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

Funny how you completely ignored the equally as rabid Amd fanboy comments. Especially since this thread is about intel's chips. Instead it's become nothing but wishful thinking from the amd crowd.

speaking of which...

All aboard the hype train!! CHOO CHOO!!!!

... *sigh*

 

YES.

9900K 8core i9 is mainstream from 9 series, and wil be supported by z370 with bios update.

There is no info about refresh of x299 cpu's yet.

 

My prediction:

i9-9900K = $499.99
i7-9700K = $399.99
i5-9600K = $299.99

IF they do end up being soldered, I think people will buy them at these prices.

 

That's because they're largely gpu bottlenecked. look at lower resolution benchmarks to see how much faster intel's chips perform ... (or do i have that backwards? im still half asleep)

 

Please sir, could we have some more PCI-E lanes.

 

"Of course they're desperate; they can smell their deaths, and the sound they'll make rattling their cages will serve as a warning to the rest."

 

Buy x99/x299/Threadripper

 

Do you think that 5~10% IPC improvement is hypetrain? From Zen to Zen2 it is like 2 years of development.
Is it hypetrain to expect such small improvement on completely new architecture?

And I would like to ask you to use F*ing Quotes which will put authors. Or use at sign like @Andrew LB .

 

I have the same idea. Otherwise releasing Z390 boards is going to be pointless.

 

They did it before.
P67 to z68
z77 to z87

 

WOW...some people are lifting the hyperbolic "godlike" a la MSI.
this is just a cpu, not a religion.
and to be perfectly clear, Intel is screwing the pooch by having 2 sku's without hyperthreading in the I-7 line-up.
granted, they will go to oem, but they will be available in all the regular sales channels (i.e. new egg etc...).
i do hope they use solder, but as someone has already pointed out, that's not a panacea.
they will undoubtedly run hot and require liquid cooling or "big" air, but what else is new?
this is yet another stop-gap by Intel. and as others have pointed out Ryzen 2 will most likely exceed the specs at lower power and heat.
now, if i was doing e-sports that 9900 would seem like the winning ticket...until you factored in all variables incl. price.
the ability to buy an enthusiast class gpu on the price differential alone between Ryzen 2 and 9900 will make this cpu a nine day wonder.
Intel please free your engineers from marketing crapola.

 

warlord has got to be the most bipolar and confusing member on these forums. One day he'll be like "I've been buying AMD for years, they're not so bad except for these couple of small problems" and the next day he'll be like "hurr durr Intel is the best, they're going to mop the floor with AMD. There's no competition.".
I seriously don't get it, and this seems to happen regularly.


Anyway more on topic...
If these products are priced well, I think they could sell well. For example, if the 9700K is roughly the same price as the 8700K (+/- $25), it could be a compelling alternative. With the same clock speeds, it'll be faster in some tasks and slower in others. Let's face it, the IPC is going to be roughly the same and the 8700K's price probably isn't going to drop much, so Intel is basically giving people a choice of "pick the 8700K if you want better performance in A, B, and C, or pick the 9700K if you want better performance in X, Y, and Z".
Of course, they could just enable HT and say "get better performance in everything" but Intel isn't a charity.

 

True. If they are not, buy them from siliconlottery.com for around those same prices with a delid+LM.

 

Perhaps, but I find the idea of a Core i7 without HT to be extremely distasteful (it'd be like a Ryzen 7 without SMT... bleh). People are paying a lot of money for these chips and there is no excuse not to enable HT. I would consider the 9900K to be the only worthy upgrade from a 8700K, but that's a Core i9 and will most likely need a X299 board. The only reason I can think for these chips (if these rumors are true) is Intel trying not to cannibalize their 8700K sales.

 

I certainly don't disagree, hence my last sentence. But regardless of being distasteful (and also probably a poor value) I'm sure it's still going to sell well.
I assume Intel knows it's only a matter of time before AMD figures out how to either meet/exceed Intel in IPC and/or achieve good overclocks, so they're probably banking on people jumping the gun on a decision for a CPU before that happens.

 

I think that´s a little hard to know unless Intel´s next CPU architecture is a failure. Or Intel knows that they have to delay their new CPUs once again...

 

Knowing for certain is irrelevant - AMD is catching up, and whether or not they accomplish what I said, Intel can't afford to take chances with them. If the 9700K gives Intel an edge that AMD can't compete with (in particular, when it comes to clock speeds) then that'll give them a head start on sales before AMD makes a product to respond with.

 

Yes but that´s what happens every time a new product is released, it´s better than the older stuff from the competition, so the competition has to release something better to counter and then the others do the same, it´s a never ending cycle regarding PC hardware. For example Intel has been catching up to AMD regarding core count, something that finally achieved, and AMD is trying to catch up Intel regarding CPU clocks, something they will accomplish sooner or later.

So business as usual, nothing more.

 

While an i7 without HT does leave a sour taste at first, if they are going to "allow" i9's on the Z390 chipset for non HEDT users it kind of makes sense. Now Intel would have 4 options in the consumer space, so it could be i3=no HT, i5=i3+HT, i7=more cores than i3 and i5 but with no HT, i9=i7+HT, while AMD is still following the 3, 5, and 7 naming scheme for now until a possible Ryzen 9 with 8+ cores comes to X470 or above.

 

A 9900k base clock of 100Mhz lower then the AMD 2700X, the performance should be close under full load all cores.
Memory speed would help the 9900k compaired to the 2700X
I dont think the 95W TDP is realistic compaired to the 8700k, i think it would be closer to the AMDs 105W or more under full load.
Time will tell.