The Intel Core i9-9900KS Review: The 5 GHz Consumer Special
by Dr. Ian Cutress on October 31, 2019 10:45 AM ESTTest Bed and Setup
As per our processor testing policy, we take a premium category motherboard suitable for the socket, and equip the system with a suitable amount of memory running at the manufacturer's maximum supported frequency. This is also typically run at JEDEC subtimings where possible. It is noted that some users are not keen on this policy, stating that sometimes the maximum supported frequency is quite low, or faster memory is available at a similar price, or that the JEDEC speeds can be prohibitive for performance. While these comments make sense, ultimately very few users apply memory profiles (either XMP or other) as they require interaction with the BIOS, and most users will fall back on JEDEC supported speeds - this includes home users as well as industry who might want to shave off a cent or two from the cost or stay within the margins set by the manufacturer. Where possible, we will extend out testing to include faster memory modules either at the same time as the review or a later date.
| Test Setup | |
| Intel 9th Gen | Intel Core i9-9900KS |
| Motherboard | MSI Z390 Gaming Edge AC (A.60 BIOS) |
| CPU Cooler | TRUE Copper |
| DRAM | Corsair Vengeance 2x8 GB DDR4-2666 |
| GPU | Sapphire RX 460 2GB (CPU Tests) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming 8G (Gaming Tests) |
| PSU | Corsair AX860i |
| SSD | Crucial MX200 1TB |
Many thanks to...
We must thank the following companies for kindly providing hardware for our multiple test beds. Some of this hardware is not in this test bed specifically, but is used in other testing.
| Hardware Providers | |||
| Sapphire RX 460 Nitro | MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X OC | Crucial MX200 + MX500 SSDs |
Corsair AX860i + AX1200i PSUs |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| G.Skill RipjawsV, SniperX, FlareX |
Crucial Ballistix DDR4 |
Silverstone Coolers |
Silverstone Fans |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
235 Comments
View All Comments
liquid_c - Sunday, November 3, 2019 - link
One of the few reasons i keep reading articles from sites / news outlets like Anandtech and ArsTechnica is the fact that besides good, well developed and portrayed journalism, i also expect knowledgeable people commenting on said articles. I always learn(ed) a little bit of extra info by doing so and it pains me to see this ongoing fan war between Intel / AMD fans, Apple / *Insert any other Android vendor name* fans, etc. So instead of finding out the “ifs” and “whens” of specific tech topics, i have to skip through countless hate posts.PeachNCream - Monday, November 4, 2019 - link
People in glass houses.... liquid_c - Sunday, November 03, 2019 - Stop being such a dummy and stop acting like a rabid dog over a product that not only you will never get but clearly, it's not geared towards you.Although I agree in principal that there are a fair number of toxic comments, yours are among them so I don't think you have much room to complain while at the same time contributing to the problem.
sorten - Sunday, November 3, 2019 - link
The 65W 3700X is the star of this show.shompa - Monday, November 4, 2019 - link
The main problem is: 16 PCI lanes. You can't really connect anything to the system without starving it for bandwidth. The 16 PCI lanes are used for graphics. DMI link to the motherboards PCI lanes has a bandwidth of 3.8GB/s. 4-year-old NVme SSDs are already at 3.5GB/s. Forget using 2 NVme. Usually, the graphics card is pushed to 8PCI lanes killing 10% performance. Forget connecting fun stuff with a thunderbolt, or use high-end capture cards and so on. There is no bandwidth. AMD Ryzen 3 with X570 is a bit better: 24 PCI lanes. 16 for PCI and 2x4 for dual NVme SSD with 8GB/s support.trojtalen - Wednesday, November 6, 2019 - link
Really? In FarCry i missing Ryzen 3000 generation, why?...Sorry but in Vulkan (Strange Brigade) its shame! 65W AMD beat 250W+ intel on 5GHz? :D:D:D LOLalufan - Thursday, November 7, 2019 - link
so this has been the main front page story on this site for the last 8 Days strikes me as a little biased other CPUs come and go yet intels last gasp attempt to make something matter is upfront and centre for over a week strikes me as a little unfairjonbar - Thursday, November 7, 2019 - link
So.... În other review, Ryzen slaughtered 9900ks in blender, even 3700x is faster :)Some say in gaming it's faster than 3900x, but so is 9700k with 2080 :) 9700k is on par with 9900ks.
Other than "having the best of the best", 9900ks requires a lot more spending to open it's full potential. From this review, 3700x is really, really good all-round with minimal spending a 100$ B450 and a good 550w psu
Maxiking - Thursday, November 7, 2019 - link
Any Ryzen CPU is getting slaughtered in gaming by piss poor 9700k without HT so your point? Don't hate things just because you are too poor to afford them. We rich bois don't care. Don't forget to attend Fridays for future today.jonbar - Friday, November 8, 2019 - link
:) how could you live a day without insults.People asked why no ryzen 3000 results for blender, and slaughters is when a 127W-rated, "special edition" "all cores 5GHz all times", 550$+ CPU doesn't even manage to beat the 3700X at 325$.
People also asked why 1080 and argued that 9900ks is still better for gaming, guess what - on a 2080, de difference is not so great, other than Hitman, 9700k (piss poor? I suppose rich boys don't know that it, at the moment, is 30$ more expensive than 3700x, with no cooler AND requires the Z mobo to overclock :)
Maxiking - Friday, November 8, 2019 - link
Yeah, I am asking too why that allegedly excellent 7nm cpu with HT is unable to beat a piss poor 14nm 9700k with HT disabled? See, there is a reason why it is so cheap.Yes, it is a piss poor version of 9900k with disabled HT, the silicone quality is subpar by Intel high standards and those pieces are unable to reach 5ghz boosts with HT being enabled , so Intel disabled the HT and sell them as 9700k. Of course, I should not forget to mention that 9700k is a piss poor quality cpu only by the high Intel standards and high Intel customers standards.. We do not bother with anything below 4.7 Ghz.
By AMD standards, anything reaching 4.0 is a godly cpu and is being binned and sold as 3900x for the premium and they are pumping up to 1.55v into it so it can reach that mighty 4.3ghz boost on a single core whilst they promised 4.6ghz.
Let's wait for 3950x and the promised 4.7ghz boost. You know, I smell a trap. Not that kind of one, you pervert. 3900x is able to reach 4.6ghz for microseconds so, that 4.7ghz boost won't be most likely even measurable because such tiny time unit the boost would be active for hasn't been discovered yet.