1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Review: Core 9th Series 9900K, 9700K and 9600K Processors

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Oct 19, 2018.

  1. Goiur

    Goiur Master Guru

    Messages:
    673
    Likes Received:
    101
    GPU:
    AMD RX Vega 56
    You got 1440p and fps are already head to head, so make your math and guess what will happen @4k.

    720p and 1080 are interesting coz you put the load on the CPU and not the gpu, so you see how fast each CPU is compared to the other ones. Not a real world test, but a test after all.
     
  2. DW75

    DW75 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,142
    Likes Received:
    556
    GPU:
    ROG GTX1080 Ti OC
    Airbud7, for many of us, it is not about being able to afford "the best". There is simply no value in the i9 9900K. I could have bought a Z390 board and a 9900K, but why ? It is overpriced for the performance it offers compared to the 2700X. I own a 2700X, and it performs perfectly at the 3K and 4K resolutions I play at. Sure, the 9900K performs faster than an R7 2700X at 1080P gaming, but who is buying a 580 US CPU (current price) for 1080P gaming ? Most people buying this CPU are buying for high res gaming. A small portion will possibly consider it for 1080P gaming at 144Hz. In games, at 1440P and beyond, the R7 2700X performs almost the same as the i9 9900K. The 9900K costs almost double, yet it performs only 15 percent faster in many tests. This is not a good value for money at all. At 4K resolution, the 2700X and 9900K are even in performance. You just proved my point once again that I made on the previous page when I said you do crap on purpose to start arguments in the forum.
     
    carnivore likes this.
  3. B-linq

    B-linq Member

    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    3
    GPU:
    nvidia 1080ti
    Nice review.

    1. I get why people using 720p tests, but Im now fan of them. 1080p chart is plenty enough and it has real use. But hey, in my country the even do tests in DOSBox.
    2. People are acting, like you cannot play on 2700x. The thing is you really can and pretty well. If you have 144Hz+ and 1080p res monitor, you should probably choose intel and that is fine. But with higher res, there is not that much the difference, is it worth up to 200+$?

    aand there are people that need the best of the best (my son-in-law) no matter cost. Its probably connected with e-value thing :)
     
    carnivore likes this.
  4. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    2,199
    GPU:
    5700XT+AW@240Hz
    That's the thing. Not one of those intel's 9xxx CPUs is worth it over 2700X for me. Why? 9900K is too costly for that kind of upgrade. Rest have no HT (SMT) which I consider important now. So, I either overpay a lot, or I sacrifice productivity for gaming. (That being said, Since I have Freesync screen and AMD's card which is not exactly powerful... I am currently not in position to gain much from intel's CPU anyway.)
    ...I understand why 8700K now looks very attractive to many.

    Btw. did anyone consider it funny that AMD took gaming seriously enough to release "Gaming Mode" for TR platform and is about to release new local mode in Ryzen Master next week? I mean, they seriously look at it.
    So... 6 months from now when there are 7nm CPUs and GPUs, there may be something to check as meaningful upgrade.
     
    carnivore likes this.

  5. millibyte

    millibyte Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,150
    Likes Received:
    76
    GPU:
    2070 subpar RTX OFF
    Why your incessant sh*tposting is somehow accepted as the innocent musings of a lovable drunk on this site is beyond my comprehension.
     
    -Tj- and B-linq like this.
  6. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,089
    Likes Received:
    5,128
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
    @airbud7, this staff including myself is getting very tired of your posts and behavior lately. You've received numerous warnings.

    You can consider this to be your last warning.
     
    BetA, Goiur, airbud7 and 2 others like this.
  7. warlord

    warlord Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,371
    Likes Received:
    778
    GPU:
    Null
    Exactly two times its price for the same cores/threads. It is not fanboyism, it is a "pathetic elitism" to my book.

    Of course a ryzen 2700x shouldn't catch an i7 9900k for double the money amount. It would be a huge failure.
     
    carnivore likes this.
  8. warlord

    warlord Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,371
    Likes Received:
    778
    GPU:
    Null
    Excuse me also HH. I don't think I offered anything to this thread also. Perhaps it needs a clean up sooner or later, it doesn't provide serious commenting to your great review. Have a nice day mister!
     
  9. rl66

    rl66 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,133
    Likes Received:
    128
    GPU:
    quadro K6000+Tesla M2090
    I have, but also there is a point were we have to go forward: do you test an actual CPU with the same test as a Pentium MMX? or do we test RTX 2080 Ti with the same test as the ATI fury (the real one in the 90' :) )?
     
