• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

9900KS...

Cooper said:
this obsession with 14nm is truly bizarre. What the hell does it matter what's under the bonnet, so long as it delivers the goods.
Click to expand...
It's not even remotely bizarre. It's a clear indicator of the quagmire Intel are in right now.

They cannot move past 14nm in any meaningful way. Refresh after refresh after refresh on the same 14nm means there is no in-silicon fixes for the bazillion vulnerabilities, there is no move to a new architecture, no real increase in IPC, just ramping the clocks higher and higher which means thermals are through the roof and efficiency is through the floor. And all the while prices are going up and up and up, instead of coming down - why should a ridiculously mature process see an increase in costs, especially when the products released on it are broken at a security level and strained to bursting point with their capabilities?

Does it matter to Johnny Commoner? Not really. Does it matter to we enthusiasts? Very much so. And if you claim to be an enthusiast, yet don't actually care, then you exist in a contradiction.
 
LePhuronn said:
It's not even remotely bizarre. It's a clear indicator of the quagmire Intel are in right now.

They cannot move past 14nm in any meaningful way. Refresh after refresh after refresh on the same 14nm means there is no in-silicon fixes for the bazillion vulnerabilities, there is no move to a new architecture, no real increase in IPC, just ramping the clocks higher and higher which means thermals are through the roof and efficiency is through the floor. And all the while prices are going up and up and up, instead of coming down - why should a ridiculously mature process see an increase in costs, especially when the products released on it are broken at a security level and strained to bursting point with their capabilities?

Does it matter to Johnny Commoner? Not really. Does it matter to we enthusiasts? Very much so. And if you claim to be an enthusiast, yet don't actually care, then you exist in a contradiction.
Click to expand...

+1 we just had an email from our Dell Rep stating they are facing HUGE delays on Intel CPU's of all varieties, Intel is in a mess right now, the fact they are marketing this as the "King of Gaming CPU's" tells you all you need to know, its an ultrabinned 9900k cpu with very stringent parameters to meet their requirements. Anyone thinking these will be huge supply is going to be wrong, and thus they will carry a huge price premium is my bet, we have already seen how resellers like to gouge, well given the demand for these and the scarcity of them expect the prices to be ridiculous. Yes Intel can set an MSRP for them as low as they like, but anyone with half a brain knows these will be massively gouged in price.

And like @LePhuronn says, will they actually contain any meaningful IPC increases? any hardware level fixes to their extremely insecure leaky architecture?? Intel have painted themselves into a "Moar MHZ" Corner and this is just showing that, from what i have been hearing from Dell and other partners is Intel is not even sure if their 10nm is going to succeed in any meaningful manner and are looking at shelving it further... the thread from AMD is real, and AMD's 7nm EUV is right around the corner.

This is a cash grab from Intel with a headliner to try and stay relevant and stave off lost sales to AMD, nothing more, nothing less.
 
Cooper said:
..this obsession with 14nm is truly bizarre. What the hell does it matter what's under the bonnet, so long as it delivers the goods.

..if Intel launched a 16c 32t CPU next week that was 10-20% faster across all scenario's than a Ryzen 3950X at a similar price but still 'only' 14nm, would you turn it down?

...if yes, you would be in a tiny minority.
Click to expand...


SO if you went into a car showroom in August knowing a new model with better technology was coming in September...would you get the old model on an older registration? They both deliver the goods.
 
Steveocee said:
How is that not expected? It is factory overclocked to an all core boost of 5Ghz therefore needs volts therefore has increased thermals.
Click to expand...

No. Intel TDP is for the base clock and raised it on the KS to 4Ghz, all core 5Ghz has 250-255W TDP
 
Steveocee said:
Was half right at least in that they "upped a frequency" lol.
Click to expand...

But that "upped frequency" comes with reduced the warranty to just 1 year, instead of 3 years the 9900K has.

Also the wording is "up to 5ghz all core", just to cover their backs if people try to use it without 360mm AIO.
 
Intel further extending their gaming lead, using their 5 year old process and 4 year old architecture, sigh.


Really wish the Ryzen 3000 series was at least 10% faster in gaming across the board, would have forced Intel to release something actually new
 
Might be a dead socket/chipset whatever but people like me it may represent a possible CPU swap upgrade now or down the line.

I'd consider it once the dust has settled and 1151 is forgotten about.

I have six cores boosting to 5Ghz and think the difference in game would be 10fps at most in a multicore optimised title looking at YT videos of multicore comparisons.

Biggest jump is 4c to 6c, sometimes an improvement to 8c is seen (generally not though) and diminishing returns have then kicked in.

IPC doesn't seem massively different compared to my 8600k, maybe 10% better at most?

Yes for me only gaming perf is of interest
 
Dave2150 said:
Intel further extending their gaming lead, using their 5 year old process and 4 year old architecture, sigh.

Really wish the Ryzen 3000 series was at least 10% faster in gaming across the board, would have forced Intel to release something actually new
Click to expand...

Define "gaming lead"? The scenario where this "gaming lead" exists is very narrow and only because of core speeds. It requires RTX2080Ti, 1080p resolution at medium/high settings.
Any deviation to worse GPU or higher resolution or higher graphics (ultra, RT) or better ram for the AMD system in comparison, would results a parity with the AMD CPUs. Even the cheaper ones like the 3700X/3800X.
 
Dave2150 said:
Intel further extending their gaming lead, using their 5 year old process and 4 year old architecture, sigh.
Click to expand...
In ridiculously fringe cases maybe, or scenarios where it really doesn't matter anyway.

That's possibly the 1 good thing you can say about milking Skylake and 14nm+++++++++++++ Intel know how to wring its neck for everything it has. They won't have such luxury when they finally move to a new arch and a new process.
 
Cooper said:
..this obsession with 14nm is truly bizarre. What the hell does it matter what's under the bonnet, so long as it delivers the goods.

..if Intel launched a 16c 32t CPU next week that was 10-20% faster across all scenario's than a Ryzen 3950X at a similar price but still 'only' 14nm, would you turn it down?

...if yes, you would be in a tiny minority.
Click to expand...
This is true but is this not the limityation of 14nm, does 14nm not make a chip such as the one you described virtually impossible? I think this is why people are waiting for Intel to move awau from 14nm
 
Lol 1yr warranty and "upto 5ghz" boost, straw clutching at it's finest. I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole, as even Intel has no faith in that silicon which is being pushed to it's limit lasting more than a year lmao.

3yr warranty or gtfo Intel, can see it now, tons of dead chips in the first 18 months as people scrimp on cooling for these and they fry themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom