Gentleman, with all due respect, you not seriously think any1 would believe 8 core 5GHz chips running AAA games doing 80w
uh ok - well feel free to test it yourself and report back the results or post some other results you've found
-
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...
- Thread starter littlepuppy
- Start date
uh ok - well feel free to test it yourself and report back the results or post some other results you've found
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Aug 2017
- Posts
- 2,209
Er no, i dont think there is any kind of reality where a 9900 at 5 big ones will do anything other than suck loads of power and output loads of heat.
Its just.. a bit crap like that.
Its just.. a bit crap like that.
Well tomshardware actually tested it - and here is a 5ghz 9900k running a cpu heavy game, Witcher 3 at a lowly 1080p resolution and only using 73w.
But you can keep on believing whatever, lol it doesn't matter.
And it's natural - a 5ghz 9900k at full tilt would be a massive hog - the thing is most games are unable to stress the chip and it usually runs at under 50% load where it's far more efficient than at 100% load and that's the case for all CPU's
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-9900k-9th-gen-cpu,5847-11.html
Last edited:
Grim the article states "Power consumption is also within the expected values during the gaming loop, especially since the game does not fully utilize all cores. Although a comparison test with Assassin's Creed Origins did yield much higher values (up to 20W more), that game is so poorly optimized that we measure completely different values each time."Well tomshardware actually tested it - and here is a 5ghz 9900k running a cpu heavy game, Witcher 3 at a lowly 1080p resolution and only using 73w.
But you can keep on believing whatever, lol it doesn't matter.
And it's natural - a 5ghz 9900k at full tilt would be a massive hog - the thing is most games are unable to stress the chip and it usually runs at under 50% load where it's far more efficient than at 100% load and that's the case for all CPU's
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-9900k-9th-gen-cpu,5847-11.html
When loaded to the hilt - >
Yup, I did say when loaded to full tilt's it's a space heater. Just someone got confused between a CPU running at 100% usage on every single thread and 40% usage spread across all the threads and thinking they are the same thing
Maybe in 5 years you'll regularly see 150w+ power draw on a 5ghz 9900k while playing a game, but right now it's overkill for just about anything and as long as games are just using 30 or 40% of the usage on tap, cpu package draw will remain peanuts.
And if you think that's cool, check out how much power a 3900x uses while playing a game - so many games use under 20% of it's potential so it's cpu package draw is even fewer peanuts.
Maybe in 5 years you'll regularly see 150w+ power draw on a 5ghz 9900k while playing a game, but right now it's overkill for just about anything and as long as games are just using 30 or 40% of the usage on tap, cpu package draw will remain peanuts.
And if you think that's cool, check out how much power a 3900x uses while playing a game - so many games use under 20% of it's potential so it's cpu package draw is even fewer peanuts.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Oct 2013
- Posts
- 4,152
- Location
- Scotland
Yup, I did say when loaded to full tilt's it's a space heater. Just someone got confused between a CPU running at 100% usage on every single thread and 40% usage spread across all the threads and thinking they are the same thing
Maybe in 5 years you'll regularly see 150w+ power draw on a 5ghz 9900k while playing a game, but right now it's overkill for just about anything and as long as games are just using 30 or 40% of the usage on tap, cpu package draw will remain peanuts.
And if you think that's cool, check out how much power a 3900x uses while playing a game - so many games use under 20% of it's potential so it's cpu package draw is even fewer peanuts.
In 5 years you'll see about 30% less performance with security patches too
. Looking at it, while the power draw seems ok it is still above pretty much anything else so it still would use more power than any other cpu.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 May 2007
- Posts
- 4,970
- Location
- Glasgow, Scotland
I couldn't care less about power draw!
Bring it on!
Bring it on!
This.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 2,890
- Location
- Exmouth, Devon
You can see why business cares about power draw as leccy = £.
But enthusiasts and gamers....judging by the PSU's we chuck in - bring it!
Gentleman, with all due respect, you not seriously think any1 would believe 8 core 5GHz chips running AAA games doing 80w
No chance.
Also have to also factor in a minimum of a 240AIO, absolute minimum, to cool these. You're looking hundreds of £££s for cpu and cooler.
An NH-D15 will work fine too, or some other comparable air cooler.
D15 is rated to "about" 250w TDP IIRC? If so excellent as I won't have to swap.
I'll be chucking on my corsair h150i pro, job done.
My own experience coming from a 7700k and 240mm Corsair AIO to a binned 9900KF
a) You can bench-run 6 cores at 5ghz on the dual AIO but not 8
b) You can run 8 cores at 5GHZ if you limit the TDP in the BIOS to approx 185w but the chip will throttle
c) In games the 9900KF with all 8 cores going will be in the 45w-85w range, I usually see something with a 6xW on the screen.
Will a triple AIO cut it ? I did not risk it and went MO-RA3 instead.
Grim the article states "Power consumption is also within the expected values during the gaming loop, especially since the game does not fully utilize all cores. Although a comparison test with Assassin's Creed Origins did yield much higher values (up to 20W more), that game is so poorly optimized that we measure completely different values each time."
When loaded to the hilt - >
did some tests today myself using a binned 9900kf at 5ghz:
https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/posts/33032773/
I would expect that if the 9900KS runs at 1.2v at 5ghz those readings will be 50w-100w under those readings by toms.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Oct 2013
- Posts
- 4,152
- Location
- Scotland
That wouldn't make sense being that Intel are stating it as a 127W part based on its own base clock of 4Ghz. Even linearly scaling the tdp up to 5Ghz that way from the 95W the 9900K uses at 3.6Ghz gives a 207W TDP at 5Ghz. Remember that power draw would almost certainly not be linear either so higher than 207W would be very likely.
that is a quoted range for a retail chip, not for a binned chip with the newer stepping.
there is no evidence to suggest that reviewers had binned chips and they certainly did not have the newer stepping. the 9900KF i have is both.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Oct 2013
- Posts
- 4,152
- Location
- Scotland
That is the expected rating for their own chip with the binning and stepping for the new 9900KS. I guess we will see but expecting it to cut power draw by about 40% seems optimistic at best.
181w (approx) peak package draw using my binned chip is 40 watts under the toms hardware launch silicon = 27% drop. I am not running a chiller, toms were.
I will do the witcher 3 next week.
https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/posts/33033730/
The way Precision Boost works it probably doesn't use much less power under low load then it does under full load. It applies very high voltages under low load and much lower voltage under full load.