Intel Core i9-9900K, i7-9700K, i5-9600K specifications also exposed

The core wars has begun

 

Interesting!
Thinking seriously about the 8 core 16 thread CPU.
Thanks for the news boss.

 

lol...a premium product, 8 core product, with no HT....if this turns out to be true, that's just wow.....

 

Yep, that 9900K sure looks nice. 4.7 GHz turbo across all 8 cores out of the box, 5.0 GHz on one core, yep, looks like a part I'd use stock without overclock. Which would meake it the first in the last 18 years that I would not overclock.

 

Where is 6C/12T... seriously... SMT is needed since many applications are coded to benefit from it.
And IIRC intel stopped releasing information about turbo clock based on number of cores under load.

 

There are errors in this write up. 9700K is shown as 6/12 and also later as 8/8. Not surprised honestly as the accuracy, grammar and quality of write ups have been bad for a while now. Almost seems like someone is speaking into google translate in some other language and then just publishing whatever the hell gets spit out in English without checking for accuracy or proper English grammar. I'm never a grammar or spelling *****, but constant errors as critical as calling the 9700K both a 6/12 part and an 8/8 part just makes reading the articles here effing painful as hell. Guru3D used to be better honestly. No idea what happened.

 

Buy 8700k/8086k, if you want 6core/12t

 

Actually my reading comprehension failed. Hilbert should ban me forever.

 

Wait!, 4.7Ghz all cores on 8 core with tooth-paste?
On other side, 4.7Ghz@8 core Intel vs 3.9Ghz @8 core AMD 2700X , the gap is too big, but as we know Intel they will ask over 50% price for this ~20% performance VS 2700X.
2800X is coming or new "Zen 2" leaks will show up as 9900K release day comes to destroy Intels Hype.

 

There was rumor about soldering. Which would make sense considering 8C/16T even for non-OC operation.

Intel does not risk another 2500K/2600K. because now their chips have little headroom.

 

If they will solder the 9X00 series that will prove us that the main reason not soldering until now was $$$$$, not good sign for their loyal customers.
P.S- I am sure that the 9900K buyers will be very sad to see the Zen2 few month after they got 9900K .
P.S2: considering such high clock rate with 8 core- Intel going to cannibalizing their HEDT even the Core i9 7900X!(not to mention the i7 7820X LOL).
as we all know many software like high core clocks vs core count (Adobe etc...).

ROFL- AMD messed up all Intel's product line!.

 

Intel hated 2500K/2600K. They underestimated OC capability and lifespan. And in return it did cost them sales for many generations.
I mean, Almost all of them did comfortably 4.4GHz on all cores, many did 4.6GHz, and few reached even 4.9GHz.
Today, it is 4,7/5.0/5.2GHz without solder. Main improvement intel did over years was better IMC.
Today, Solder will not cause some magical 6GHz OC. Not even 5,5GHz. It will allow those more power hungry chips to stay cool.

And no doubt that intel's 8C/16T will be stronger than AMD's current 8C/16T (mainly due to clock difference), but for what price difference?
Then you are right again that Zen 2 which will catch up with clock, probably will win on IPC metric and will be better even at power efficiency... Probably will win on performance to price ratio too.

I think intel understands this. And they will decrease pricing a bit upon release of 9x00 chips to make quick revenue before Zen2 comes kicking butts.

 

That 9700K will be the new gaming king. It will obliterate 8086k and 2700x in all aspects. 8/8 with strong clocks and godlike IPC is more than enough before 2020. Well done Intel.

 

There's no doubt in my mind it will be priced higher than the current 8700K part, enough maybe to raise some eyebrows...we have to pay for those extra cores and the 14+++ Whiskey Lake silicon. Must say I'm very keen to see the benchmark numbers. Only question is, will it be soldered or will they use cottage cheese?

 

Godlike IPC? Are you on intel's drugs? Last time I checked IPC of intel and AMD chips are practically same.
Only intel started to call it "instructions per core" which makes no sense as there is no time unit in name anymore.
Or do you expect them to improve IPC drastically, and prove that they intentionally held IPC back while having improvements ready for years?

And fun fact... "Well done Intel." Congratulating before fact? Reminds me of all those racers who lost their races on last meters due to them celebrating early.

 

@Fox2232 Whenever you like it or not If differences between 9900K and 8700K are like 8700K vs 7700K we are talking for frightening power inbound. AMD is still weak to react. Everything else mentioned is blabbing.

 

@HWgeek Blah blah as much as you want. Intel is sitting on throne, whether you ROFLing or not. War cries will not give you any victories.

 

Yeah, Frightening change of having 50% more cores
well, now it will be Frightening change by having 33% more cores.

Secondly, Since Ryzen release it is intel who is in reactive mode. It is AMD who's following their own roadmap.

 

Per clock there is not much difference, but Intel can run @ ~1Ghz faster core and ~Ghz faster memory. This makes the big difference. If you don't like it, don't buy it.