; It's something that you know doesn't exist because you know it's BS - so you won't waste your time looking for something that isn't there.

It's been over a year now since Ryzen / ThreadRipper shipped and reviewers have all to a one reported that the interactive use especially under load is one of the stand out features of AMD's new architecture.

 

It's not FUD, I just truly can't be bothered to dig up the screenshots that people have posted in various forums, as well as online reviews I've read - the info is out there, but this convo is not important enough for me to dedicate the time to collate the info for you. (I provided one link to an article with regards to the general point I was making, just not with regards to the finer detail of AIDA 64 latency measurements, which people can indeed search for if they want - often in CPU and/or RAM reviews, etc.)

 

Might be a paper launch anyway...

PCGamesN: “Intel’s processor supply shortfall” could mean we have to wait until 2019 to get our hands on a Core i9 9900K.
https://www.pcgamesn.com/intel-14nm-supply-shortfall

Fanbois can rag on them all they like, but there is still more demand than supply right now, and if you're a business selling stuff, that's what you want.

 

The drive to smaller and smaller nodes reminds me of my youth when Intel kept trying to surpass Moore's law with bigger and badder Pentium processors. What happens when we finally reach the point where technology is finally the bottleneck?

We will need new innovators with visions on the order of Steve Jobs and the like. But, these people are few and far between. Until then, I fear that companies like Intel will continue to squander resources in order to make deadlines imposed by sharreholder and public opinion.

If the 9700K and 9900K must be delayed to make sure they meet standards of excellence, so be it. I'll be disappointed but I'll eagerly await a product I'll be happy to put on my charge card!

 

I expect Intel will make an effort to steal 8 core cpu sales from AMD. This chips will probably get some priority

 

The lack of 14nm production capacity is a result of the failure of Intel's 10nm production; overloading Intel's 14nm production.

If there is no 10nm production, there can be no 10nm products.

All of Intel's planned 10nm products are now being redirected to 14nm production, including the previously announced 10nm Ice Lake, which are now the 14nm 9xxx CPU's

Intel hadn't planned on additional 14nm production build out because Intel planned on migrating to 10nm, so there is no additional 14nm capacity.

The only way to balance the production on 14nm is to stop producing some things, cancel migration of 22nm products to 14nm - like the z390 14nm and instead allow the 22nm z370 to accept the 9xxx CPU's.

This is bad for Intel and it's bad for the 9xxx CPU's that were planned to be 10nm Ice Lake.

" but there is still more demand than supply right now, and if you're a business selling stuff, that's what you want."

That isn't what's happening, this isn't good for Intel.

This is bad for Intel, and bad for us as consumers.

 

Yup, something else won't get built so Intel can carry a basket of 8c/8t 9700k CPU's to market, and a handful of 8c/16t 9900k CPU's to some lucky customers.

I doubt there is enough 14nm production for full availability of the new 9xxx CPU's, so those CPU's will likely be constrained and may be in limited availability like the 8700k was at release last year. At least until Intel builds out more 14nm production capacity.

As Intel decides to sacrifice other customers needs for 14nm product, someone else will have trouble finding parts instead of 9xxx buyers.

Maybe Intel can buy some of that 14nm/12nm Global Foundries capacity.

 

Expect the same availability for 3rd gen Ryzen chips also But why stress it? I have to wait for Nvidia so this doesn't really matter. It come when it comes.

 

It's much different for AMD @ 7nm. AMD isn't getting future 7nm capacity from their contracted supplier - GoFlo - but AMD already have production capacity planned out for years from TSMC.

GoFlo was for back up 7nm / 5nm capacity, which could be a problem a couple of years from now.

Intel has had their 14nm capacity problem starting last year, and is responsible for the shorfall themselves due to Intel's failures at 10nm.

TSMC and Samsung can get together to increase 7nm capacity, and both have working 7nm processes to rely on for increased capacity.

Intel is off scratching their 10nm heads by their lonesome.

AMD was bound by contract agreements when they split off GoFlo, and AMD might be much better off now due to GoFlo giving up on 7nm/5nm.

