Are Intel getting Worried? - 9900KS

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

deustroop

Golden Member
Dec 12, 2010
1,406
16
116
I already showed (# 79 above) that on this system I can run 5GHZ all cores on the 9900K at ~ 168w.
 
Apr 27, 2000
11,857
1,048
126
Responsible? I smell confusion. You should be talking "overbinning," which is my whole point - clocking chips to within 100MHz of their lives!
No, you weren't. You're accusing AMD of setting the tone for the entire industry, which they aren't. If you would actually listen to what anyone else in the thread is saying, you wouldn't be continuing this line of inquiry. I'm not confused about anything.

I already showed (# 79 above) that on this system I can run 5GHZ all cores on the 9900K at ~ 168w.
How many people can do that? AT did worse:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13400/intel-9th-gen-core-i9-9900k-i7-9700k-i5-9600k-review/22
 

Hitman928

Golden Member
Apr 15, 2012
1,774
213
136

IEC

Super Moderator
Super Moderator
Jun 10, 2004
13,566
391
136
It's going to depend heavily on load. I don't think what load was used in post #79. Anandtech mentioned a much lower v-core on their 5 GHz overclock while reporting 192 W which makes me think the earlier post was a much lighter load, even if it spanned decently across all threads.
Agreed. My 8700K power consumption is heavily dependent on the load. Running something that stresses CPU/FPU/Cache all to the max simultaneously with a full AVX load is going to eat more power than a CPU-only benchmark with no AVX code.

The Asus motherboard in question is also listed in the "expect to use an AVX offset for 5GHz with 9900K" category on the VRM tier list on OCN:
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27657582-post2156.html#/topics/1638955?page=216&gid=1&pid=1

I use no offset on my 8700K and on some loads can get close to the #s reported... and that's with a 6c/12t chip, delidded.
 

lobz

Senior member
Feb 10, 2017
265
98
86
I already showed (# 79 above) that on this system I can run 5GHZ all cores on the 9900K at ~ 168w.
And I know a guy who basically never brushes his teeth and yet he has bright white and nice teeth. You should both bless your lucky stars and shouldn't think that it applies to everyone else - or rather anyone else.
 
Jan 26, 2004
76
39
91
The thing with 9900KS part isnt really about being realistically better or having better pricing.
Its about perception.
This thing is on newer stepping that has some hardware fixes for exploits.
And as it will run at 5ghz flat. Its gonna occupy the top of the gaming charts.
So intel will claim best gaming performance, and this kind of thing trickles down in peoples mind to other parts , its the kind of thinking "oh, intels are best for gaming as this 9900KS proves, so im gonna buy this 9600..."
People are gonna project its performance on all the lineup.Its stupid.But thats how people mostly work.Thats the reason nvidia can pull the prices its pulling on 1650 for example.
 

deustroop

Golden Member
Dec 12, 2010
1,406
16
116
It's going to depend heavily on load. I don't think what load was used in post #79. Anandtech mentioned a much lower v-core on their 5 GHz overclock while reporting 192 W which makes me think the earlier post was a much lighter load, even if it spanned decently across all threads.
That's likely a factor. If i get around to it I will run Blender 1.0B2.
 

Thunder 57

Senior member
Aug 19, 2007
672
172
136
All of these games have a feature that records your input and allows you to render them the same way you would render any 3d scene...all except for GTA V that only shows 11% improvement.
Are you really suggesting AMD is not being deceptive, but outright cheating with those numbers?? That would turn out to be a PR disaster if not outright illegal.
 

TheELF

Platinum Member
Dec 22, 2012
2,848
122
126
How low is low enough?
They'll be eating close to 180w for 8c at 5GHz even with the most efficient CPUs. That'll be twice what AMD will be matching it with the 3800X.
Sure they will.
Well, 180 is still better than 240.
The key thing I took away from the announcement was this: "Q4".
Yup they will have the "stocking buster" ready for holidays because that's when people spend the most money on this stuff.
You have it all wrong, and if you think it is right do you think it is any kind of sustainable business model?
Do I think what is any kind of sustainable business model?
Adding 50% more cores each gen to try to compete against a couple of generations old nm and arch?
No, I definitively do not think that this is sustainable.
Are you really suggesting AMD is not being deceptive, but outright cheating with those numbers?? That would turn out to be a PR disaster if not outright illegal.
It's neither deceptive nor cheating because they simply do not state what exactly they measured there was zero words or video or even picture,just an icon of the game and a percentage, we have no idea what they benchmarked.
 

OTG

Member
Aug 12, 2016
92
160
76
It's neither deceptive nor cheating because they simply do not state what exactly they measured there was zero words or video or even picture,just an icon of the game and a percentage, we have no idea what they benchmarked.
It would be precisely the dictionary definition!
Deceptive - giving an appearance or impression different from the true one; misleading.

A claim like "34% faster in CS:GO", with no other details, would be assumed by any reasonable person to mean an increase in gameplay performance. That's what is measured in benchmarks (ideally), gameplay reviews like HardOCP, and really just about any time people discuss gaming performance, including product launches in every category.
It's not impossible that AMD is trying to pull a fast one here, or maybe they just decided that replay performance is what people really care about.
It just doesn't seem very likely, when they would be outed IMMEDIATELY after the embargo lifts, and lose any scrap of goodwill and credibility they've built up since Ryzen launched.
 

TheELF

Platinum Member
Dec 22, 2012
2,848
122
126
It would be precisely the dictionary definition!
Deceptive - giving an appearance or impression different from the true one; misleading.

A claim like "34% faster in CS:GO", with no other details, would be assumed by any reasonable person to mean an increase in gameplay performance. That's what is measured in benchmarks (ideally), gameplay reviews like HardOCP, and really just about any time people discuss gaming performance, including product launches in every category.
Lol the last (quite a) few years all we get is canned benchmarks,any time you saw a CS:GO bench with more then 300FPS it's from a pre recorded game.
Especially HardOCP still uses the lost planet canned bench that just throws tons of objects on the screen and has nothing to do with how the game,or any game, runs.
 

OTG

Member
Aug 12, 2016
92
160
76
Lol the last (quite a) few years all we get is canned benchmarks,any time you saw a CS:GO bench with more then 300FPS it's from a pre recorded game.
Especially HardOCP still uses the lost planet canned bench that just throws tons of objects on the screen and has nothing to do with how the game,or any game, runs.
A canned benchmark is a known, standardized test, that's generally a pretty good indicator of how a game will perform.
OF COURSE there are exceptions, but because we have a pretty good idea what the CS:GO, or Tomb Raider, or GTA benchmarks show, we have an idea what performance should be like outside the benchmarks.
I'm sure it's what AMD used for comparison, because doing otherwise would be stupid.
 

JTaylor2005

Junior Member
Nov 27, 2018
14
9
41
Aug 29, 2010
943
121
136
I have just seen this. Cracked me up a bit. What gaming person is going out and spending £500 on just the CPU!! It's not about "The perfect gaming CPU" it's about usability and cost effectiveness. Which Intel has been useless at for a while.
Oh you'll be surprised. My friend has a 9900K / 2080 Ti setup and when you have that kind of money, who am I to argue?

I suggested a 8700K, he wanted a 9900K because it was 'the best'. *shrugs*

But on the KS chip it's totally a desperation move to keep the 'gaming crown'
 


ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS