The Intel Core i9-9980XE CPU Review: Refresh Until it Hertz
by Ian Cutress on November 13, 2018 9:00 AM ESTPower Consumption
One of the key topics in power consumption recently has been whether Intel’s approach to power, or to how it represents its Thermal Design Power (TDP) values, is valid or not. Intel’s take on TDP is that it should represent the sustained power of the processor, which unfortunately does not take into account any of the turbo modes available to the users (or disclose how long those turbo modes should be available for). Part of this is not only confusing, but motherboard manufacturers rarely use Intel specifications for these limits anyway, as you can read in our article covering the practice here.
With the Core i9-9980XE, the typical representation of power is used: stick to the turbo tables unless the system is thermally compromised. In this case the 165W TDP value is a guide, not a limit or a suggestion – it relies on the quality of the silicon and the ability of the motherboard manufacturer to be stable, performance focused, and competitive.
Comparing the Core i9-9980XE to the Core i9-7980XE, the new processor has a higher base frequency by 400 MHz, a higher single core turbo frequency by 100 MHz, and a higher all-core turbo, but uses a newer 14++ manufacturing process and soldered thermal interface material. The peak power consumption numbers are as follows:
Looking at the full chip values, the peak power consumption we observed for the Core i9-9980XE is 192W. This is 9-10W higher than our Core i9-7980XE sample.
If we remove the ‘idle’ power numbers away to see the core-only power, then the Core i9-9980XE uses around 152W just for the cores, which should be around 8.5W per core. The 32-core Threadripper 2990WX by contrast uses around 6W per core.
If we look at the efficiency of each processor, with our power numbers taken during a POV-Ray run:
The Core i9-7980XE gets a performance per watt of 43.3 POV-Ray points per watt - the new Core i9-9980XE scores a little less at 42.7, as for the extra 5% of power, we get a 3.6% increase in performance. For competition, the only HEDT processors coming close are the other Intel HEDT parts, or the 2990WX at the top right of the diagram. Obviously, this is benchmark specific, but an interesting comparison nonetheless.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
143 Comments
View All Comments
Stasinek - Wednesday, November 21, 2018 - link
If something is a joke - Threadripper 2920, 2970,2990 is for sure with one exception 2950To have much more weak threads than IF/RAM subsystem is capable handle it's a joke.
Intels HDET despite having less cores is stil just better solution.
Benchmarks yet another series here on this site are best prove of that.
Badelhas - Tuesday, November 13, 2018 - link
Intel have been milking us for years, I am still holding to my 2500k overclocked to 5ghz (their last great CPU) and my next CPU is going to be a AMD for sure. Nvidia is doing the same lately, its outrageous.Badelhas - Tuesday, November 13, 2018 - link
Oh, I forgot: GREAT REVIEW, Anandtech! Cheers. :)imaheadcase - Tuesday, November 13, 2018 - link
Crazy right, its almost like you needed a performance product and bought it.nerd1 - Tuesday, November 13, 2018 - link
My 9900k@5.1Ghz is almost 3X faster than yours considering IPC difference. And seriously, no one's using AMD GPU anymore, either for gaming or gpu computing.benedict - Tuesday, November 13, 2018 - link
No one cares how fast your CPU is and plenty of people who are not obscenely rich use AMD GPUs.nerd1 - Tuesday, November 13, 2018 - link
He said 2500k is intel's last great CPU and I showed him a counterexample.AMD is indeed good if you just need many cores for budget, but that's it.
Aephe - Tuesday, November 13, 2018 - link
Actually, if, like me, you're rendering on Corona (or any CPU render engine in 3ds Max) daily, AMD has the best CPU. Period. The fact my 2990WX is also WAY cheaper than the next best thing from Intel is just an added bonus for my company.Spunjji - Tuesday, November 13, 2018 - link
He's using a different definition of "great CPU" from you. His includes price/performance ratio, yours doesn't. Insisting that your comparison is more valid than his doesn't make any more sense than him doing the same, so if you're going to mock someone's post, maybe avoid the same errors.Arbie - Tuesday, November 13, 2018 - link
How do AMD's GPUs relate to the HEDT CPU market being discussed here? And seriously, can't see any point to your remarks.