Intel All-Core 5GHz Flagship Core i9 9900KS processor spotted in 3DMark

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Aug 14, 2019.

  1. fry178

    fry178 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,494
    Likes Received:
    205
    GPU:
    2080S WaterForceWB
    @NCC1701D
    My 3600 on balanced profile (slider on perf) hovers abound 40xxish, with slider on the left it usually jumps between 36xx to 42xx clocks.

    Since some sites saw no overall perf bump, when running tests with pbo and other "oc" options turned on (vs turned off), so there is either still some work to do for bios/drivers, or (what i suspect) those chips are binned pretty much to a level where they do not have a lot more headroom (aside from cooling).

    But i couldnt be happier even at stock level (ram @3600cl18).
    Not even talking about getting only a 6C/6T from intel, compared to what i paid for the 3600.
    any i7 or i9 would have been multiple times more, only to gain zero for gaming (vsync 75hz), and most of the time equal for other stuff i do on the pc.

    As long as I don't have an unlimited budget for things like this, i dont mind a 1-10% drop in performance, if i get it at half or 2/3 of the price of the next faster brand.
    Going intel would have meant not getting 2 new nvme drives (capacity/speed),
    and being able to image my os drive in under 30s is definitely something i dont want to give up for "10fps" more.

    Intel is now similar to super sport cars like lambos.
    Sure they outperform almost everything, but even the cheapest model will cost +200K.
    Or buy a corvette/porsche and have almost the same experience for half (e.g., money left for gas :D
     
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2019
  2. PrMinisterGR

    PrMinisterGR Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,189
    Likes Received:
    237
    GPU:
    Sapphire 7970 Quadrobake
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  3. fry178

    fry178 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,494
    Likes Received:
    205
    GPU:
    2080S WaterForceWB
    @las
    The only problem is that +90% on this planet dont game at high fps and/or dont have the money for a i9 setup, meaning its irrelevant for the mass market.

    I can hit 100 min fps @1440p with ingame settings maxed out and 2x txaa@50% scale on siege, which isnt really known for a proper coded game/using more resources than others with same IQ (textures etc).
    That on a 3600 stock, on balanced power profile.

    Not sure why you would need to reduce settings to go above 100 with a more powerful cpu..
     
  4. NCC1701D

    NCC1701D Member Guru

    Messages:
    199
    Likes Received:
    116
    GPU:
    RTX 2080 Ti
    I was mostly pointing to the fact that if you're going to call people plebs, you should have the best of everything. My system has a pleb 3700X, but it will still post higher fps than yours with my GPU. 9900K doesn't automatically turn any rig into a high FPS machine on it's own.
     

  5. jaggerwild

    jaggerwild Master Guru

    Messages:
    780
    Likes Received:
    279
    GPU:
    EVGA RTX 2070 SUP
    Removed for ignorance........By myself! :eek:
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2019
  6. Ryu5uzaku

    Ryu5uzaku Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,819
    Likes Received:
    126
    GPU:
    5700 XT UV 1950~
    9900KS is not an interesting release at all. Just more expensive 9900K. Now all this shouting about high refresh rate gaming. I don't know but 1800x seems to server just fine in games like counter strike and overwatch only games that would require high frames in my current library. Both go nicely over 200.

    9900K is faster no doubt. Barely in some cases and what not. Ryzen 3000 doesn't really oc that well while Intel does. But then again it seems when ever intel goes to 10nm they are losing that clock advantage.

    AMD had stupidly high clocks with their FX series but those cpus were shite in every other aspect.

    But swinging around epeens is like the best I guess.
     
  7. DeskStar

    DeskStar Master Guru

    Messages:
    898
    Likes Received:
    125
    GPU:
    EVGA 2080Ti FTW3 HC
    I would love to see ultimate epic battlefield simulator run as a benchmark for these CPU's.

    Using that game and seeing it destroy 12 threads like it is nothing is insane. Along with actually witnessing a true CPU bottleneck while only some of the GPU's get used.

    UEBS check it out....
     
    jaggerwild likes this.
  8. exodus1337

    exodus1337 Member

    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    Damn, I'm rocking essentially the same setup minus the 9900KS 5.0GHZ... An 8700K NOT OC and only 1800 points away... This isn't impressive at all hopefully Ice Lake will bring some better improvements or at least another ++...

    https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/39076151?

    [​IMG]
     
  9. UZ7

    UZ7 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,513
    Likes Received:
    56
    GPU:
    ASUS STRIX RTX2080S

    You got 18,601 physics, benchmark had 26,350.
     
  10. exodus1337

    exodus1337 Member

    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry I was comparing the over all score... The physics is a fairly large gap, but considering I'm not OC was also my point and since the overall score is so close in 99% games I wouldnt see a GIANT jump in fps... My mistake for not clarifying what I was comparing. Here is an example of an 8700K OC with physics 23,210...

    https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14208719
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2019

Share This Page