Since our thermal and power consumption numbers are very different from other publications, here's some clarification on our board settings: -Multi-core enhancement: Disabled -SVID behavior: "Intel Fail-Safe" / Intel's default -XMP: Enabled -All power duration and limit settings default -Core multiplier at defaults -Core voltages at defaults Cooler: Corsair H115i w/IC Graphite thermal pads The performance numbers we got were double-checked against Intel's engineers, and they were in line; This suggests that our thermal tests are indicative of stock performance (with motherboard vendor optimizations disabled). We did *not* ask Intel about their thermal or power consumption results.
You can have smooth responsiveness on Intel too. Without HT, IDK. Disable deep C-states. It takes additional power to run the additional HT pipelines. Your best power consumption vs performance is without HT. The low end Ryzens don't have SMT and they're quite responsive whether idle or when all cores are busy.
I've also seen a demo where having more than your optimal number of cores available can hurt performance by having threads spread out too much and result in downclocking. Unless you prefer to waste a lot of power keeping it in performance mode. Or unless you can and do lock the app to it's optimal number of cores and set affinity to a specific set. This was demoed on a 6c/12t cpu and an 8c/16t cpu by two different people by just turning HT off and on and disabling cores for comparison.
@@jasonlisonbee wait... "Waste a lot of power keeping it in performance mode" You can't tell me that people with 6 core CPUs and likely powerful gfx cards Actually care about the amount of power their computer takes from the wall. Also, if you want to save a bit of power, T U R N O F F Y O U R C O M P U T E R W H E N Y O U A R E N ' T U S I N G I T
@Mentos, not an option when it's always recoding videos. If you ever encode to h265, always use 'pmode'. I don't know why it's not on by default when you have more than two cores. It improves thread utilization and output quality. Makes the files smaller if you use CQ mode. Too many start ups in a cold room can also damage electronics. It's optimal to keep it at a (near) constant temp. I just reminded myself why I should have liquid cooling even though my CPU never reaches critical temps on air (It might if I used the 'performance' governor rather than 'schedutil' for a couple percent difference in app performance.). Much slower heat/cooling cycles regardless of usage. Since the room is cold, it's not a big deal anyway, it's saving the use of running a room heater.
"Here we are again with another refresh of Skylake" It is the second refresh of Skylake which is a refresh of Broadwell, which is a refresh of Haswell, which is a refresh of Ivy Bridge, which is a a refresh of Sandy Bridge.
Yep, same architecture for about 5-6 years now? Small bumps in IPC and finally after AMD launched Ryzen Intel is now throwing out Cpus all over the place. An i9 on the mainstream? I guess they couldn't call it an i7 since that would confuse others who purchased the x299 platform or ticked them off which I'm sure it did already. Think about how much they paid for that i9 on x299 and here's one for half the price. I would be pissed. That's probably the reason Intel didn't lower the price any lower. X299 owners would have went full-blown retarded. I know I would have and it's the reason I didn't go x299. I went Ryzen 1700-2700x all the way for half the price and a few frames less. I game at 4k so it doesn't matter. I would imagine or hope that most people spending 2 grand on a pc doesn't buy a 150$ monitor in 1080p. I imagine most would go 2k 144hz or 4k like me. It wouldn't make any sense to game in 1080p with a 2080ti and 500$ cpu. These reviewers don't normally go with what most people have as far as hardware. Most have a Ryzen 1600-2600 or Ryzen 1700 or Intel 8400-7700k paired with a 1070, 1060, or 970,580 gpu. The CPU wouldn't matter with a 1060 as most will be a gpu bottleneck anyway. Even a 1070 will be pushed to the max with a 2600x or 8600 cpu.
@@XDbored1 you are a complete brainlet if you think Skylake CPU's (and by extension kaby and coffee lake CPU's) are not a continuation of Sandy Bridge architecture. All that has changed since Sandy Bridge are a change in memory controller, 2 manufacturing node refinements, slight deviations in iGPU, and some insignificant instruction set additions.
my point is a new Memory controller and 2 manufacturing node refinements are important changes but we have had nothing since Skylake the 6700K shits all over the 2700K but if you look at Intels newer quad cores there's nothing different between them and the 6700K
@@laujack24 if intel came next year with a new CPU 15% faster than this one but with a price of 1500 euro would you still say that? Sorry to tell you that but price to performance matters and it matters a lot in the hardware industry.
@@laujack24 just like RTX 2080TI. That's why we desperately need a competitor on every category. If someone were to buy this intel CPU though, is kinda stupid or crazy rich. A ~20% increase for twice the price?
The results on here are complete bunk. The thermals are wrong because the motherboard they chose is only a cheap 4 phase vrm design. The chip is actually faster than what they posted, but the heat is INSANE, and the tdp is WAY higher than what he posted. Go see hardware unboxed. He explains how Linus and OC3D got these results because they both used the same shitty board.
I've observed that that concept is hard to understand for some people, and I'm not talking about Intel fanboys but AMD fanboys, in some tech blogs I comment on. It's like saying the 9900k is the fastest means (for them) saying it's the best and the only one worth buying and that Ryzen is shit. I just hope neither Intel nor AMD make a mess and the healthy competition lasts for as long as possible. Intel is having trouble with production and that's why their CPUs are SO expensive right now (they would be more expensive than AMD's anyway, but not for that much of a difference).
I'd wait new gen, especially wait if AMD comes out with something good. Between 4790k and 7700k only like 10% difference total. 8700k only 1% better single thread performance than 7700k. Unless you want to spend $600 on CPU don't bother for another 1-2 years.
Im still on my 4790k and two 1080ti's SLI I have been itching to get a new CPU still unsure of what to do though. Ideally I would like more cores for newer titles coming out. But still have decent clock speeds. Id go with the 2700X but it is kinda of weird going from my OC 4.7Ghz CPU to something thats clocked lower. Which leads me to intels outrageous 9900k. I think I might wait for zen 2 to come out next year. :(
hmm no clock speed kind of don't mater.. AMD needs to bump up their IPC per a thread , past intel to take them out... Pure clock speed helps but IPC matter the most..
Funny seeing as how many are suddenly saying this when a lot of the Intel fanboys always used to brag and rag on AMD cpu's because of Intel's core 2 core performance.
@@nosferatu5 they are working on a new architecture(zen3)so expect ipc gains.Plus zen3 will be on 7nm.So with ipc gains + clock speed increase AMD will be able to match in gaming performance.
Was wondering about that, I guess they went by 579-304=275, 275/579=47.5%, and then taking the first number, or... SOMETHING. Really it's 90% more expensive than the Ryzen and 49% more expensive than the 8700K.
@@exxxz1999Still on a 9900k with an RTX 4080 at 4K 120hz! This beast is still able to push my GPU to 100% GPU usage nearly all the time. Not bad for a half a decade old chip.
This isn't new. Premiering has been here for over a month. DashieGames has been using it for his Super Mario Maker weekly videos for the past 4-5 weeks now. TH-cam Premiere is simply a scheduled time when a *pre-recorded* video will play live (basically, you cannot skip forward in the video, you watched the video at the SAME time as other people, "live", and you can use live chat with them as well.) All this does, is allow for community gathering and conversation about a video. It's like watching a TV show with your friends, the show is pre-recorded, but it's "live" on-air (I'm talking about cable, not on-demand) and you can't skip forward, except your "friends" are just other viewers in other places around the world. After the premiere is finished, it will simply be a video, and the creator can choose whether to keep the live chat on or off.
@Anon 1 yes ryzen performs worse in gaming. Intel has that definitely. Zen 2 may change that but who knows. What must be taken into consideration is that gaming is not all a PC must do. Productivity is an important factor and yes the 9900k performs better than the 2700x but for 500 that is entering HEDT range which will be much better for productivity. What I'm trying to say is that all chips have their place and not one is 'trash' just for performing badly in one aspect
Why buy an X chip when the non X is exactly the same and cheaper? 2700 is a great cheap, cheaper, comes with a pretty damn good cooler and MBs are cheaper than Intel too. Makes it really easy to shell out the few extra bucks for good RAM to make her sing.
That ryzen 2700 X is a beast for how much it costs honestly. + You get a free LED cooler? Btch please like i care about 15-20 fps difference on 160 fps range.
its not about only 15 - 20 fps difference. But its about how long your computer will be up to date ? i9 9900k will last you for about 8 years while the ryzen will get outdated in the next 4
@@Tragedyval - In the next four years, paying another $300 will get you a processor FAR more powerful than the i9-9900K so I'd rather do the extra upgrade. And I don't know where you get your ideas but the i7-2600K is about 8 years old and I would have upgraded from it long ago. I never bought one because I just wasn't willing to pay what Intel wanted for that either, I got an FX-8350 instead for 1/3 the price. My experience with it over five years told me that I made the right choice because I NEVER had any gaming problems with it so not paying the Intel tax turned out to be a smart move. By the time Ryzen 3 is out, all signs point to AMD having surpassed Intel's IPC and clock speeds while retaining their efficient modular-core design. You really sound like a simple fanboy. Programs and games are going to be more and more threaded in the future and that is also the reason why many people are still happy with the FX-8350. I was until Canada Computers offered me an R7-1700 for under $400CAD. I didn't retire my FX CPU, I used it to build a 30TB file server.
@@AvroBellow Intel CPUS last longer if you buy their high end. Spending as much as you can you do not need to keep upgrading unlike the low performance of AMD cpus costs less but after two years their performance decrease greartly. Spending more you get what you pay for and spending less you get your moneys worth. Id rather spend a lot now than to have a PC that will be out dated in less than 3 years.
@@BRC_Del that's cause threadripper isn't as good at gaming as the 2700X. (Depending on the model) Which is what intel wanted to show off, heck the 1950x is around as good for gaming as an i7 8700k, which isn't bad at all. Of course threadripper is better at rendering and streaming and all that, but for gaming exclusively, intel still has the upperhand, despite being overpriced.
You can't compare a 500 dollar CPU that has less PCI-e Lanes, no ECC RAM support, and no quad channel RAM to a platform that does have those things. i9 9900K is not HEDT, no matter what Intel thinks
from retailers in the EU it's more like 50 percent... I can literally buy 2 2700X's for the price of a i9-9900K o.O Also is Intel binning these chips when sending to big outlets? Every reviewer I've seen EXCEPT for Tomshardware and LTT (HU, Der8auer and others) have seen the 9900K have crap thermals. I also noticed that Toms sample was running at much lower voltages than those described by Hardware Unboxed... Really does make one wonder if Intel made sure to send the best voltage to frequency samples to the largest reviewers...
Thing I wondered about was how der8auer mentioned, that the Chips who clock 5Ghz easily should already be quite good samples. And I remember Jay saying he had zero problems getting the chip to 5Ghz. I'm not trying to say anything against him but it seems like he got lucky again because having a stable OC at auto voltage seems like the chip COULD clock higher. Tinfoil hat off. Could just be luck, but wouldn't be surprising if it was binned at some point of the harsh competition they are facing ATM in terms of price.
"A few fps here and there" Never ever do FPS deltas. They have no meaning. That's because FPS is a nonlinear quantity. An FPS delta of 20 means something entirely different if it is between 20 and 40 fps vs. 300 and 320 fps for example. Use SPF or milliseconds instead - these *are* linear quantities.
@@bradhaines3142 I can tell you, when using a 240Hz monitor and doing high-speed gameplay, it’s really trippy at first, because the motion looks smoother than it should due to the insane refresh rate.
