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
Overclocking
With the upgraded thermal interface between the processor and the heatspreader, from paste to solder, Intel is leaning on the fact that these overclockable processors should be more overclockable than previous generations. We’ve only had time to test the Core i9-9900K and i7-9700K on this, so we took them for a spin.
Our overclocking methodology is simple. We set the Load Line Calibration to static (or level 1 for this ASRock Z370 motherboard), set the frequency to 4.5 GHz, the voltage to 1.000 volts, and run our tests. If successfully stable, we record the power and performance, and then increase the CPU multiplier. If the system fails, we increase the voltage by +0.025 volts. The overclocking ends when the temperatures get too high (85C+).
For our new test suite comes new overclocking features. As mentioned in the previous page, our software loading for power measurement is POV-Ray, which can thrash a processor quite harshly. POV-Ray also does a good job on stability, but is not a substantial enough test – for that we use our Blender workload, which pushes the cores and the memory, and lasts about 5 minutes on an 8 core processor.
Results as follows:
For the Core i7-9700K, we hit 5.3 GHz very easily, for a small bump in power and temperature. For 5.4 GHz, we could boot into the operating system but it was in no way stable – we were ultimately voltage/temperature limited at this case. But an eight core, eight thread 5.3 GHz CPU at 180W for $374? Almost unimaginable a year ago.
Overclocking the Core i9-9900K was not as fruitful. The best bit about this overclock is the 4.7 GHz value: by using our own voltage settings, we reduced power consumption by 41W, almost 25% of the total power, and also reduced temperatures by 24ºC. That's a safe idea. Even 4.8 GHz and 4.9 GHz was reasonable, but the temperatures at 5.0 GHz might not be for everyone. When all cores and threads are loaded, this is one warm chip.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
274 Comments
View All Comments
AutomaticTaco - Saturday, October 20, 2018 - link
Revised. TDP is still some generic average not true max. Regardless, not 220w.https://www.anandtech.com/show/13400/intel-9th-gen...
The motherboard in question was using an insane 1.47v
https://twitter.com/IanCutress/status/105342741705...
https://twitter.com/IanCutress/status/105339755111...
dezonio2 - Friday, October 19, 2018 - link
I would love to see overclocking performance of the 9600k. It would show exactly how much of a difference the upgraded TIM makes if compared to 8600k.emn13 - Friday, October 19, 2018 - link
That power consumption seems pretty crazy. Going from 4.5 to 5Gz for +56% powerdraw? or worse, from 5.0 to 5.3GHz for 6% clock boost and +40% powerdraw?This proc looks like it makes sense at 4.5GHz; beyond that - not much. I mean going from 4.5 to 5.3 isn't nothing - 18% more clocks! But that's going to translate into less-than-that performance gain, and even 18%, while admirable and all, is often not actually all that noticeable - unlike that powerdraw, which you'll likely notice in terms of noise and effort to get the system cooled at all.
I don't know; this proc looks... cool... but borderline. I'm not sure I'd buy it, even if money were no object (and since I'd consider this for work - it basically isn't).
Tkan2155 - Saturday, October 20, 2018 - link
Yes bill add up this prepare big wallet . amd can overclock higher but it's better at stock . intel is going over limit because they want to show the world they are the bestmapesdhs - Sunday, October 21, 2018 - link
But then, the candle that burns twice as brightly burns half as long. :)MonkeyPaw - Friday, October 19, 2018 - link
In regards to TDP, I say use your own methodology and ratings if Intel and AMD can’t arrive at a standard measure. Based on how the i9 truly performs in this regard, the 95W rating is just shy of disingenuous. When real world values are applied it does change where this CPU sits in regard to its overall value. Lots of performance? Yes, but it comes at a significant cost. These CPUs aren’t like GPUs, where the cooling solution is designed to match the limits of the GPU. No, Intel doesn’t even bundle a cooler, because they know they have nothing to offer to hit boost speeds, and let’s be real—it’s the boost speeds that help sell this product and yield bragging rights.pavag - Friday, October 19, 2018 - link
It doesn't have a price/performance chart, so it is hard to tell how justifiable is to spend on this processor, compared to alternatives, and that's the main purpose of reading this kind of articles.Here is one from TomsHardware, for reference:
https://img.purch.com/r/711x457/aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLm...
It makes clear that is little to gain from a cheap i5-8400 to an i9-9900K, and it also tells which processors are better performing at a given price, or cheaper at a given performance. At least from an average FPS gaming viewpoint.
WinterCharm - Friday, October 19, 2018 - link
Well written. Great article, and I enjoyed it thoroughly :)Machinus - Friday, October 19, 2018 - link
Can you test the power draw and temperatures of the 9900 with HT disabled, and compare that to the 9700 under the same conditions?Felice - Saturday, October 20, 2018 - link
Ryan--Any chance of you doing the same run with the 9900K's hyperthreading disabled? A lot of gamers find they get better performance without hyperthreading.