  10. MaCk0y

    MaCk0y Master Guru

    Messages:
    520
    Likes Received:
    154
    GPU:
    GB RX 5700 XT OC
    I think a better compromise would be not to test at 720p but at 1080p with medium graphic settings (or lower depending on the game). That would be a more realistic scenario, one which I currently do, to keep a high framerate. So maybe Hilbert might consider this so that then everybody starts complaining that he is testing at medium settings? :p
     

  11. tunejunky

    tunejunky Master Guru

    Messages:
    881
    Likes Received:
    314
    GPU:
    RadeonVII gtx1080ti
    oh hell yeah. i switched to 1440p a few years ago and other than WoW/Rift on the living room tv i don't game at 4k...and even then for a raid i switch to my gaming rig at 1440p
     
  12. Turanis

    Turanis Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,422
    Likes Received:
    155
    GPU:
    Gigabyte RX500
    I dont know what kind of Motherboard used in these reviews (I guess MSI), but a little thing about others review when they use Asus ROG Maximus XI Hero:
    "ROG Maximus XI Hero has a big fat 4-phase VRM designed to look like an 8-phase. So fake 8-phase that's really a 4-phase VRM."
    Which some reviewers used to follow Intel's TDP specs (95W) and manually limited the board for this 9900k. (source: Hw unbox)

    So thats why some of reviewers show "better" temps and low power consumption(misleading) vs usually unlimited power boards,as should be.They provide fake benches and when users build their own rig will see the real "power" of 9900k.
     
  13. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    2,199
    GPU:
    5700XT+AW@240Hz
    That does not sound right. Out of the box, intel BIOS limits power consumption by reducing clock as limit is reached.
    Or did something change and now boards come with BIOS ignoring CPUs TDP by default?

    Apparently, one should benchmark with stock settings and measure power consumption there too.
    And then show difference from OC which is The Place one expects TDP limits to be removed as much as possible for given board.
     
  14. ezodagrom

    ezodagrom Master Guru

    Messages:
    587
    Likes Received:
    43
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 1660 Ti 6GB
    Personally I think 1080p tests at full settings are fine as long as the testing is done with a top tier GPU (such as a 1080 Ti or even 2080 Ti like in Guru3D's tests).

    On an unrelated note, my 9700K just arrived this morning, though I don't have time to set it up until tonight.
    Though, based on several reviews, I don't like how power hungry it can be, so I think I'm gonna manually lower some of the turbo clocks. <-<
    (Before anyone says anything about it being a waste to have 9700K and not use it to its full potential, I originally planned for a 9700 non-K, but it's not gonna come out for months and I wanted to give my i5 8400 to my sis to replace her old phenom ii asap). ^^;
     
  15. airbud7

    airbud7 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,426
    Likes Received:
    4,058
    GPU:
    pny gtx 1060 xlr8
    I know my time here is very limited but before I go I would like to let you know I love you and your site and all of its members.

    Peace out Hilbert.
     

  16. NiColaoS

    NiColaoS Master Guru

    Messages:
    569
    Likes Received:
    37
    GPU:
    1060 6GB Armor OC
    As it seems, is anyone able to answer or even guess my simple question? Perhaps some missed it 'cause I had the question as P.S.

    I'll try again. Can someone at least guess why i5 8600K comsumes much less energy than the i5 9600 on browsing? You know, the good old browsing that most of us do it usually most of the time... What gives?
     
  17. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    2,199
    GPU:
    5700XT+AW@240Hz
    Check die shots.
     
  18. warlord

    warlord Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,371
    Likes Received:
    778
    GPU:
    Null
    You are wrong. No differences. https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/intel_core_i5_9600k_processor_review,5.html
     
  19. S V S

    S V S Member

    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    11
    GPU:
    Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti
    Again, the issue is that this is a *CPU* review, not a GPU or game performance review. The point is to see the relative performance of the *CPU*. It is absurd for you to sit there and tell me I don't deserve to see benchmarks where the CPU isn't constrained by the GPU, simply because that data reflects poorly on AMD processors.

    Again, I am not asking for pointless non-gaming synthetic benchmarks of 32 core processors to be removed as it is "unrealistic" and "not practical" for the use case of almost all Guru3D members (I also don't blindly support a particular corporation).

    The more data the better I can make sound purchasing decisions regardless of the corporation producing the product.
     
  20. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    2,199
    GPU:
    5700XT+AW@240Hz
    @S V S : Yet, it does not represent your use case either. Have you ever thought about pixel coverage based LoD? You see, simply by going to higher resolution objects covers more pixels on screen => Higher LoD used.
    Main engine thread vs. object/per-pixeld CPU effects/post-process. In that case going to lower resolution decreases actual CPU based post-processing workload below real-world-scenarios. So, in reducing GPU workload (by means us reducing resolution) below necessary minimum not only exaggerates actual difference, it can conceal other differences in CPU ability too.
     

Share This Page