Here in the UK. The 9900K is £599 and the 2700X is £299... Alternatively on Overclockers shop in the UK. For £538.97 you can get a Ryzen 7 2700X, Asus Strix motherboard, 8GB of RAM and a 480GB SSD.. Don't get me wrong. I can afford a 9900K but I still dont want to be ripped off or just not see good value and at these price differences it just seems a bit of a joke.
Can you imagine spending £600, and still being down a motherboard, ram and SSD?.. Or you can have all of that, but be down 5-10% fps, for the same graphics card.. Except now you have £400 more to spend on the graphics card... And more than making up the difference. There's just no value here for gaming, the only thing its supposed to do "best".
That's because the bundle pack isn't very good...first the Mobo is one of the worst Asus boards out of the pack...second the Teamgroup ram is pants slow for Ryzen. Third the Teamgroup SSD is not a quick as others and cheaply made too. Always be wary of bundles...they are always just the retailer trying to clear more room of shite that they struggle to sell inorder to get rid. Better to choose your own components...the Asus Crosshair v2 for example pissed all over the Strix..and more features...for an extra few quid. That's 1 example of that bundle.
3000MHz CL16 .. slow RAM? That isn't slow. 2400MHz is bog standard RAM and usually fine for most people. Sure it isn't 3200MHz CL14, but 3000 MHz is fine. Also any ASUS X370 board is fine. They probably bought too many of them, and now most people buying high end Ryzen motherboards would be buying X470, so they want to get rid of excess stock. So what, it's not a bad board at all. In what universe is a Crosshair X370 board "a few quid more" than the STRIX X370-F? That isn't and has never been the case.
@ MayDay GoingDown!! While I agree that bundles are, usually, made out of mediocre parts, I think that was not necessarily the point of OP's example. I see it more like: for the price of just the CPU, you can get the core parts of an entire computer and be left with £62. I'm pretty sure you can upgrade the mediocre parts to better ones and still make the £599 limit. It puts things into perspective rather well.
@@ALegitimateTH-camr I just built a new system with ryzen 5 1500x 16gb ddr4 ram and a gigabyte board all together for $480. Looking at a ryzen 7 1800x for $250 on amazon. Comparing that to Intel, Intel straight up is scamming. My laptops 8750h is still close to the performance of that 9900k. Like wtf is the pricing on that thing? 580 bucks for a few extra threads that is close to the same performance of the 300 dollar 2700x. Intel is on some high key fuckin drugs
this is true, the cooler for the 2700x is actaully pretty decent. Only really worth getting an after market if you want it to run quite under heavy load. other wise just day to day use and it'll be perfectly fine.
"How is this for gamers" proceeds to use it in every gaming rig they build for the next year and it becomes the best performing gaming chip for a year or so
'For a 16 thread processor, you will be paying a nearly 40% premium to get a blue case badge.' Someone explain this math to me. I can admit maybe I'm crazy, but $329 -> $488 (MSRP vs MSRP) is a 48% increase $304 -> $488 (current price vs MSRP) is a 61% increase. $304 -> $579 (current vs current) is a 90% increase. 'At 30-40% more than the i7-8700K and Ryzen 7 2700X' Again, what? 8700K MSRP: $359 2700X MSRP: $329 9900K MSRP: $488 That's 36-48%. 8700K Current: $370 2700X Current: $304 9900K Current: $579 That's 56-90%. 30-40% price increase is an outlandish claim.
It depends what number you divide the difference by. Going from Intel to AMD saves you 30-40% of the cost. It's not how I would do math or present that info but I can see how someone can make that mistake writing this.
I have my 9900k for 3 years know, running at solid 5.2 Ghz with an AIO and ohh boy, its going strong until today and i really think that i will be good for another 2 years atleast in 1440p 💪🏻
this is what I was thinking about. Years ago you could get an i9, overclocked it to 5ghz, and still having a decent performance even for high end card. And AMD? I have a 2700x and its a garbage. Same aera. Okay, the 2700x is much much cheaper
@@DaBombtasi yea 9900k is a good option if u get a good deal. I mean mine is working great, heat is managed well with the Corsair Aio and i know for shure i could pack a 4090 in my Pc and the I9 would still not be a bottleneck. Ofc i play in 1440p so the CPU Difference isnt that big, but tbh the Cpu will be great for another decade, i think the first thing to swap would be my 2080Super OC. So If u can get a good deal, take it! 👌🏻
@@SLPrevious What would you consider a good deal for a 9900k/2080/32g ddr4 3600mhz z390 maximus hero rig used? I'm upgrading to 13900k with a 4080 and ddr5 so trying to gauge what a fair price point would be selling the old rig also replaced the 3 front intake fans over the summer
That thing they removed hyper-threading from a f*cking 450€ CPU makes me pretty mad. With amd finally making good chips I don't know if I am gonna buy Intel again. I've an i7 4790k and i am planning to keep it for few years more though
i'm still rockin a i5-3570 3.4 ghz on a P8Z77 M-pro mobo after all these years. has pci-e 3.0 24gigs ddr3 ram. have just added more hard drives for space and upgraded gpu's
From a gamers standopint - yes. Just remember that gaming isn't everything and, for example, a user that needs a productivity rig, won't give 2 shits about how many available PCIe lanes you offer. Food for thought.
Actually, 3d rendering and deep learning applications benefit immensely from multi-GPU setups. Even if it's not Crossfire or SLI technologies, a decent workstation for 3d rendering would benefit from more PCIe lanes. The i9-9900k would be a bit of budget option for workstations, but nonetheless, more of a feature doesn't hurt anything but Intel's X299 sales.
well SLI is kinda dead now NVLink might be a up tick developers wanting to use multi-card support. NVLink was made to replace a on board connection to remove the latency between compute cards. It can be used for SLI it appears but only if the SLI is coded on the hardware level to support the more throughput and less assumed latency in software drivers.
Gamers - "Intel has yet to push anything NEW to the market lacking innovation." Intel - "Ha! Let's prove them wrong! We can innovate!" Proceedes to remove hyerthreading and a refresh. Also throws in a $410.00 price tag. Yeah... I think I'm swapping to AMD after Intel's super shady buissness model which has been revilied several times.
I love my 8 core 1800x and it was only $350 a year ago. Its now a year old and still runs great with me being able to sim out stuff faster then my friends 6 core coffee lake and thats been happening for a year now. If you buy an intel CPU without needing the extra frames or its integrations with certain programs like AE then you're deciding to spend money on brand not product imo.
NOT ONLY THAT BUT THE NEW CHIP that was market as the best cpu for gaming... is actually slower than the old one for gaming.....you can also appreciate the extreme quality of 115c temperatures and really bad soldering.... all for you at worse price than ryzen and same price as Threadripper ... and also the fact that can be another paper lunch...for the intel fanboys
The problem with Intel is the founders no longer exist in the way they used to. Intel was actually an amazing company when they started, but the people running the show aren't who made the company and that leads to things like removing STIM and ramping up prices when you are already losing market share. Intel holds the same place as Apple for me now. They make a great product, but the majority of their product is marketing and hype without much substance in the product itself.
Sure it's faster, but the price is just too much. It's why I mainly stick with Ryzen because I get a good amount of value (not the best but whatever) for the price. I don't care if I lose a few frames, or even if it gets slower in certain applications, I'm paying much less and on the other note, motherboards for Ryzen are MUCH cheaper.
If you are at 1440p or 4k it doesn't matter anyway. So many benchmarks showing the 8700k having a 5% to 10% performance advantage at 1440p over the r5 2600 with a 1080ti. Spending that $200 on a better gpu will always give you better performance.
I don't care how much my hardware costs, but even then it's impossible to find arguments for the 9900k from a gaming standpoint. You wont pay more than 500$ for your cpu to play on 1080p, thats just dumb. Moving on to 1440p (or even 4k), your CPU basically doesn't matter, since even my 2080ti hasn't enough Power to overcome any mordern CPU. No reason to pay doble the price if your GPU is the bottleneck anyway.
Benedict Rancor unless you are Shroud and want more FPS for your 240hz monitor. I have a 2700x, but I do understand why people will upgrade purely for the FPS instead of price/performance.
Power consumption figures seem off. 9900k using less power under full load than the 8700k. Same architecture, more cores, less power? Thats not even mentioning that they don't come close to the figures provided by other reviewers with the same workloads.
it can be explained with lower voltage or lower freq... also it's "only" aida64 fpu which is not a very stressful test. Also it can explained with avx-3 or something such. But yes, the power draw figures don't make sense.
so lowering temperature can actually lower power consumption even with slightly higher performance coming out of it the lower power wold be due to the the new under lid heat dissipation (soldering them together)
No hyperthreading on the 9700K really sucks balls, and I just don't understand why Intel made this move. Having hyperthreading ONLY on the top-end flagship product in 2018 makes no sense. Hyperthreading in not some expensive luxury-part or niche feature FFS. Now though you are stuck with the shitty choice of having to pay the absurd top-tier price, or still pay quite a lot and not even get the hyperthreading on what is supposed to be a high-end product. Besides, it just means old 8700k's eat into the 9700K market. It's cheaper and has multithreading - and arguably you may not have much use of the 2 extra cores for gaming and most non-workstation tasks.
TheStigma Same reason Apple put a 720p screen on the IPhone XR; to distant it from the premium product. No hyper threading is a deal breaker for most tech enthusiast so Intel removed an extremely important aspect of it so people would purchase 9900k.
They did it for me. I always wanted a fast CPU with no SMT and needed to stick to i5 until now. Oh wait, last year's i5 tier is now called i7? Absolutely idiotic. Linus is right to be mad (not only because the Techquickie episode is suddenly wrong for no reason) So now I'm totally getting the 9700K... whenever it's actually launched (as in: appears in European stores for price lower than $1000, which is probably just a way of them saying "we don't actually have it in stock, don't buy it yet").
@@jardanijovonovich7071 I always think it's funny how people take any positive comment about AMD, or negative about Intel as an AMD fanboy... Nobody praised AMD gpu's in this comment. I know this might blow your mind, but I have an AMD CPU _and an NVIDIA_ GPU.... I know... SHOCKER! :O lol. We're not all brand-sheep fanboys. Different brands can make the most sense at different times and price points, and for different people and applications. Your favorite brands aren't always the right choice... Who would've thought?!
Very true, but the motherboards are significantly more expensive and it has worse single core performance, even though the multi-core performance dominates the 9700K.
Brad Viviviyal Actually you can go with a r5 2600 if you're using a 1440p or 4k panel as it makes little to no difference, but cost less than the current i5.
OK after the new Hardware Unboxed Video, the mystery is solved. Linus used a board which had a 95W TDP limitation. Means the CPU was throttled. I wounder why Linus took longer to publish his Video. I bet they had to chat with Intel about that and Intel (because it is Intel) did the same as always. :-)
By the time Linus published this, everyone was aware of the results published by the other tech tubers. Does Intel recommend using a board with a 95W TDP? Who would buy an 8c/16t flagship proc and put it in a board with 4 VRMS/95W cap?
u are actually wrong. look in the comment section of Hardware Unboxed. This MOBO is not limited and is in spec for this cpu. This mobo supports the cpu. The other mobos just run the cpu out of spec to get more perfomance
It is to differentiate with the i9 line. If they didn't do that, there wouldn't really be much of a difference between them. It also helps keep thermals under control so they don't need to use solder on the i7 line.
It's just a rename. 9900k is the direct upgrade to the 8700k, and the 9700k is the direct upgrade to the 8600k. They've apparently decided that hyperthreading is something only their absolute top of the line (consumer level) customers should get, and that they weren't charging enough for it in the past.
The point of it is to keep balance between each performance tier, while maintaining price. The only especially stupid thing is how HT is obviously artificially disabled.
@@thelightsilent lol no. You get 2 more FPS with the 9900k on 6GHZ, 4k is all about the GPU. A 4790K gets the same for as the 9900K in games with a 2080 on 4k..
ryzen gen3 in 2019 will have a 13% IPC boost compared to intel who hasn't done anything like that in a very very long time if ever. If you care about IPC go ryzen and wait a few months.
@@thelightsilent Remember, those $200 would make a diference if CPU bottlenecked the GPU at 2k / 4k. Thing that's not gonna happen unless you are one of those FPS player that want to play at 240p - 1250001234234fps. Got 2700X, MB X470 and 16GB DDR4 for the same price of the I9 9900k.
Why are some bars on the charts longer even though the value is exactly the same? For example with the first chart on DirectX 11: the top 2 have identical scores, but the 97th percentile bar is a bit longer on the top one. It just seems like a useless and confusing thing.
@@DudethatGross Good luck with that old-tech 14nm power-hungry hot-like-an-oven overpriced CPU that has new security flaws each month! Oh and don't forget to TURN OFF Hyper Threading to be a bit more safe. LMAO :P
@@Power_Fantastic "old 14nm tech" lol. intel i9's have faster single-core clock speed than your ryzens, and better performance overall. more cores doesn't equal better performance. yes its more expensive but im willing to pay more because Intel has more longevity than AMD's processors. i hate this AMD fanboy shit, get off your fucking high horse and cry that you dont have an i9
Glad I'm not the only one. "I have over 21 apples!" You mean you have 22? "No!! I might have 23 or 29, you don't even know!!1" It's stupid hype to make you think it's as much as you want it to be. It's like talking down to a child. "OMG ISN'T THIS AMAZING LOLZORZ"
How is LTT the only 3rd party reviewer so far to pull decent temps and power draw from the 9900k under load? I wouldn't normally be so skeptical, but Linus claims to have only pulled 58c under load and everyone else is pulling somewhere in the 90's and sometimes 100c with hefty AIO coolers. That seems like an enormous discrepancy between them and everyone else and I'm surprised they didn't address it in the video. I would definitely like to see a follow up video on this.
summary: the decent temp is because of the power limit, which throttle the CPU to around 4.2ghz. Leaving us user only 2 choices: a) get an overpriced 9900k CPU of 4.2ghz , but with decent thermal and power consumption b) get an on spec 5ghz 9900k CPU, with horrendous thermal and power that double up as kitchen stove your call ☹️
@@onlylonly888 thank you for the informative reply. Just watched the Hardware Unboxed video discussing it so this whole debacle is getting really interesting haha.
I currently have a 4790k installed and just bought a 9900k. Can’t install it yet because I don’t have a compatible motherboard or ram (yet), but my logic was: “if I’m using a 4th gen professor, I should probably upgrade to a 9th gen one that is most future-proof.” Also the packaging is neat, 3D shapes are cool.
been using my 2600k since forever, running at 4.6ghz right now, had to downclock it after a few years of abuse :D, running gtx970 and can still play anything at decent settings
My 5960X (OC'd to 4.5GHz 8-core) drives my two RTX 2080Ti cards in SLI. CPUs don't age as fast as we are led to believe these days... That being said, the 5960X is an 8C/16T CPU with quad-channel memory support and 40 PCIe lanes (which drove 4x 1080/1080Ti GPUs before I got the RTX ones)...that came out in 2014. Everyone's bugging out about Ryzen and stuff, while 8-cores were available for 4 years now xD
@EGH666 Are you sure it is due to abuse and not something else. I've never had a CPU that deteriorated in any way due to OC. I keep my 2600K at 4.6 too, but just because the extra-voltage needed and the extra-heat are not worth it for what I do with the PC. Otherwise, the CPU can run stable at 5.1 with a lot of voltage. Do you happen to remember the voltage you ran the CPU at during those years of abuse? I've never found reliable information regarding the votlage limit for 24/7 use for these CPUs.
Threadripper has lower overall gaming performance due to lower core clocks from having more cores. What makes you think that adding 4 more cores but dropping 300mhz compared to the r7 2700x is better for gaming? And if you're looking more into productivity instead of gaming, you wouldn't be looking at the 9900k in the first place, you'd be looking at skylake x or threadripper. It's a poor comparison.
TR is more similar to x299 chipset; i9 would be more comparable to a ryzen than TR. So yes for productivity workloads you would be looking at Thread ripper or x299 chipsets, but that is not what you suggested :P
I run my Core i7-6900k (exactly equivalent to the 9900k just a few years old) with hyperthreading off. Since the main CPU-intensive thing I do is music production -- a task that benefits from single thread performance -- I actually get much *better* performance from having fewer logical cores. In one song, the performance is almost twice as good, but usually the benefit is much less. So to anyone considering this chip, I would recommend waiting for the 9700k unless you work with video or other multi-threaded workloads a lot. For single thread tasks, the 9700k will perform at least as well as the 9900k at the same clock speed.
No hyper threading on the i7 9700k? Wow. Intel have done an nvidia and just rebadged everything. The i9 sis really the the i7 and the i7 is really the i5. Nice way to send customers to AMD.
the entire review is soft and kind to the ears by LTT. trying to not put much emphasis to the negatives of the CPU and always trying to compare it with the previous intel models. in other words i didn't a expected a harsh review from linus.
I have had the i7 9700K for years now, and it hasn't disappointed me in any way. Last week I was offered a swap-out for the i9 9900K, and with the minimum amount of performance difference between the CPUs,I still chose to push through with it. And I'm happy I did.
@@exxxz1999Still on a 9900k with an RTX 4080 at 4K 120hz! This beast is still able to push my GPU to 100% GPU usage nearly all the time. Not bad for a half a decade old chip.
*To the people complaining that they're wrong about the price difference percentages:* The problem is that if you're using percentages, it changes based on if you're going up or down. I think they simply went down in their math but used the same number for up without thinking, and that's the whole issue. For example 600 is 200% of 300. However, 300 is 50% of 600. See the problem here? They can say the Ryzen is 40% _less_ money, but the Intel is 90% _more_ money. They should have just said "nearly half" or "nearly double". It's still technically the same problem, but people make the association easier this way. I highly doubt they were "being intentionally misleading because Intel pays them!". Most likely it was the obvious simple mistake, or possibly just an issue with the wording of whoever wrote the script. They were correct in the wrong wording basically. All of these people are calling out the math but not realizing the very obvious reason for the mistake. The difference *IS* 40% if you're going from the Intel to the AMD. However, going from the AMD to the Intel is a 90% difference. Stop flipping your shit with your conspiracies about Intel paying them to lie. And I'm not some Intel fanboy trying to defend a pro-Intel sentence or something. I'm typing this on the PC that I built with the AMD CPU that I bought.
The problem is the Linus isn't this stupid and neither are his production staff. This managed to get through EDITING. They don't post this shit live you know. Stop being so naive.
@@AvroBellow If you think it was some intentional conspiracy, you're a moron. Linus _consistently_ points out that AMD is a better deal for the money in pretty much all of their videos, yet people are jumping on one mistake of one number in one sentence in one video as "proof that he lies for intel!". On top of that as I already pointed out, a mistake that isn't completely incorrect. It's just worded backwards. I know they don't post it live, I know it was edited before release. Do you think the editors fact check all the lines of the script, or do they do video editing? Pretty sure the writers are not the same people as the video editors, and the script writers might not even do all of the research themselves.
Was rocking my Gen 1 i7 960 for the longest time, but just bought i7 8700k due to price. Hopefully theres noticeable improvements for me either way. Currently have GTX 970, but will soon change that out too.
So what you're saying is. . .buy a Ryzen 5? Honestly, this is starting to feel like Phenom days. Everyone's buying Intels because they are "better" with their hyper-threading. . .for gaming. Meanwhile I'm over here spending half as much for the same performance and better overclocks, meaning I can afford a better GPU.
So then if the cycle continues to repeat itself... Another Sandy Bridge revolution mayhaps? Another faildozer flop? Heck I'm glad I read your comment, this is genuinely interesting to think about.
I mean. true. but it also depends a lot on the situation you are in. If you already have a suitable Intel motherboard and are looking for an upgrade switching to AMD has some additional costs associated with it. A good mainboard doesn't come for free either.
true. But if you pay about the same for both options you'll end up with more performance choosing the new intel chip right now. If you put together a new pc I agree that there is no way anyone should go for the intel option right now - especially not this chip. Also if you don't care about what mobo you'll get and good bios/IO/etc you can probably get a good price on it and still switch to a R7. But there are some people for which this chip might make sense. Especially if you already have a high end Intel Motherboard with the right socket.
@TheVergile BUut that's the thign here: Proice to performance is very much in AMD's court right now. You get a 12% increase in performance for an extra 31% of the price.
Just upgraded my motherboard to an Aorus Z390 pro wifi, my cpu to an i7 9700k ($489 boxing day sale in Canada) and ram to corsair vengeance lpx 3000mhz 16 gb and honestly, I went there to buy the i9 9900k but the price just killed it for me. The i9 was literally $200 more on sale at $689 so I decided, because I don't stream or do video editing, the latest generation i7 processor should be MORE than enough. Turns out I was right, I previously had an MSI Radeon RX 580 8gb and I decided to keep it for a bit longer and just overclock it for better performance and ohhhh boy, my rig shreds Gears 5, Hellblade, and Outer worlds with ease. Even gives killer scores in cinebench. Overall, I am really happy with my new PC build, considering my previous cpu was an i7 875k
Wow a commercial that I actually can use for once xD I need a special tripoint screwdriver for my 3DS, but just buying it with shipment costs is quite expensive and here you have an offer for a whole set of usefull stuff that is not expensive.
I dont understand the part with Power Consumtion and Temp? this is the only site reporting this numbers, all others report diff numbers. 240W and 100c ``??
These tests varies a lot depending if TDP limit is enabled or not. With no limit 9900k boost all-core around 4.8GHz and consumes 180W(just cpu) assuming there's adequate cooling. With stock TDP boost clocks are much lower, 4.1GHz for all-core. And so is performance numbers.
Linus shilling at his best, this is why you don't just watch 1 techtuber watch gamernexus, hardwareunboxed, derbaur this is the purest channel so far no bs and some sort of shilling happen, this channel will shit on any company if they fck up, I'm gonna bet if Linus don't repost a video on this temp he will be called out by other techtuber.
If anyone is interested in my upgrade from 3570k to 9700k both used with GTX 970 i5 3570k -460 Points at Cinebench R15 i7 9700k -1578 Points at Cinebench R15 Both with GTX 970 EVGA Battlefield was NOT playable with the i5. It looked awful and still didnt perform. WIth the 9700k i got 90 FPS at High/ Ultra settings at 1080p and it drops to 85fps. Cooling was with the Enermax Liqfusion 240 and it never got above 55°C. GPU was about 72°C. I actually wanted to build a whole new PC, but it seems i dont need a new GPU right now. I dont need 1440p. 24" IPS Eizo is fine as fuck (i prefer IPS.....nothing can beat that colors from Eizo), and 1440p only makes sense with a larger Monitor. In other Games the 9700k doesnt swat at ALL. 20% usage in R6, 42°C. TDP is only 55 TDP with BF5.
Intel lost the market Linus, however no one ever said AMD was better than Intel on gaming.. Intel is the king for gaming, but who cares? Ryzen kill so simple the gaming Intel CPU's The reason is more than simple, Lower Price, Average FPS, which Gamer care if he play with 100-140FPS or 140-180? Shuttering start on below 60FPS 55 usually.. Ryzen can manage the 90% of games at the moment 2k Resolution monitor with decent graphic card like 1060GTX
You should probably check the market analysis before you blow smoke out of your ass. Intel lost this generation, they still dominate the market, 76% to be exact.
To change the overall PC market will be hard to achieve.Just in my country(India) there are millions of old PCs that are still being used and they won't upgrade them.So i think looking at CPU sold quaterly should be new metric to measure CPU market
@@BenderBendingRodriguezOFFICIAL maybe you are right, the TH-cam and Google are screaming of AMD Ryzen two years now, I haven't see Intel videos the last two years, who the heck buying Intel? also can you compare Intel technology with AMD now? cpu with onboard Vega perform so well people seeking cpu & money value, can you compare thread ripper? Intel same technology same chip-sets same boost clocks they change only the second letter number I7 I9 now no sorry. I'm not taking the bait
@@BenderBendingRodriguezOFFICIAL domination of the market why they cooked benchmarks results after releasing new cpu with there own documentation which include ryzen specs that smells bad for a company like Intel.. it's a shame
afaik linus already had it in another video.... im pretty sure i heard it here before.... might also be another channel... searching for the name also, its pretty catchy....
Yea he did and I wanted to know the name back then too... I tried clipping a snippet of it and running it through a recognition program with no results
Do you still know what other video it was used in? I guess its pretty new and not a genre most user hear so its not in every music recognition program......
still no success, I've browsed through the possible music promotion channels' videos from the last month. I would really like to know the title of this song
which one is the one I should choose for gaming and video rendering and photoshop and such like you said from both worlds? I just don't know what to choose actually
J It was a joke for me but I am actually building my friend one that's much less than that as it's just an old Dell and a GTX 1050 ti. And I got the Dell for free from a neighbor.
Since our thermal and power consumption numbers are very different from other publications, here's some clarification on our board settings:
-Multi-core enhancement: Disabled
-SVID behavior: "Intel Fail-Safe" / Intel's default
-XMP: Enabled
-All power duration and limit settings default
-Core multiplier at defaults
-Core voltages at defaults
Cooler: Corsair H115i w/IC Graphite thermal pads
The performance numbers we got were double-checked against Intel's engineers, and they were in line; This suggests that our thermal tests are indicative of stock performance (with motherboard vendor optimizations disabled). We did *not* ask Intel about their thermal or power consumption results.
you didn't mention the cooler used anywhere btw
Linus reply
Light Silent hope intel postmarked that check dude
@tommihommi1 Good catch. It was a Corsair H115i on all platforms.
@Light Silent: It's 5 GHz on 2 cores, 4.7 GHz is the all-core boost.
*house catches fire*
911: What is your emergency
Me: I over clocked my i9 9980xe with no liquid cooling
911: Say no more
It could even melt the ice on Antarctica.
@@maximumretroyer4892 reason for global warming
Firefighters come in with an ice cold hose
This can even warm the whole artic continent
🤣🤣😂😂👍🏾
>Killing hyperthreading on all but your highest end CPU
It's like intel WANT AMD to win
You can have smooth responsiveness on Intel too. Without HT, IDK. Disable deep C-states. It takes additional power to run the additional HT pipelines. Your best power consumption vs performance is without HT. The low end Ryzens don't have SMT and they're quite responsive whether idle or when all cores are busy.
I've also seen a demo where having more than your optimal number of cores available can hurt performance by having threads spread out too much and result in downclocking. Unless you prefer to waste a lot of power keeping it in performance mode. Or unless you can and do lock the app to it's optimal number of cores and set affinity to a specific set. This was demoed on a 6c/12t cpu and an 8c/16t cpu by two different people by just turning HT off and on and disabling cores for comparison.
@@jasonlisonbee wait...
"Waste a lot of power keeping it in performance mode"
You can't tell me that people with 6 core CPUs and likely powerful gfx cards Actually care about the amount of power their computer takes from the wall. Also, if you want to save a bit of power, T U R N O F F Y O U R C O M P U T E R W H E N Y O U A R E N ' T U S I N G I T
@Mentos, not an option when it's always recoding videos. If you ever encode to h265, always use 'pmode'. I don't know why it's not on by default when you have more than two cores. It improves thread utilization and output quality. Makes the files smaller if you use CQ mode. Too many start ups in a cold room can also damage electronics. It's optimal to keep it at a (near) constant temp. I just reminded myself why I should have liquid cooling even though my CPU never reaches critical temps on air (It might if I used the 'performance' governor rather than 'schedutil' for a couple percent difference in app performance.). Much slower heat/cooling cycles regardless of usage. Since the room is cold, it's not a big deal anyway, it's saving the use of running a room heater.
I saved 200$ by turning off my heating at home during the winter and buying an AMD GPU and leaving my PC ON when in use/at home
Intel is *really* good at competing with their own products.
lol
Even intel don't care about i9
And loosing.
GM be like
I.P Mahendra u are a fool if u believe that they’re just penny pinching bastards 😆
Ur NoT a GaMeR - You wouldn't understand
- Intel Marketing
I was not expecting to find you here.
Intel just knows better don't they
BUT PROTO
@Juug And Finessing fuck off I will buy what will please me
But Proto...
RIP "Hyper-threading" for Core i7
(2009 - 2018)
nope. the 9700k, predecessor to the 8700k has 8c and 8t. so in total 8 cores. the 8700k had 6 cores and 12 threads. 4 more cores.
hypertheading cores are not real cores. they are like 1/2 cores on a good day, and basically nothing on most days.
woolfoma - It's even a bit less than 1/2 as far I am aware.
I mean the best anyone has ever gotten out of hyperthreading is a 50% bump in a like a handful of programs, most make no use of it.
8700k had 6 cores and 12 threads. your theory blown out of the water.... id rather have 6 + 6 than just 8
Removing features and selling same thing at higher price
That sounds a lot like Apple
And yet people still buy Apple
Someone give this thread a thinking reptile meme.
This one gets it. Except Apple was able to sell the headphone jack back at you for a much higher price. Wonder how Intel will do it.
When brand name is strong enough, customers still but it and you save money, make more
Apple is also paired with amd.. Or did you forget that apple uses their gpus in their high end desktops..
These Intel prices have ryzen
😌 true
That's a good joke!
You could say AMD's market share is ryzen because of this.
TMan.exe please leave
get. out.
My i7 920: Hyperthreading
i7 9700k: No Hypertheading
My i7 870 has hyper threading
The worst thing is u have to pay 170 dolars more for HT :d
my Prescott pentium 4 ht
had hyper threading ...
Lol are you really complaining?
cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-920-vs-Intel-Core-i7-9700K/1981vs4030
@@LocoMe4u >Taking Userbenchmark seriously
ok buddy
Dedicated video about the updated h264 encoder please. You guys have mentioned it repeatedly but nobody has deep dived into it at all yet. Come on.
Coalition Gaming a techquike one? You have to contact that guy on Twitter or the forum to submit ideas. I forget his name..
@@iKingRPG would prefer to see it on the main channel instead of some condensed techquickie content
Maybe do it for all hardware encoders? NVENC, VCE, and QuickSync have improved quite a bit recently.
Well, I've found this video on youtube and it seems like "updated h264 encoder" is just bullshit
th-cam.com/video/L8yqfWlmakE/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/hvgxn8v--8Q/w-d-xo.html
"Here we are again with another refresh of Skylake"
It is the second refresh of Skylake which is a refresh of Broadwell, which is a refresh of Haswell, which is a refresh of Ivy Bridge, which is a a refresh of Sandy Bridge.
Yep, same architecture for about 5-6 years now? Small bumps in IPC and finally after AMD launched Ryzen Intel is now throwing out Cpus all over the place. An i9 on the mainstream? I guess they couldn't call it an i7 since that would confuse others who purchased the x299 platform or ticked them off which I'm sure it did already. Think about how much they paid for that i9 on x299 and here's one for half the price. I would be pissed. That's probably the reason Intel didn't lower the price any lower. X299 owners would have went full-blown retarded. I know I would have and it's the reason I didn't go x299. I went Ryzen 1700-2700x all the way for half the price and a few frames less. I game at 4k so it doesn't matter. I would imagine or hope that most people spending 2 grand on a pc doesn't buy a 150$ monitor in 1080p. I imagine most would go 2k 144hz or 4k like me. It wouldn't make any sense to game in 1080p with a 2080ti and 500$ cpu. These reviewers don't normally go with what most people have as far as hardware. Most have a Ryzen 1600-2600 or Ryzen 1700 or Intel 8400-7700k paired with a 1070, 1060, or 970,580 gpu. The CPU wouldn't matter with a 1060 as most will be a gpu bottleneck anyway. Even a 1070 will be pushed to the max with a 2600x or 8600 cpu.
Skylake is not a refresh of Broadwell just look at the second syllable of Intel Architectures
2 Bridges
2 wells
4 Lakes
So... Half-Life 3 confirmed?
@@XDbored1 you are a complete brainlet if you think Skylake CPU's (and by extension kaby and coffee lake CPU's) are not a continuation of Sandy Bridge architecture. All that has changed since Sandy Bridge are a change in memory controller, 2 manufacturing node refinements, slight deviations in iGPU, and some insignificant instruction set additions.
my point is a new Memory controller and 2 manufacturing node refinements are important changes but we have had nothing since Skylake the 6700K shits all over the 2700K but if you look at Intels newer quad cores there's nothing different between them and the 6700K
it's not the best cpu, it's the fastest. Price to performance ratio is a complete mess
When u go for the fastest, price and performance ratio r irrelevant. If u think it's too expensive simply means it was not design for u
@@laujack24 if intel came next year with a new CPU 15% faster than this one but with a price of 1500 euro would you still say that? Sorry to
tell you that but price to performance matters and it matters a lot in the hardware industry.
@@laujack24 just like RTX 2080TI. That's why we desperately need a competitor on every category. If someone were to buy this intel CPU though, is kinda stupid or crazy rich. A ~20% increase for twice the price?
The results on here are complete bunk. The thermals are wrong because the motherboard they chose is only a cheap 4 phase vrm design. The chip is actually faster than what they posted, but the heat is INSANE, and the tdp is WAY higher than what he posted. Go see hardware unboxed. He explains how Linus and OC3D got these results because they both used the same shitty board.
I've observed that that concept is hard to understand for some people, and I'm not talking about Intel fanboys but AMD fanboys, in some tech blogs I comment on. It's like saying the 9900k is the fastest means (for them) saying it's the best and the only one worth buying and that Ryzen is shit.
I just hope neither Intel nor AMD make a mess and the healthy competition lasts for as long as possible. Intel is having trouble with production and that's why their CPUs are SO expensive right now (they would be more expensive than AMD's anyway, but not for that much of a difference).
Any other 4790k users here who are unsure if they should upgrade or not? :(
Still using 4790k and gtx970 and I'm gonna wait few more years probably. No new super-demanding AAA games coming out anyway.
Upgraded to i7 8700k oc to 5ghz. Delid. Happy as can be.
I’m going to be upgrading from my 4790k. Going to be getting the 9900k I expect I won’t upgrade again for another 5 years
I'd wait new gen, especially wait if AMD comes out with something good. Between 4790k and 7700k only like 10% difference total. 8700k only 1% better single thread performance than 7700k. Unless you want to spend $600 on CPU don't bother for another 1-2 years.
Im still on my 4790k and two 1080ti's SLI I have been itching to get a new CPU still unsure of what to do though. Ideally I would like more cores for newer titles coming out. But still have decent clock speeds. Id go with the 2700X but it is kinda of weird going from my OC 4.7Ghz CPU to something thats clocked lower. Which leads me to intels outrageous 9900k. I think I might wait for zen 2 to come out next year. :(
All AMD need to do is bump up the core speeds for the next Ryzen iteration`s,and intels last pillar will fall.
Can not wait till the unveil of amd 7NM chips in january
hmm no clock speed kind of don't mater..
AMD needs to bump up their IPC per a thread , past intel to take them out... Pure clock speed helps but IPC matter the most..
Funny seeing as how many are suddenly saying this when a lot of the Intel fanboys always used to brag and rag on AMD cpu's because of Intel's core 2 core performance.
If they were able to do so, they would've done it already. Its clear cpu manufacturing details and logistics involved are way over our heads.
@@nosferatu5 they are working on a new architecture(zen3)so expect ipc gains.Plus zen3 will be on 7nm.So with ipc gains + clock speed increase AMD will be able to match in gaming performance.
What math informs you that $579 is 40% more than $300? What numerical system was used?
Was wondering about that, I guess they went by 579-304=275, 275/579=47.5%, and then taking the first number, or... SOMETHING. Really it's 90% more expensive than the Ryzen and 49% more expensive than the 8700K.
He might be going by the 490 price tag that they actual thought it was before publication, which would still make it like 63% more
@@webbie7503 $490 was wholesale price to reseller per 1000x or 10000x unit lol who knows
Language error/mixing up the math that was needed. The 2700X is a little under 40% cheaper than the 9900K, which is where that number came from.
Wouldnt it be easier to just say “the 9900k is almost double the price of the 2700x” but you don’t get double the performance value?
I love that vintage setup in the back
th-cam.com/video/W5bNkHCCIgk/w-d-xo.html
And how it has a huge Intel logo. No, not a sponsored video in the least :)))
It's crazy to me how i feel about this CPU. I think the 9900k was ahead of its time, for reasons i cant explain. Its still a beast.
Right. I have no trouble running anything I want at top marks.
@@exxxz1999Still on a 9900k with an RTX 4080 at 4K 120hz! This beast is still able to push my GPU to 100% GPU usage nearly all the time. Not bad for a half a decade old chip.
@@leviferrero6068 Still running mine as will on a 2080 with 32 gb was thinking about getting a 4080 do you think I should?
Pls make a Techquickie "What is a live premiere TH-cam Video"
What is the purpose of the premiere live stream? Why not uploading the video instead
xd
its the same thing, it just puts a timer up for when the video goes live on the site.
Sascha Wagner Its a video where there is a live chat that's it.
This isn't new. Premiering has been here for over a month. DashieGames has been using it for his Super Mario Maker weekly videos for the past 4-5 weeks now.
TH-cam Premiere is simply a scheduled time when a *pre-recorded* video will play live (basically, you cannot skip forward in the video, you watched the video at the SAME time as other people, "live", and you can use live chat with them as well.) All this does, is allow for community gathering and conversation about a video. It's like watching a TV show with your friends, the show is pre-recorded, but it's "live" on-air (I'm talking about cable, not on-demand) and you can't skip forward, except your "friends" are just other viewers in other places around the world. After the premiere is finished, it will simply be a video, and the creator can choose whether to keep the live chat on or off.
ryzen is literally half the price WITH a cooler
how much are u paid for saying this?, r5 2600 is the best cpu right now for 150$
Literally half the price with excess weight thrown in.
Built two 2600x based machines this week, more to come soon. Happy times ahead
@Anon 1 yes ryzen performs worse in gaming. Intel has that definitely. Zen 2 may change that but who knows. What must be taken into consideration is that gaming is not all a PC must do. Productivity is an important factor and yes the 9900k performs better than the 2700x but for 500 that is entering HEDT range which will be much better for productivity. What I'm trying to say is that all chips have their place and not one is 'trash' just for performing badly in one aspect
Why buy an X chip when the non X is exactly the same and cheaper? 2700 is a great cheap, cheaper, comes with a pretty damn good cooler and MBs are cheaper than Intel too. Makes it really easy to shell out the few extra bucks for good RAM to make her sing.
This isn't a live video. It's a scheduled recorded video.
Feroz Yacoob new TH-cam feature or has it been here for a while???
new feature
It says premiered instead of live so.
Feroz Yacoob don’t you say
can people help me get to 5000 subs? A lot of people don’t know what this is so it’s not obvious
That ryzen 2700 X is a beast for how much it costs honestly. + You get a free LED cooler? Btch please like i care about 15-20 fps difference on 160 fps range.
Never mind that, if you put the savings towards a better video card, you'll get a HUGE fps INCREASE for the same money.
its not about only 15 - 20 fps difference. But its about how long your computer will be up to date ?
i9 9900k will last you for about 8 years while the ryzen will get outdated in the next 4
@@Tragedyval - In the next four years, paying another $300 will get you a processor FAR more powerful than the i9-9900K so I'd rather do the extra upgrade. And I don't know where you get your ideas but the i7-2600K is about 8 years old and I would have upgraded from it long ago. I never bought one because I just wasn't willing to pay what Intel wanted for that either, I got an FX-8350 instead for 1/3 the price. My experience with it over five years told me that I made the right choice because I NEVER had any gaming problems with it so not paying the Intel tax turned out to be a smart move. By the time Ryzen 3 is out, all signs point to AMD having surpassed Intel's IPC and clock speeds while retaining their efficient modular-core design. You really sound like a simple fanboy.
Programs and games are going to be more and more threaded in the future and that is also the reason why many people are still happy with the FX-8350. I was until Canada Computers offered me an R7-1700 for under $400CAD. I didn't retire my FX CPU, I used it to build a 30TB file server.
@@AvroBellow
Intel CPUS last longer if you buy their high end. Spending as much as you can you do not need to keep upgrading unlike the low performance of AMD cpus costs less but after two years their performance decrease greartly. Spending more you get what you pay for and spending less you get your moneys worth.
Id rather spend a lot now than to have a PC that will be out dated in less than 3 years.
@@AvroBellow while you are going to spend extra 300$, i dont have to spend anything
I like that Intel slaps the i9 HEDT brand on it and people still compare it with the 2700X as if Threadripper doesn't exist
Threadripper is flying forward, there's no point in comparing the two.
@@BRC_Del that's cause threadripper isn't as good at gaming as the 2700X. (Depending on the model)
Which is what intel wanted to show off, heck the 1950x is around as good for gaming as an i7 8700k, which isn't bad at all.
Of course threadripper is better at rendering and streaming and all that, but for gaming exclusively, intel still has the upperhand, despite being overpriced.
You can't compare a 500 dollar CPU that has less PCI-e Lanes, no ECC RAM support, and no quad channel RAM to a platform that does have those things. i9 9900K is not HEDT, no matter what Intel thinks
You cant compare Socket 1151 with Socket TR4! It has nothing with the i9 labeling to do.
@@mr_beezlebub3985 if Intel claims it is a HEDT so I have rights to compare it to another HEDT SoC, Threadripper
from retailers in the EU it's more like 50 percent... I can literally buy 2 2700X's for the price of a i9-9900K o.O Also is Intel binning these chips when sending to big outlets? Every reviewer I've seen EXCEPT for Tomshardware and LTT (HU, Der8auer and others) have seen the 9900K have crap thermals. I also noticed that Toms sample was running at much lower voltages than those described by Hardware Unboxed... Really does make one wonder if Intel made sure to send the best voltage to frequency samples to the largest reviewers...
idk all i know the previous gen 8700K for me is running at very low temp for air cooled.
Guy Fawkes I am not sure, but didnt linus say that he watch at least 3 other reviews, before he does his? But if, I think he would said that.
Yeah Intel prices suck in Europe for example in Hungary the i5 8400 costs the same as the 2700.
That's near 100% just to let you know ::)
Thing I wondered about was how der8auer mentioned, that the Chips who clock 5Ghz easily should already be quite good samples. And I remember Jay saying he had zero problems getting the chip to 5Ghz. I'm not trying to say anything against him but it seems like he got lucky again because having a stable OC at auto voltage seems like the chip COULD clock higher. Tinfoil hat off. Could just be luck, but wouldn't be surprising if it was binned at some point of the harsh competition they are facing ATM in terms of price.
>No hyperthreading on i7
Intel just commited kerchoouicide
I got the new cpu because I liked the box, isn't it so beautiful.
its cost more than the cpu will be
$300 for a box with a cpu that cost $200
@@daddadification I think it was a joke
Give me the cpu , and i let box for u 🤣
It soo gorgeous. Lol!!!
@@daddadification the cpu is actually $300 at micro center so is it at a good price or shall I go for a more expensive ryzen
"A few fps here and there"
Never ever do FPS deltas. They have no meaning. That's because FPS is a nonlinear quantity. An FPS delta of 20 means something entirely different if it is between 20 and 40 fps vs. 300 and 320 fps for example. Use SPF or milliseconds instead - these *are* linear quantities.
Brad Haines spoken like a peasant
@@bradhaines3142 TOXIC
@@bradhaines3142 I can tell you, when using a 240Hz monitor and doing high-speed gameplay, it’s really trippy at first, because the motion looks smoother than it should due to the insane refresh rate.
Here in the UK. The 9900K is £599 and the 2700X is £299...
Alternatively on Overclockers shop in the UK. For £538.97 you can get a Ryzen 7 2700X, Asus Strix motherboard, 8GB of RAM and a 480GB SSD..
Don't get me wrong. I can afford a 9900K but I still dont want to be ripped off or just not see good value and at these price differences it just seems a bit of a joke.
Can you imagine spending £600, and still being down a motherboard, ram and SSD?.. Or you can have all of that, but be down 5-10% fps, for the same graphics card.. Except now you have £400 more to spend on the graphics card... And more than making up the difference. There's just no value here for gaming, the only thing its supposed to do "best".
if you play at 4k or 2k FPS difference will be minimal.
That's because the bundle pack isn't very good...first the Mobo is one of the worst Asus boards out of the pack...second the Teamgroup ram is pants slow for Ryzen.
Third the Teamgroup SSD is not a quick as others and cheaply made too.
Always be wary of bundles...they are always just the retailer trying to clear more room of shite that they struggle to sell inorder to get rid.
Better to choose your own components...the Asus Crosshair v2 for example pissed all over the Strix..and more features...for an extra few quid.
That's 1 example of that bundle.
3000MHz CL16 .. slow RAM? That isn't slow. 2400MHz is bog standard RAM and usually fine for most people. Sure it isn't 3200MHz CL14, but 3000 MHz is fine. Also any ASUS X370 board is fine. They probably bought too many of them, and now most people buying high end Ryzen motherboards would be buying X470, so they want to get rid of excess stock. So what, it's not a bad board at all. In what universe is a Crosshair X370 board "a few quid more" than the STRIX X370-F? That isn't and has never been the case.
@ MayDay GoingDown!! While I agree that bundles are, usually, made out of mediocre parts, I think that was not necessarily the point of OP's example. I see it more like: for the price of just the CPU, you can get the core parts of an entire computer and be left with £62.
I'm pretty sure you can upgrade the mediocre parts to better ones and still make the £599 limit. It puts things into perspective rather well.
2700X has been 290 for a few weeks...so it is 2x the price
Yep. It's a 100% difference!
plus the boards for the 2700x are much cheaper as well. plus those am4 boards are said to be compatible with future amd cpu's for a bit longer.
@@ALegitimateTH-camr I just built a new system with ryzen 5 1500x 16gb ddr4 ram and a gigabyte board all together for $480. Looking at a ryzen 7 1800x for $250 on amazon. Comparing that to Intel, Intel straight up is scamming. My laptops 8750h is still close to the performance of that 9900k. Like wtf is the pricing on that thing? 580 bucks for a few extra threads that is close to the same performance of the 300 dollar 2700x. Intel is on some high key fuckin drugs
Plus Ryzen actually includes a cooler, and a pretty good one at that
this is true, the cooler for the 2700x is actaully pretty decent. Only really worth getting an after market if you want it to run quite under heavy load. other wise just day to day use and it'll be perfectly fine.
"How is this for gamers" proceeds to use it in every gaming rig they build for the next year and it becomes the best performing gaming chip for a year or so
And literally the only superior CPU for gaming compared to the 9900K is the 10900K 😂
@@GrainMuncher no its the i7 10700k
mr TUVOK isn’t the 10700k basically just a 9900k? In terms of performance
mr TUVOK i7 10700k is just a 9900k with less cores & threads
@@GrainMuncher 10700k is actually a bit better and lower temps + lower price
I might need a small loan of a million dollars
Jake Sullivan same
Dead meme.
Might need another million to get a cooler for it.
More like a small load of a million volts.
@@thelightsilent omg your brain is the only thing cheaply made. What a disaster this guy is.
'For a 16 thread processor, you will be paying a nearly 40% premium to get a blue case badge.'
Someone explain this math to me. I can admit maybe I'm crazy, but
$329 -> $488 (MSRP vs MSRP) is a 48% increase
$304 -> $488 (current price vs MSRP) is a 61% increase.
$304 -> $579 (current vs current) is a 90% increase.
'At 30-40% more than the i7-8700K and Ryzen 7 2700X'
Again, what?
8700K MSRP: $359
2700X MSRP: $329
9900K MSRP: $488
That's 36-48%.
8700K Current: $370
2700X Current: $304
9900K Current: $579
That's 56-90%.
30-40% price increase is an outlandish claim.
Thank you, was wondering about this too.
Take a guess why he said that, maybe you'll realise he did too.
He said somewhere else in the video that when they were recording, the exact price wasn't available
The 2700x is 30 to 40 percent cheaper... I guess.
It depends what number you divide the difference by. Going from Intel to AMD saves you 30-40% of the cost. It's not how I would do math or present that info but I can see how someone can make that mistake writing this.
579.99 - 304 = 275 , 9900k is 90% more expensive than 2700x.
-50% cpu cost =40% more
shihab hamed That was epic for the win. lol
9700k>>>2700x if money isn't an issue
😂😂
Some of these mathematical geniuses need to open their Windows 10 calculators and press the following buttons 304+90%=
I have my 9900k for 3 years know, running at solid 5.2 Ghz with an AIO and ohh boy, its going strong until today and i really think that i will be good for another 2 years atleast in 1440p 💪🏻
this is what I was thinking about. Years ago you could get an i9, overclocked it to 5ghz, and still having a decent performance even for high end card. And AMD? I have a 2700x and its a garbage. Same aera. Okay, the 2700x is much much cheaper
@@DaBombtasi yea 9900k is a good option if u get a good deal.
I mean mine is working great, heat is managed well with the Corsair Aio and i know for shure i could pack a 4090 in my Pc and the I9 would still not be a bottleneck.
Ofc i play in 1440p so the CPU Difference isnt that big, but tbh the Cpu will be great for another decade, i think the first thing to swap would be my 2080Super OC.
So If u can get a good deal, take it! 👌🏻
@@SLPrevious Not true. I have 9900k and a 4090 and 9900k even at 4k is bottleneck.
@@kevin26exe depends on the games u play….
@@SLPrevious What would you consider a good deal for a 9900k/2080/32g ddr4 3600mhz z390 maximus hero rig used? I'm upgrading to 13900k with a 4080 and ddr5 so trying to gauge what a fair price point would be selling the old rig also replaced the 3 front intake fans over the summer
That thing they removed hyper-threading from a f*cking 450€ CPU makes me pretty mad. With amd finally making good chips I don't know if I am gonna buy Intel again. I've an i7 4790k and i am planning to keep it for few years more though
Wait for Zen2
Using the same CPU and got no plans to upgrade. Haven't been able to push beyond 50% usage yet, and still haven't overclocked it.
i'm still rockin a i5-3570 3.4 ghz on a P8Z77 M-pro mobo after all these years. has pci-e 3.0 24gigs ddr3 ram. have just added more hard drives for space and upgraded gpu's
Keep it , my i5 3470 is still running strong , ill upgrade to ryzen when the time comes
Rocking an i7 4770k,z87, 1080 ti, moded Bois for mnve pci ssd support, plays everything at 1440p over 100fps
16 PCI-E lanes on a $580 chip. This is the world Intel expect you to live in. Can't even use SLI to it's full extent. Cache sizes are too small too.
From a gamers standopint - yes. Just remember that gaming isn't everything and, for example, a user that needs a productivity rig, won't give 2 shits about how many available PCIe lanes you offer. Food for thought.
When something doesn't apply to you, you have the ability to ignore it. Food for thought.
Actually, 3d rendering and deep learning applications benefit immensely from multi-GPU setups. Even if it's not Crossfire or SLI technologies, a decent workstation for 3d rendering would benefit from more PCIe lanes. The i9-9900k would be a bit of budget option for workstations, but nonetheless, more of a feature doesn't hurt anything but Intel's X299 sales.
@@webbie7503 imagine if they actually supported SLI. Sell double the cards! I wonder why they don't want people to buy more than 1 card
well SLI is kinda dead now NVLink might be a up tick developers wanting to use multi-card support. NVLink was made to replace a on board connection to remove the latency between compute cards. It can be used for SLI it appears but only if the SLI is coded on the hardware level to support the more throughput and less assumed latency in software drivers.
Gamers - "Intel has yet to push anything NEW to the market lacking innovation."
Intel - "Ha! Let's prove them wrong! We can innovate!" Proceedes to remove hyerthreading and a refresh. Also throws in a $410.00 price tag.
Yeah... I think I'm swapping to AMD after Intel's super shady buissness model which has been revilied several times.
its almost like intel wants amd to catch up in single thread performance too so that amd will get more fps in gaming then intel.
they are so close.
and watch as zen 2 gets the single thread to 5 percent
I love my 8 core 1800x and it was only $350 a year ago. Its now a year old and still runs great with me being able to sim out stuff faster then my friends 6 core coffee lake and thats been happening for a year now. If you buy an intel CPU without needing the extra frames or its integrations with certain programs like AE then you're deciding to spend money on brand not product imo.
NOT ONLY THAT BUT THE NEW CHIP that was market as the best cpu for gaming... is actually slower than the old one for gaming.....you can also appreciate the extreme quality of 115c temperatures and really bad soldering.... all for you at worse price than ryzen and same price as Threadripper ... and also the fact that can be another paper lunch...for the intel fanboys
The problem with Intel is the founders no longer exist in the way they used to. Intel was actually an amazing company when they started, but the people running the show aren't who made the company and that leads to things like removing STIM and ramping up prices when you are already losing market share. Intel holds the same place as Apple for me now. They make a great product, but the majority of their product is marketing and hype without much substance in the product itself.
Upgrading from a 2600k now! He's done his Job over like 8 Years.
Hi there my core 2 duo is still working and it's like a 12 to 13 years or so...
@@puns0 With 10 year old games and web browsing.
@@Gamevet no games work on mine only web browsing is possible.......vedios shutter a lot.....
Well, no need for a gas bill, my heating ca be covered by this
Jay Olufsen Nah, just get a $5 pentium d and a 775 workstation with 2 processor sockets.
Then you have the sun
Lol
Andrew G Hi didnt say amds processor was hotter. Tbh both are a really oven. Anything with more than 100w is very hot...
He* i can't edit my comment as the premiere chat is on top of it....
The Ryzen has a higher tdp and temperature
Sure it's faster, but the price is just too much. It's why I mainly stick with Ryzen because I get a good amount of value (not the best but whatever) for the price. I don't care if I lose a few frames, or even if it gets slower in certain applications, I'm paying much less and on the other note, motherboards for Ryzen are MUCH cheaper.
If you are at 1440p or 4k it doesn't matter anyway. So many benchmarks showing the 8700k having a 5% to 10% performance advantage at 1440p over the r5 2600 with a 1080ti. Spending that $200 on a better gpu will always give you better performance.
I don't care how much my hardware costs, but even then it's impossible to find arguments for the 9900k from a gaming standpoint. You wont pay more than 500$ for your cpu to play on 1080p, thats just dumb. Moving on to 1440p (or even 4k), your CPU basically doesn't matter, since even my 2080ti hasn't enough Power to overcome any mordern CPU. No reason to pay doble the price if your GPU is the bottleneck anyway.
Benedict Rancor unless you are Shroud and want more FPS for your 240hz monitor. I have a 2700x, but I do understand why people will upgrade purely for the FPS instead of price/performance.
Power consumption figures seem off. 9900k using less power under full load than the 8700k. Same architecture, more cores, less power?
Thats not even mentioning that they don't come close to the figures provided by other reviewers with the same workloads.
it can be explained with lower voltage or lower freq... also it's "only" aida64 fpu which is not a very stressful test. Also it can explained with avx-3 or something such. But yes, the power draw figures don't make sense.
ive seen plenty of reviews showing this, but generally they are using asus motherboards....
Want to know why? Cause he's a snake LOL, let's see if another video is gonna launch correcting his mistakes.
so lowering temperature can actually lower power consumption even with slightly higher performance coming out of it the lower power wold be due to the the new under lid heat dissipation (soldering them together)
@@GATERISTIC what for, you seen the pinned comment yet?
Just boyght my 9900k along with asus rog strix z390 and rtx 2080 ti gaming oc, super excited
I love how people say Ryzen is better. The Intel 8700k is way better than anything on the AMD equivalent
Thoriuz Why not i7-9700K?
@@Champoforyx for the price... it is... but you need your 5fps.
@@Champoforyx 11 months later and your comment still looking stupid
@@Champoforyx FX is better when overclocked
No hyperthreading on the 9700K really sucks balls, and I just don't understand why Intel made this move. Having hyperthreading ONLY on the top-end flagship product in 2018 makes no sense. Hyperthreading in not some expensive luxury-part or niche feature FFS.
Now though you are stuck with the shitty choice of having to pay the absurd top-tier price, or still pay quite a lot and not even get the hyperthreading on what is supposed to be a high-end product.
Besides, it just means old 8700k's eat into the 9700K market. It's cheaper and has multithreading - and arguably you may not have much use of the 2 extra cores for gaming and most non-workstation tasks.
TheStigma Same reason Apple put a 720p screen on the IPhone XR; to distant it from the premium product. No hyper threading is a deal breaker for most tech enthusiast so Intel removed an extremely important aspect of it so people would purchase 9900k.
Hypertgreading would hurt performance not help it. Be thankful they made the decision.
Because having a lower clocked version of the 8 core 16 thread cpu would just mean having a 2700X. It wouldn't make much sense.
They did it for me. I always wanted a fast CPU with no SMT and needed to stick to i5 until now. Oh wait, last year's i5 tier is now called i7? Absolutely idiotic. Linus is right to be mad (not only because the Techquickie episode is suddenly wrong for no reason)
So now I'm totally getting the 9700K... whenever it's actually launched (as in: appears in European stores for price lower than $1000, which is probably just a way of them saying "we don't actually have it in stock, don't buy it yet").
Compare 9700K to 9900K. Now add multi-threading to 9700K and compare again. See why?
intel's response is:
Too Little, Too Late, Too Expensive! 😁
@Brad Viviviyal yeah touch keyboard.... makes mistakes
out of topic, we are talking about CPUs. :P
@@jardanijovonovich7071 I always think it's funny how people take any positive comment about AMD, or negative about Intel as an AMD fanboy... Nobody praised AMD gpu's in this comment.
