• 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.

Any reviews of 9900 (non-k)?

kalniel

kalniel

kalniel

Associate
Joined
11 Aug 2005
Posts
414
Location
Cambridge
Has anyone seen any reviews of the Intel i9 9900 (non-K) anywhere?

It seems like the 9900K is pretty much power/thermal limited, so I don't see too much point in the K version for my uses (non-water cooling, not a beefy PSU). I might OC the RAM I guess, but does that require a K version?
 
Any potential Core i9 9900 non-K reviews will be under stock Intel coolers including prebuilt PC tests. It is rated at a lower 65W TDP too,so it will thermally throttle probably even with better cooling due to the TDP cap.So it is probably worse off than a Core i9 9900K using the stock cooler.

The main advantage Intel will have over AMD is sheer clockspeed,but AMD has greater IPC now,which manifests itself as an advantage in TDP limited scenarios.

I am not sure why you would want a non K? The Ryzen 7 3700X is only consuming 10 to 15w than my Ryzen 5 2600 and less than a Ryzen 5 2600X.

Most of the reviews of the Ryzen 7 3700X are using the stock cooling against better cooling on the Intel side. So unless you really don't like overclocking or are not going to buy a big heatsink it's a bit of weird purchase. The 65W TDP Ryzen 7 3700X will be better at most things than a 65W TDP Core i9 9900 non-K.

Edit!!

I just checked,they used to use stock cooling but Hardware.info have stopped doing this now,and have moved to using better cooling.
 
Last edited:
Thanks.

You don't think the 65W 'TDP' might mean it's binned better than the 95W K version? It still has to be able to hit the same boost clock doesn't it?

I'm in a right dilemma over ryzen vs i9. I want something a bit quicker at gaming than the 3700X.. much as I still think it's very impressive, and I'm a bit concerned over the mem write issue. The 3800X could be promising for gaming.. but still mem write issues. Then there's the 3900X which solves the mem write, but then that's intel money and still not as fast for gaming.
 
kalniel said:
Thanks.

You don't think the 65W 'TDP' might mean it's binned better than the 95W K version? It still has to be able to hit the same boost clock doesn't it?

I'm in a right dilemma over ryzen vs i9. I want something a bit quicker at gaming than the 3700X.. much as I still think it's very impressive, and I'm a bit concerned over the mem write issue. The 3800X could be promising for gaming.. but still mem write issues. Then there's the 3900X which solves the mem write, but then that's intel money and still not as fast for gaming.
Click to expand...

Intels binning process is very deep so I’d think the 9900 is a fair way down the pecking order. What are you using the chip for?
 
Last edited:
jigger said:
Intels binning process is very deep so I’d think the 9900 is a fair way down the pecking order. What are you using the chip for?
Click to expand...
Gaming, molecular dynamics, photo editing, video editing/rendering, music editing. Ryzen is a great fit for most of those, but gaming is the primary use :p

Doesn't the 65W TDP suggest they'd bin 9900 for better thermals/power?
 
kalniel said:
Gaming, molecular dynamics, photo editing, video editing/rendering, music editing. Ryzen is a great fit for most of those, but gaming is the primary use :p

Doesn't the 65W TDP suggest they'd bin 9900 for better thermals/power?
Click to expand...

Ryzen is great for gaming too :p
 
jigger said:
Ryzen is great for gaming too :p
Click to expand...
Seems to be good, just not quite great, from reviews so far. Almost certainly good enough in the short term, but I tend to buy once in a blue moon :p

This wasn't meant to be a 'my concerns with Ryzen' thread.. but I'm also a bit unsure about the X570 motherboards.. which means I should wait.. always have to wait :p
 
kalniel said:
Seems to be good, just not quite great, from reviews so far. Almost certainly good enough in the short term, but I tend to buy once in a blue moon :p

This wasn't meant to be a 'my concerns with Ryzen' thread.. but I'm also a bit unsure about the X570 motherboards.. which means I should wait.. always have to wait :p
Click to expand...

The AMD chips lead will widen over time. look at all the posts tying to come up with an excuse to buy Intel.
 
kalniel said:
Thanks.

You don't think the 65W 'TDP' might mean it's binned better than the 95W K version? It still has to be able to hit the same boost clock doesn't it?

I'm in a right dilemma over ryzen vs i9. I want something a bit quicker at gaming than the 3700X.. much as I still think it's very impressive, and I'm a bit concerned over the mem write issue. The 3800X could be promising for gaming.. but still mem write issues. Then there's the 3900X which solves the mem write, but then that's intel money and still not as fast for gaming.
Click to expand...

If you check the review of the Core i7 8700K vs Core i7 8700 you can see the problem in prebuilt systems(check one of the reviews on Hexus of one). The prebuilt system was configured to 65W TDP and was significantly slower than what you might expect as clockspeeds are lower.

I also think you might be overthinking it a bit - you have a Core i7 950 still?? My Ryzen 5 2600 beats my old Xeon E3 1230 V2 even in a very Intel biased title and this is with the stock cooler and the Intel using an AIO water cooler. This is with worse memory latency,etc.

Consoles such as the will PS5 be using 8C Zen2 CPUs,so if there is any issue it can only be if Intel forces it but developers are going to be using AMD designs. But also look at the huge L3 cache - in some benchmarks like Lightroom,the Ryzen 7 3700X is ludicrous speed.

IkN4Pwy.png


Also TBF remember how Zen had a lot of problems - it was only predicted at Ivy Bridge level performance due to some of the design decisions AMD made but it exceeded it.

I think it's prudent to wait a few weeks and see what happens once BIOSes,etc are in a better state and people do more testing. Best not to rush methinks.
 
Yes, think you're right. More waiting! :p Nice LR bench though.

I'm on a X5680 now. Same speed as the 950 but 50% more cores :D Oh how nice it was to be able to drop server chips into a desktop computer..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom