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
Gaming: Integrated Graphics
Despite being the ultimate joke at any bring-your-own-computer event, gaming on integrated graphics can ultimately be as rewarding as the latest mega-rig that costs the same as a car. The desire for strong integrated graphics in various shapes and sizes has waxed and waned over the years, with Intel relying on its latest ‘Gen’ graphics architecture while AMD happily puts its Vega architecture into the market to swallow up all the low-end graphics card sales. With Intel poised to make an attack on graphics in the next few years, it will be interesting to see how the graphics market develops, especially integrated graphics.
For our integrated graphics testing, we take our ‘IGP’ category settings for each game and loop the benchmark round for five minutes a piece, taking as much data as we can from our automated setup.
Finally, looking at integrated graphics performance, I don’t believe anyone should be surprised here. Intel has not meaningfully changed their iGPU since Kaby Lake – the microarchitecture is the same and the peak GPU frequency has risen by all of 50MHz to 1200MHz – so Intel’s iGPU results have essentially been stagnant for the last couple of years at the top desktop segment.
To that end I don’t think there’s much new to say. Intel’s GT2 iGPU struggles even at 720p in some of these games; it’s not an incapable iGPU, but there’s sometimes a large gulf between it and what these games (which are multi-platform console ports) expect for minimum GPU performance. The end result is that if you’re serious about iGPU performance in your desktop CPU, then AMD’s APUs provide much better performance. That said, if you are forced to game on the 9900K’s iGPU, then at least the staples of the eSports world such as World of Tanks will run quite well.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
274 Comments
View All Comments
DominionSeraph - Sunday, October 21, 2018 - link
The 8700k is also pulling 150W while the 8086k is 95W. Something's not right there._mat - Wednesday, November 7, 2018 - link
There can be two reasons why that is the case:1) The mainboard settings for Power Limits were different.
2) The 8086K ran into Power Limit 1 while the 8700K was not.
Whatever is the case here, it is no doubt that the 8086K did run into Power Limit 1 after the "Time Above PL1" (= power budget) was depleted. The 95 Watts are exactly the specified TDP of the CPU and Intel recommends this as Power Limit 1 value.
So the problem here is that the Power Limits and Current Limits of the mainboard are not properly documented and seem to differ between the test candidates. While the 8086K obviously had Power Limits in place, the 9th gen CPUs were benched with no limits at all (only temperature limit at 100 °C on a core).
Also, the whole page on power consumption needs rework. The TDP does matter depending on the board and its default settings.
ballsystemlord - Sunday, October 21, 2018 - link
Ian! Many of your tests ( Y-Cruncher multithreaded, apptimer, FCAT - ROTR, WinRAR ), are taking too short of a time. You need some differentiation here! Please make them harder.R0H1T - Sunday, October 21, 2018 - link
>In case the previous comment was missed.I see that the last few pages have included a note about Z390 used because the Z370 board was over-volting the chip? Yet on the Overclocking page we see the Z370 listed with max CPU package power at 168 Watts? Could you list the (default) auto voltage applied by the Asrock Z370 & if appropriate update the charts on OCing page with the Z390 as well?
mapesdhs - Sunday, October 21, 2018 - link
"Intel has promised that its 10nm manufacturing process will ramp through 2019, ..."Ian, what promises did Intel make 2 years ago about what they would be supplying now?
eastcoast_pete - Sunday, October 21, 2018 - link
My guess is that Intel is now printing those promises in 10 nm font size (easily readable with a standard electron microscope). See, they moved to 10 nm by 2018!ballsystemlord - Sunday, October 21, 2018 - link
Actually, fonts are measured in points. So, it's 10pt, and it's rather legible.But, as for products, I don't see any either.
darkos - Sunday, October 21, 2018 - link
nice review, but: please add a flight simulation such as x-plane and prepar3d or fsx. this is an area that is sadly, missing from your reviews.kasboh - Monday, October 22, 2018 - link
Do I see it correctly that there is little benefit of HyperThreading with 8 core CPUs?eXterminuss - Monday, October 22, 2018 - link
I am quiet shocked to see that Anandtech is using a vastly outdated and in parts plainly wrong description for World of tanks:1. The enCore engine ist being used in world of tanks for quiet a while now (10 month)
2.World of tanks is a free to play game, no elements hiden behind a paywall, e. g. no more features for a paying customer than for a freelooter.
3. Since the outadted EnCore benchmark was used, i would have at least expected to see the Results of that benchmark being posted aswell.
Sincerly yours,
eXterminuss a World of Tanks Player