I know this might blow your mind, but I have an AMD CPU _and an NVIDIA_ GPU.... I know... SHOCKER! :O lol. We're not all brand-sheep fanboys. Different brands can make the most sense at different times and price points, and for different people and applications. Your favorite brands aren't always the right choice... Who would've thought?!
You can get a 1920x at the price of the 9700k
The motherboards are probably cheaper too.
Correct, that's also not for gamers though.
Light Silent 5G for 2 core not all core.
You cannot do 5G all core with air cooler.
@@thelightsilent intel fanboy much?
Very true, but the motherboards are significantly more expensive and it has worse single core performance, even though the multi-core performance dominates the 9700K.
I have a i3 9gen for 4 years now and used to have a 1050ti but uphraded to a 1080 1 year ago and i am happy with the setup
Intel and Nvidia are out of their minds with the pricing these days
Brad Viviviyal Actually you can go with a r5 2600 if you're using a 1440p or 4k panel as it makes little to no difference, but cost less than the current i5.
This didn’t age well
laughs in 3070
lmfao
Just pick one up for $250 lol
OK after the new Hardware Unboxed Video, the mystery is solved. Linus used a board which had a 95W TDP limitation. Means the CPU was throttled. I wounder why Linus took longer to publish his Video. I bet they had to chat with Intel about that and Intel (because it is Intel) did the same as always. :-)
Maybe they publish only the intel “approved” number.
By the time Linus published this, everyone was aware of the results published by the other tech tubers. Does Intel recommend using a board with a 95W TDP? Who would buy an 8c/16t flagship proc and put it in a board with 4 VRMS/95W cap?
That's why it baffles me that Linus used this board for testing.
@@NemoRSRB baffles?? It's diskussed with Intel..
u are actually wrong. look in the comment section of Hardware Unboxed. This MOBO is not limited and is in spec for this cpu. This mobo supports the cpu. The other mobos just run the cpu out of spec to get more perfomance
I don't quite understand the need to remove hyperthreading from the Core-i7 line of CPUs. Is hyperthreading no longer beneficial to CPU performance?
It is to differentiate with the i9 line. If they didn't do that, there wouldn't really be much of a difference between them. It also helps keep thermals under control so they don't need to use solder on the i7 line.
It's just a rename. 9900k is the direct upgrade to the 8700k, and the 9700k is the direct upgrade to the 8600k. They've apparently decided that hyperthreading is something only their absolute top of the line (consumer level) customers should get, and that they weren't charging enough for it in the past.
Its not beneficial to intels greed...
It's beneficial to the dollars in Intel's pocket.
The point of it is to keep balance between each performance tier, while maintaining price.
The only especially stupid thing is how HT is obviously artificially disabled.
Boy this video didn't age well. Little that he knew that now, 3 years later, 8 core CPU's will be the norm for high-end gaming.
just upgraded from four to 8 with i9-9900k
@@andrewsummersgill6863 Congrats!
Is i7 2600 to i9 11900 good for gaming and video editing/3d render
@@andrewsummersgill6863 just got mines for $300, so long i7 8700
@@bobbybarler874 both are fine for that stuff but the i9 is more ideal
Just get the 2700x for half the price for the same fps at 4k unless you only care about IPC
@@thelightsilent lol no. You get 2 more FPS with the 9900k on 6GHZ, 4k is all about the GPU. A 4790K gets the same for as the 9900K in games with a 2080 on 4k..
ryzen gen3 in 2019 will have a 13% IPC boost compared to intel who hasn't done anything like that in a very very long time if ever. If you care about IPC go ryzen and wait a few months.
@@thelightsilent Remember, those $200 would make a diference if CPU bottlenecked the GPU at 2k / 4k. Thing that's not gonna happen unless you are one of those FPS player that want to play at 240p - 1250001234234fps. Got 2700X, MB X470 and 16GB DDR4 for the same price of the I9 9900k.
@@NoLongo no in ac origins the 2950x is the fastest cpu look it up
You might get 6GHz on LN2 but i don't think it will be practical for your daily use.
At least they didn't skip the number 9
Maybe they should have.
We're looking at *YOU* Microsoft.....And Apple......
They even got two number nine
Because Ryzen 7 ate intel core i9
😂
Why are some bars on the charts longer even though the value is exactly the same? For example with the first chart on DirectX 11: the top 2 have identical scores, but the 97th percentile bar is a bit longer on the top one. It just seems like a useless and confusing thing.
I know this video was kinda meant to disparage the i9 9900k but it honestly made me happier that I bought one, since the only downside was the price.
it will do u good service.. but beware of using it without proper and adequate cooling.. they run hooooooot
LMAO, you got trolled by Intel. Wake up bruh
@@Power_Fantastic Im still buying the i9-9900K.
@@DudethatGross Good luck with that old-tech 14nm power-hungry hot-like-an-oven overpriced CPU that has new security flaws each month! Oh and don't forget to TURN OFF Hyper Threading to be a bit more safe. LMAO :P
@@Power_Fantastic "old 14nm tech" lol. intel i9's have faster single-core clock speed than your ryzens, and better performance overall. more cores doesn't equal better performance. yes its more expensive but im willing to pay more because Intel has more longevity than AMD's processors. i hate this AMD fanboy shit, get off your fucking high horse and cry that you dont have an i9
Bye Bye Intel, it's AMD time.
Let’s not be drastic now. i5 and i7 are beasts
Tek best part about AMD CPUs is that they don’t make the lights flicker when you turn your rig on.
@@thelightsilent you're an idiot
@@thelightsilent you again with similar comments all over
@@nws6146 i5?! really?
9:50 "It includes over 13 different tools"... So, it includes 14? Why can't you just cut the crap and name the real numbers?
Glad I'm not the only one.
"I have over 21 apples!"
You mean you have 22?
"No!! I might have 23 or 29, you don't even know!!1"
It's stupid hype to make you think it's as much as you want it to be. It's like talking down to a child. "OMG ISN'T THIS AMAZING LOLZORZ"
How is LTT the only 3rd party reviewer so far to pull decent temps and power draw from the 9900k under load? I wouldn't normally be so skeptical, but Linus claims to have only pulled 58c under load and everyone else is pulling somewhere in the 90's and sometimes 100c with hefty AIO coolers. That seems like an enormous discrepancy between them and everyone else and I'm surprised they didn't address it in the video. I would definitely like to see a follow up video on this.
check the hardware unboxed video
summary: the decent temp is because of the power limit, which throttle the CPU to around 4.2ghz. Leaving us user only 2 choices:
a) get an overpriced 9900k CPU of 4.2ghz , but with decent thermal and power consumption
b) get an on spec 5ghz 9900k CPU, with horrendous thermal and power that double up as kitchen stove
your call ☹️
highest binned chip sent to him?
@@RentableSocks just watched his reaction to this video. Very informative. Thanks for the heads up
@@onlylonly888 thank you for the informative reply. Just watched the Hardware Unboxed video discussing it so this whole debacle is getting really interesting haha.
I currently have a 4790k installed and just bought a 9900k. Can’t install it yet because I don’t have a compatible motherboard or ram (yet), but my logic was: “if I’m using a 4th gen professor, I should probably upgrade to a 9th gen one that is most future-proof.” Also the packaging is neat, 3D shapes are cool.
Just don't overclock it...you'll draw a lot of power up
2:44
Oh, i thought another sponsor....
Running my 2600k till the day it dies!
same here with 3770 :)
With which GPU out of interest? I had (loved) mine from release day but 980ti pushed an upgrade.
been using my 2600k since forever, running at 4.6ghz right now, had to downclock it after a few years of abuse :D, running gtx970 and can still play anything at decent settings
My 5960X (OC'd to 4.5GHz 8-core) drives my two RTX 2080Ti cards in SLI. CPUs don't age as fast as we are led to believe these days... That being said, the 5960X is an 8C/16T CPU with quad-channel memory support and 40 PCIe lanes (which drove 4x 1080/1080Ti GPUs before I got the RTX ones)...that came out in 2014.
Everyone's bugging out about Ryzen and stuff, while 8-cores were available for 4 years now xD
@EGH666
Are you sure it is due to abuse and not something else. I've never had a CPU that deteriorated in any way due to OC.
I keep my 2600K at 4.6 too, but just because the extra-voltage needed and the extra-heat are not worth it for what I do with the PC. Otherwise, the CPU can run stable at 5.1 with a lot of voltage.
Do you happen to remember the voltage you ran the CPU at during those years of abuse? I've never found reliable information regarding the votlage limit for 24/7 use for these CPUs.
Where are the TR 1920x comparisons? The platform might be a little bit more expensive, but the CPU is cheaper and it has 4 more cores than this.
Threadripper has lower overall gaming performance due to lower core clocks from having more cores. What makes you think that adding 4 more cores but dropping 300mhz compared to the r7 2700x is better for gaming? And if you're looking more into productivity instead of gaming, you wouldn't be looking at the 9900k in the first place, you'd be looking at skylake x or threadripper. It's a poor comparison.
So for the productivity workloads tested you would consider threadripper, just like I suggested?
TR is more similar to x299 chipset; i9 would be more comparable to a ryzen than TR. So yes for productivity workloads you would be looking at Thread ripper or x299 chipsets, but that is not what you suggested :P
Petition for Linus to make all ads 10 seconds long so we can double tap and skip them all
1 signed
2 signed
3 signed
4 signed
Protocol 27 signed
Keep it up boys, it’s for the greater good. Our people have struggled for long enough
lower temps and power than the Ryzen 2700X, you sure about that????
That's also what i thought.
Light Silent source for any of this, because every other publication has these new chips roasting
@@thelightsilent Buddy not a single comment section without you giving dumb comments
@@nawzy202 maybe intel is paying him for being such a good fanboy
Light Silent you have brain damage. The CPUs are cheaper because AMD cares about pricing more than intel at the moment. Leave the community please.
Didn't amd reduce the price by 10%?
Yes they did.
more than 10 I think, but that might be currency confusion, i'm not american.
Bought the 9900k at microcenter for $460, thing is a beast. Worth it if you have all the best of other pc parts and play older single cpu games.
There’s one for sale at Best Buy for 369.99 I’m gonna pull the trigger!
@@chasingtheLord96 Amazing deal!! its an amazing cpu!! you'll be set for the next 4 years at least. Enjoy!!
@@fantasyfootballpro2471 just got one. Newegg $319
I run my Core i7-6900k (exactly equivalent to the 9900k just a few years old) with hyperthreading off. Since the main CPU-intensive thing I do is music production -- a task that benefits from single thread performance -- I actually get much *better* performance from having fewer logical cores. In one song, the performance is almost twice as good, but usually the benefit is much less. So to anyone considering this chip, I would recommend waiting for the 9700k unless you work with video or other multi-threaded workloads a lot. For single thread tasks, the 9700k will perform at least as well as the 9900k at the same clock speed.
The new intel core i10 coffee lake 5.8 ghz starting at 899.999 dollars
More than meets the Eye, Robots in disguise 🙃
Eye get it.
@Scientific Skyfire Δ 🤣
Thanks for making all your sponsors exactly 10 seconds so i can hit right arrow twice :)
Once for me :D
My i7 9700k holds so fucking solid in 2022 games and I expect it will going forward too
2:24 Linus and Techquickie are the same person!?!? WHAAA?!?
Dude
No hyper threading on the i7 9700k? Wow. Intel have done an nvidia and just rebadged everything. The i9 sis really the the i7 and the i7 is really the i5. Nice way to send customers to AMD.
the entire review is soft and kind to the ears by LTT. trying to not put much emphasis to the negatives of the CPU and always trying to compare it with the previous intel models. in other words i didn't a expected a harsh review from linus.