GoFlo has been AMD's problematic child since the beginning:

The GlobalFoundries and AMD Story
AdoredTV
Published on Sep 1, 2018
A marriage made in hell.


https://www.reddit.com/r/AyyMD/comments/9chqeq/truer_words_have_never_been_spoken/

 

Put all of its eggs into a 7nm basket reminds me all too much about last gen AMD graphics You remember the HBM availability? And how long it took for people to get it? But yeah, none know the future. Only God know. You're welcome

 

I have heard this statement about insufficient 14nm capacity be made around the place, but not seen any proof of it, only rumours like the article I linked

I agree it makes sense given they probably had plans to migrate chipset and controllers that use older nodes for cost and capacity reasons - and those plans assumed 14nm would be the "old node" by now

On the face of it, it does look like a silly decision to shift fabbing chipsets to 14nm if they are facing capacity constraints, for what, an infinitessimal amount of power saving? Maybe they are indeed so starved of innovation, that the power saving (and integrated WiFi) is all that z390 offers over z370 and they've done it to make a sales pitch rather than anything else

 

Man, this thread is hard to read with so much info going on. so is the new 9700K worth it? Better? 9900K is the top dog now?

 

Unknown, nothing is announced officially, and nothing is shipping - so it's all rumor, all of it.

Being the 1st (rumored) non-HT i7 the 9700k is an unknown - will it outperform the 8700k with 12 threads vs 8 threads on the 9700k? Depends on the app, depends on the top OC on both the 9700k and 8700k.

9900k with 8c/16t is more likely faster overall than the 8700k, but it's also 25%+ more expensive (rumored).

The 9xxx CPU's and z390 are rumored to be released October 1, but with the 14nm constrained production (rumored) it is unknown whether the z390 will ship along side the new CPU's, or if z370 will be the only compatible motherboards at release.

If you can only think in "Intel" you are kinda forced to upgrade within the limited walls of Intels's 14nm and high prices...and no upside of 10nm for a couple of years, maybe.

AMD might be a better choice even if it's slower by core with the 2700x (8c/16t) as it's less cost with the future upside of 7nm AM4 / TR4 socket compatible CPU upgrades for 2 more years.

The AMD 2800x (?c/?t) is rumored to be shipping not long after the Intel 9900k to match / beat it's performance.

These Intel CPU's and Nvidia's 2xxx series GPU's are so much more power hungry at full performance (far more than TDP indicate), none of this will fit in a laptop that you'd want to sit next to at full performance - or want to carry around.

These are all pushing the limits of desktop power, laptops haven't got a chance.

 

Intel Core i7-9700K Performance Benchmarks Leak Out – 8 Cores Faster Than The Core i7-8700K and Ryzen 7 2700X, Overclocked To 5.3 GHz on Low entry Air Cooling
The chip was spotted running with a Deepcool GAMMAXX 400 air cooler which is a very entry-level solution featuring 4 heat pipe which makes direct contact with the CPU and costs under 30 bucks. We have no idea what board the chip was running on but its surprising to see that the VRM area of the board used was bare of any heatsink so that might put some heavy stress on the PWM supply.

 

5.3Ghz on air with an under $30 air cooler. Wow. . Imagine this beast on water.

 

Or 1.215V for [email protected] as the 9700K sample posted above

 

I am really looking forward to this fall. Wonder if Santa can make an earlier detour with a bag full of Intel goodies.

 

Isn't it boring news that intel leaks 5.x GHz on air cooling when you, Mr. Fox and others have been on 5.1GHz for nearly 2 years with LM and Intel should allow 6.1GHz if they want customers to buy their product.

 

So true, but at 14nm, we get what we are given and can only wait patiently for what follows, whether that is "10nm", or some alternative.

 

Yes as always we get what we are given. But history will show that Zen and Intel's response has given us what 2 years ago was >$1000 8 core HEDT platform performance. I don't think that kind of raw % performance increase in the consumer space has been seen since the P4/K8 to Conroe shift?

 

When Intel says their 14nm++++ is better than competitors 10nm I feel they should be able to do 6GHz on air.

 

Yeah, but we all know that's Intel's 10nm "excuses" BS. Now we are hearing that the "new" "10nm" streamlined for production is considered as "12nm", hopefully that reduction makes it work well enough to gain yield - enough for production.

 

Yes and no. Sure we've seen 5.x Ghz before, but those were 4 and 6 core CPUs. Hell my 8700K isn't even a year old yet. If we are seeing 5.3Ghz (my 8700K can do this with LM and water AIO) on a cheapo air cooler with 8 cores and most likely the 8/16 9900K will also do it then I would say that is progress. Also that voltage. It appears 14nm+++++++++++ still has life in her yet.

 

Very sad about 8700K. less than one year life it's going to be dethroned.

 

Maybe Intel has more powerful weapons for 10nm next year. 8c/16t 10900K 6.0GHz?

 

50% more cores with same +50x overclock means progress. We can as well talk about almost no progress... Just look at the Ryzen 2700x vs its predecessor. Or 2nd gen Threadripper 2950X vs. 1950X