The Intel Core i9-9900K at 95W: Fixing The Power for SFF
by Ian Cutress on November 29, 2018 8:00 AM ESTCPU Performance: Legacy Tests
We have also included our legacy benchmarks, representing a stack of older code for popular benchmarks.
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
3DPM v1: Naïve Code Variant of 3DPM v2.1
The first legacy test in the suite is the first version of our 3DPM benchmark. This is the ultimate naïve version of the code, as if it was written by scientist with no knowledge of how computer hardware, compilers, or optimization works (which in fact, it was at the start). This represents a large body of scientific simulation out in the wild, where getting the answer is more important than it being fast (getting a result in 4 days is acceptable if it’s correct, rather than sending someone away for a year to learn to code and getting the result in 5 minutes).
In this version, the only real optimization was in the compiler flags (-O2, -fp:fast), compiling it in release mode, and enabling OpenMP in the main compute loops. The loops were not configured for function size, and one of the key slowdowns is false sharing in the cache. It also has long dependency chains based on the random number generation, which leads to relatively poor performance on specific compute microarchitectures.
3DPM v1 can be downloaded with our 3DPM v2 code here: 3DPMv2.1.rar (13.0 MB)
x264 HD 3.0: Older Transcode Test
This transcoding test is super old, and was used by Anand back in the day of Pentium 4 and Athlon II processors. Here a standardized 720p video is transcoded with a two-pass conversion, with the benchmark showing the frames-per-second of each pass. This benchmark is single-threaded, and between some micro-architectures we seem to actually hit an instructions-per-clock wall.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
101 Comments
View All Comments
urbanman2004 - Thursday, November 29, 2018 - link
Yeah, the 9900K is the latest and greatest when it comes to mainstream CPU's, but at its current pricing you're better off purchasing a more value oriented CPU such as the 8700K to get more bang for your buck. Intel has been losing their sh!t as of late ever since AMD's Ryzen has them on their heels.AlyxSharkBite - Thursday, November 29, 2018 - link
The 9900K is awesome if you build a rig that can keep it cool when overclocked. But otherwise yeah an 8700K is a better choice or for bang for buck the 2700X is good4800z - Thursday, November 29, 2018 - link
It's not that hard to cool it. Just need a big noctua or an AIO.TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, November 29, 2018 - link
It still runs high 90C under OC on such coolers. The only way to keep it running at a 5 GHz OC with with a 360mm rad, and even then just barely.The 9900k is the hardest intel to cool since the pentium DEE
4800z - Thursday, November 29, 2018 - link
If you want value stop playing games and get a part time job so you can have more money in your pocket. The 9900k is only a few hundred dollars more. THat's not much spread over years.sa666666 - Thursday, November 29, 2018 - link
Found the Intel shill/apologist. Not everyone has unlimited funds to spend like that, and even if they could afford the CPU, what about the power to run it? This CPU is very power-hungry and expensive, and insulting users that don't have a lot of money (or have a better sense of how to properly budget it) won't change that fact.schujj07 - Thursday, November 29, 2018 - link
Very true. Has to justify the reason for spending an arm and a leg on his/her new space heater. 4800z while the CPU is $200 more expensive, you also need the $70+ cooler, you have to have the expensive z390 motherboard that adds another $70 onto the build, your room is going to be warmer so that will increase your cooling costs, and drawing 77% more power means you are going to increase your electric bill. All these costs add up and unless you are able to purchase this on a credit card with 0% interest or have saved up for a long time, the extra $400 is going to make a huge difference. Also someone could go with the 2700X or 8700K and use the extra $400 for a nice upgrade on their build, where said person would have gotten a RTX2080 not s/he can afford a RTX2080Ti.TEAMSWITCHER - Thursday, November 29, 2018 - link
He's not wrong. The 9900K is closer the Thread Ripper in many benchmarks than Ryzen is to the 9900K, and at the same time closer to Ryzen in cost. While billed as a gaming processor, the 9900K is great for content creators. Unless you have a specific need for HEDT platform capabilities (RAM or PCIe lanes) the 9900k would get the job done for less money.Targon - Thursday, November 29, 2018 - link
And if you just wait until March of 2019, Ryzen 3rd generation will probably meet or beat the performance of the 9900k for $330. So your $200+ higher price will only be for 4-5 months of having superior performance before the new AMD will be considered faster.HollyDOL - Saturday, December 1, 2018 - link
I know a person holding to a similar philosophy. He still runs Athlon XP, always waiting for the next generation beating the current one.