R2700 + gtx1080ti vs 9900k+gtx1080 at 4k for the same price, who's the real gaming king?
intel and nvidia.
@@Dr.WhetFarts LMAO
Well now third gen would be interesting... Just saying
@@Dr.WhetFarts Nope
Real gaming rig is R7 3700X + GTX1660 / R7 3800X + GTX1660Ti / R9 3900X + RTX2080TiSuper
Even Intel doesn't care about the i9-9900k...
Yup!
Also great icon. :D
0 regrets on buying my 8700k just 2 weeks before this launch
0 regrets buying my 8700k 2 weeks after this launch
Same ill keep my 8700k for now and move over to AMD when i next upgrade , intel following the apple greedvidea route
@steve levario What do you mean? Is there a way I can avoid taxation? lol
I will keep my 4770k still perform well with the 780ti.
@steve levario lol I considered it but I didn't mind paying 50$ more for higher minimum fps
So what Intel is saying is their Hyper-threading is just Hype-threading? 🤔
I have had the i7 9700K for years now, and it hasn't disappointed me in any way.
Last week I was offered a swap-out for the i9 9900K, and with the minimum amount of performance difference between the CPUs,I still chose to push through with it. And I'm happy I did.
@@exxxz1999Still on a 9900k with an RTX 4080 at 4K 120hz! This beast is still able to push my GPU to 100% GPU usage nearly all the time. Not bad for a half a decade old chip.
There's nothing to choose. Ryzen is still value.
does that mean I can finally afford an i3 now?
no you cant afford any intel cpu
*To the people complaining that they're wrong about the price difference percentages:*
The problem is that if you're using percentages, it changes based on if you're going up or down. I think they simply went down in their math but used the same number for up without thinking, and that's the whole issue. For example 600 is 200% of 300. However, 300 is 50% of 600. See the problem here? They can say the Ryzen is 40% _less_ money, but the Intel is 90% _more_ money. They should have just said "nearly half" or "nearly double". It's still technically the same problem, but people make the association easier this way.
I highly doubt they were "being intentionally misleading because Intel pays them!". Most likely it was the obvious simple mistake, or possibly just an issue with the wording of whoever wrote the script. They were correct in the wrong wording basically. All of these people are calling out the math but not realizing the very obvious reason for the mistake. The difference *IS* 40% if you're going from the Intel to the AMD. However, going from the AMD to the Intel is a 90% difference. Stop flipping your shit with your conspiracies about Intel paying them to lie.
And I'm not some Intel fanboy trying to defend a pro-Intel sentence or something. I'm typing this on the PC that I built with the AMD CPU that I bought.
600 is 100% of 300
@@themonkeyking8506 .......Is that a joke?
@@niclastnameI don't think so. Lol
The problem is the Linus isn't this stupid and neither are his production staff. This managed to get through EDITING. They don't post this shit live you know. Stop being so naive.
@@AvroBellow If you think it was some intentional conspiracy, you're a moron. Linus _consistently_ points out that AMD is a better deal for the money in pretty much all of their videos, yet people are jumping on one mistake of one number in one sentence in one video as "proof that he lies for intel!". On top of that as I already pointed out, a mistake that isn't completely incorrect. It's just worded backwards. I know they don't post it live, I know it was edited before release. Do you think the editors fact check all the lines of the script, or do they do video editing? Pretty sure the writers are not the same people as the video editors, and the script writers might not even do all of the research themselves.
Was rocking my Gen 1 i7 960 for the longest time, but just bought i7 8700k due to price. Hopefully theres noticeable improvements for me either way. Currently have GTX 970, but will soon change that out too.
So what you're saying is. . .buy a Ryzen 5?
Honestly, this is starting to feel like Phenom days. Everyone's buying Intels because they are "better" with their hyper-threading. . .for gaming. Meanwhile I'm over here spending half as much for the same performance and better overclocks, meaning I can afford a better GPU.
So then if the cycle continues to repeat itself... Another Sandy Bridge revolution mayhaps? Another faildozer flop?
Heck I'm glad I read your comment, this is genuinely interesting to think about.
I mean. true. but it also depends a lot on the situation you are in. If you already have a suitable Intel motherboard and are looking for an upgrade switching to AMD has some additional costs associated with it. A good mainboard doesn't come for free either.
fortunately you can get a good mobo for the price difference between the cpus
true. But if you pay about the same for both options you'll end up with more performance choosing the new intel chip right now. If you put together a new pc I agree that there is no way anyone should go for the intel option right now - especially not this chip. Also if you don't care about what mobo you'll get and good bios/IO/etc you can probably get a good price on it and still switch to a R7. But there are some people for which this chip might make sense. Especially if you already have a high end Intel Motherboard with the right socket.
@TheVergile BUut that's the thign here: Proice to performance is very much in AMD's court right now. You get a 12% increase in performance for an extra 31% of the price.
I think i will buy AMD then...
Zen 2 will be unveiled this January
@Strawberry The specs for Zen 2, the official specs, aren't even out yet
never considered amd until now
zen 2 looks promising for my new system
If is for gaming don’t
Thanks to this video I now know that Ryzen supports ECC memory.
Hello
Just upgraded my motherboard to an Aorus Z390 pro wifi, my cpu to an i7 9700k ($489 boxing day sale in Canada) and ram to corsair vengeance lpx 3000mhz 16 gb and honestly, I went there to buy the i9 9900k but the price just killed it for me. The i9 was literally $200 more on sale at $689 so I decided, because I don't stream or do video editing, the latest generation i7 processor should be MORE than enough. Turns out I was right, I previously had an MSI Radeon RX 580 8gb and I decided to keep it for a bit longer and just overclock it for better performance and ohhhh boy, my rig shreds Gears 5, Hellblade, and Outer worlds with ease. Even gives killer scores in cinebench. Overall, I am really happy with my new PC build, considering my previous cpu was an i7 875k
Wow a commercial that I actually can use for once xD
I need a special tripoint screwdriver for my 3DS, but just buying it with shipment costs is quite expensive and here you have an offer for a whole set of usefull stuff that is not expensive.
I dont understand the part with Power Consumtion and Temp? this is the only site reporting this numbers, all others report diff numbers. 240W and 100c ``??
No OC, even the default mobo OC was turned off.
cause he is using an Asus motherboard, the rest of the motherboards are overvolting these cpu's through the roof.
These tests varies a lot depending if TDP limit is enabled or not. With no limit 9900k boost all-core around 4.8GHz and consumes 180W(just cpu) assuming there's adequate cooling. With stock TDP boost clocks are much lower, 4.1GHz for all-core. And so is performance numbers.
Linus shilling at his best, this is why you don't just watch 1 techtuber watch gamernexus, hardwareunboxed, derbaur this is the purest channel so far no bs and some sort of shilling happen, this channel will shit on any company if they fck up, I'm gonna bet if Linus don't repost a video on this temp he will be called out by other techtuber.
GN chip didn't run overly hot but yeh the general consensus is they run hotter with more watts
I bet Intel wont be happy with Linus after this video.
He did help them hide the bad thermals on the 9900K and lied about the price difference from the 2700X (the 9900K is 90% more expensive, not 40%)
matter of perspective.. If you start with the intel price en you go to ryzen ... its half... if you start from 2700 its double :p
he was talking about the i7 not the 2700x
He was talking about both the 8700K and the 2700X.
If anyone is interested in my upgrade from 3570k to 9700k both used with GTX 970
i5 3570k -460 Points at Cinebench R15
i7 9700k -1578 Points at Cinebench R15
Both with GTX 970 EVGA
Battlefield was NOT playable with the i5. It looked awful and still didnt perform.
WIth the 9700k i got 90 FPS at High/ Ultra settings at 1080p and it drops to 85fps.
Cooling was with the Enermax Liqfusion 240 and it never got above 55°C. GPU was about 72°C.
I actually wanted to build a whole new PC, but it seems i dont need a new GPU right now.
I dont need 1440p. 24" IPS Eizo is fine as fuck (i prefer IPS.....nothing can beat that colors from Eizo), and 1440p only makes sense with a larger Monitor.
In other Games the 9700k doesnt swat at ALL.
20% usage in R6, 42°C.
TDP is only 55 TDP with BF5.
Not worth to buy, just get a 2800x for half price and 80% of the performance while you wait for next gen
There is no 2800x tho
It will be ;)
@@MiGujack3 not yet
i meant 2700x i wrote wrong
@@kotsokale5850 there is litarly 0 need for a 2800x
Intel lost the market Linus, however no one ever said AMD was better than Intel on gaming.. Intel is the king for gaming, but who cares?
Ryzen kill so simple the gaming Intel CPU's
The reason is more than simple, Lower Price, Average FPS, which Gamer care if he play with 100-140FPS or 140-180?
Shuttering start on below 60FPS 55 usually.. Ryzen can manage the 90% of games at the moment 2k Resolution monitor with decent graphic card like 1060GTX
You should probably check the market analysis before you blow smoke out of your ass.
Intel lost this generation, they still dominate the market, 76% to be exact.
To change the overall PC market will be hard to achieve.Just in my country(India) there are millions of old PCs that are still being used and they won't upgrade them.So i think looking at CPU sold quaterly should be new metric to measure CPU market
@@TheLastElderDragon either that or yearly since most CPU and GPU sales don't come at launch
@@BenderBendingRodriguezOFFICIAL maybe you are right, the TH-cam and Google are screaming of AMD Ryzen two years now, I haven't see Intel videos the last two years, who the heck buying Intel?
also can you compare Intel technology with AMD now? cpu with onboard Vega perform so well people seeking cpu & money value, can you compare thread ripper?
Intel same technology same chip-sets same boost clocks they change only the second letter number I7 I9 now no sorry. I'm not taking the bait
@@BenderBendingRodriguezOFFICIAL domination of the market why they cooked benchmarks results after releasing new cpu with there own documentation which include ryzen specs
that smells bad for a company like Intel.. it's a shame
Good on AMD for sticking it out all these years and finally reaching a decent cost vs performance level that can kick Intel to the curb.
Finally got to a point in life where I could get an i9, and of course, its raptor lake. Watching this and reminiscing about the good times.
I was kinda hoping for the 6gpu system update but ok.
ryzen is still KING!
Yes, Kings on a budget. The other kings who don't have to think too much about money they won't bother.
@@mankybrains so tell me how's your i3 doing these days?
i7 ivybridge is still chucking along. Waiting for Ryzen2 next year.
What is the music used during the video? I keep hearing "Na na na nana nana" with a decent beat, but it's neither the intro nor outro song.
It sounds awesome and very familiar but I have no idea what it is. Someone plz
afaik linus already had it in another video.... im pretty sure i heard it here before.... might also be another channel... searching for the name also, its pretty catchy....
Yea he did and I wanted to know the name back then too... I tried clipping a snippet of it and running it through a recognition program with no results
Do you still know what other video it was used in? I guess its pretty new and not a genre most user hear so its not in every music recognition program......
still no success, I've browsed through the possible music promotion channels' videos from the last month. I would really like to know the title of this song
which one is the one I should choose for gaming and video rendering and photoshop and such like you said from both worlds? I just don't know what to choose actually
Please verify which is more cooler under gaming and streaming load . Ryzen 2700x or 8700K .
Thank you very much !!!
Linus, the VRM on that board is locked at 95W by default, and you know it, the processor is consuming half the power it should.
The thing is more expensive than my PC how is this for me.
Your PC is worth less than $500?
J
It was a joke for me but I am actually building my friend one that's much less than that as it's just an old Dell and a GTX 1050 ti.
And I got the Dell for free from a neighbor.
@@radarphaser mine cost me less than 250 dollars