The Intel 9th Gen Review: Core i9-9900K, Core i7-9700K and Core i5-9600K Tested
by Ian Cutress on October 19, 2018 9:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
- Intel
- Coffee Lake
- 14++
- Core 9th Gen
- Core-S
- i9-9900K
- i7-9700K
- i5-9600K
CPU Performance: Rendering Tests
Rendering is often a key target for processor workloads, lending itself to a professional environment. It comes in different formats as well, from 3D rendering through rasterization, such as games, or by ray tracing, and invokes the ability of the software to manage meshes, textures, collisions, aliasing, physics (in animations), and discarding unnecessary work. Most renderers offer CPU code paths, while a few use GPUs and select environments use FPGAs or dedicated ASICs. For big studios however, CPUs are still the hardware of choice.
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
Corona 1.3: Performance Render
An advanced performance based renderer for software such as 3ds Max and Cinema 4D, the Corona benchmark renders a generated scene as a standard under its 1.3 software version. Normally the GUI implementation of the benchmark shows the scene being built, and allows the user to upload the result as a ‘time to complete’.
We got in contact with the developer who gave us a command line version of the benchmark that does a direct output of results. Rather than reporting time, we report the average number of rays per second across six runs, as the performance scaling of a result per unit time is typically visually easier to understand.
The Corona benchmark website can be found at https://corona-renderer.com/benchmark
Corona is a fully multithreaded test, so the non-HT parts get a little behind here. The Core i9-9900K blasts through the AMD 8-core parts with a 25% margin, and taps on the door of the 12-core Threadripper.
Blender 2.79b: 3D Creation Suite
A high profile rendering tool, Blender is open-source allowing for massive amounts of configurability, and is used by a number of high-profile animation studios worldwide. The organization recently released a Blender benchmark package, a couple of weeks after we had narrowed our Blender test for our new suite, however their test can take over an hour. For our results, we run one of the sub-tests in that suite through the command line - a standard ‘bmw27’ scene in CPU only mode, and measure the time to complete the render.
Blender can be downloaded at https://www.blender.org/download/
Blender has an eclectic mix of requirements, from memory bandwidth to raw performance, but like Corona the processors without HT get a bit behind here. The high frequency of the 9900K pushes it above the 10C Skylake-X part, and AMD's 2700X, but behind the 1920X.
LuxMark v3.1: LuxRender via Different Code Paths
As stated at the top, there are many different ways to process rendering data: CPU, GPU, Accelerator, and others. On top of that, there are many frameworks and APIs in which to program, depending on how the software will be used. LuxMark, a benchmark developed using the LuxRender engine, offers several different scenes and APIs.
Taken from the Linux Version of LuxMark
In our test, we run the simple ‘Ball’ scene on both the C++ and OpenCL code paths, but in CPU mode. This scene starts with a rough render and slowly improves the quality over two minutes, giving a final result in what is essentially an average ‘kilorays per second’.
POV-Ray 3.7.1: Ray Tracing
The Persistence of Vision ray tracing engine is another well-known benchmarking tool, which was in a state of relative hibernation until AMD released its Zen processors, to which suddenly both Intel and AMD were submitting code to the main branch of the open source project. For our test, we use the built-in benchmark for all-cores, called from the command line.
POV-Ray can be downloaded from http://www.povray.org/
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
274 Comments
View All Comments
0ldman79 - Friday, October 19, 2018 - link
There are certainly occasions where more cores are better than clock speed.Just look at certain mining apps. You can drop the power usage by half and only lose a little processing speed, but drop them to 2 cores at full power instead of 4 and it is a *huge* drop. Been playing with the CPU max speed in Windows power management on my various laptops. The Skylake i5 6300HQ can go down to some seriously low power levels if you play with it a bit. The recent Windows updates have lost a lot of the Intel Dynamic Thermal control though. That's a shame.
Makaveli - Friday, October 19, 2018 - link
Power consumption rules on mobiles parts why would they release an 8 core model?notashill - Friday, October 19, 2018 - link
Because you get more performance at the same power level using more cores at lower clocks. The additional cores are power gated when not in use.evernessince - Saturday, October 20, 2018 - link
Not judging by the power consumption and heat output displayed here.mkaibear - Friday, October 19, 2018 - link
9700K is definitely the way to go on the non-HEDT. 9900K is technically impressive but the heat? Gosh.It's definitely made me consider waiting for the 9800X though - if the 7820X full load power is 145W ("TDP" 140W) at 3.6/4.3, then the 9800X isn't likely to be too much higher than that at 3.8/4.5.
Hrm.
Cooe - Friday, October 19, 2018 - link
"9700K is definitely the way to go on the non-HEDT."I think you meant to say "Ryzen 5 2600 unless your GPU's so fast, it'll HEAVILY CPU-bind you in gaming" but spelt it wrong ;). The 9700K is a vey good CPU, no doubt, but to claim it the undisputed mainstream champ at it's currently mediocre bang/$ value (so important for the mainstream market) doesn't make any sense, or accurately represent what people in the mainstream are ACTUALLY buying (lots of Ryzen 5 2600's & i5-8400's; both with a MUCH saner claim to the "best overall mainstream CPU" title).
mkaibear - Saturday, October 20, 2018 - link
No, I meant to say "9700K is definitely the way to go on the non-HEDT".Don't put words in people's mouth. I don't just game. The video encoding tests in particular are telling - I can get almost a third better performance with the 9700K than I can the r5 2600x.
>"best overall mainstream CPU" title
Please don't straw man either. Nowhere did I say that it was the best overall mainstream CPU (that's the R7 2700X in my opinion), but for my particular use case the 9700K or the 9800X are better suited at present.
koaschten - Friday, October 19, 2018 - link
Uhm yeah... so where are the 9900k overclocking results the article claims are currently being uploaded? :)watzupken - Friday, October 19, 2018 - link
The i9 processor is expected to be quite impressive in performance. However this review also reveals that Intel is struggling to pull more tricks out of their current 14nm and Skylake architect. The lack of IPC improvement over the last few generations is just forcing them to up the clockspeed to continue to cling on to their edge. Considering that they are launching the new series this late in the year, they are at risk of AMD springing a surprise with their 7nm Zen 2 slated to launch next year.SquarePeg - Friday, October 19, 2018 - link
If the rumored 13% IPC and minimum 500mhz uplift are for real with Zen 2 then AMD would take the performance crown. I'm not expecting very high clocks from Intel's relaxed 10nm process so it remains to be seen what kind of IPC gain they can pull with Ice Lake. It wouldn't surprise me if they had a mild performance regression because of how long they had to optimize 14nm for clock speed. Either way I'm all in on a new Ryzen 3 build next year.