Intel Core i9-9900K Review

Enthusiast Desktop processor released in 2018 with 8 cores and 16 threads. With base clock at 3.6GHz, max speed at 5GHz, and a 95W power rating. Core i9-9900K is based on the Coffee Lake Refresh 14nm family and part of the Core i9 series.
Price 45.7%
Speed 92%
Productivity 85%
Gaming 97%
Category Desktop
Target enthusiast
Socket Compatibility LGA1151
Integrated Graphics Intel UHD Graphics 630
Cooler Included No
Overclock Potential 1 %
Year 2018 Model
Price 530 USD
Number of Cores 8 Cores
Number of Threads 16 Threads
Core Frequency 3.6 GHz
Boost Frequency 5 GHz
Max Stable Overclock 5 GHz
Power Consumption 95 W
Manufacturing Process 14 nm
L3 Cache 16 MB
Maximum Supported Memory 128 GB
Price-Value Score 45.7 %
Speed Score 92 %
Productivity Score 85 %
Gaming Score 97 %
Max 1080p Bottleneck 6.7 %
Max 1440p Bottleneck 3.3 %
Max 4K Bottleneck 1.7 %
Overall Score 56/100

The Core i9-9900K is one of Intel's enthusiast Desktop processors. It was released in 2018 with 8 cores and 16 threads. With base clock at 3.6GHz, max speed at 5GHz, and a 95W power rating. The Core i9-9900K is based on the Coffee Lake Refresh 14nm family and is part of the Core i9 series.

Core i9-9900K is also the successor of Intel's last gen Core i9-7900X processor that was based on the Skylake-X and 14nm process and was released in 2017.

Speaking of which, if you want a high-end desktop (HEDT) 16-core processor that can compete with the Intel Core i9-9900K, you’re going to have to drop quite a bit more cash and get something like the $710 AMD Ryzen 9 3950X. And, even if you do go with this AMD chip, you won’t necessarily end up with the same level of performance.

The Intel Core i9-9900K is an absolute behemoth of a processor, as it absolutely should be with its 8 cores, 16 threads and high price tag. If you’re looking for the absolute best processor money can buy on a mainstream processor, then look no further. Whether you’re playing PC games or even doing hardcore video and 3D work, the Intel Core i9-9900K can handle them with ease.

What this all means is that the Intel Core i9-9900K is an absolute beast when it comes to multi-threaded workloads, especially at this price point. If you're counting on doing some video editing or compiling one hell of an Excel spreadsheet, you're going to see firsthand a performance boost with the Core i9-9900K.

Bear in mind, however, that if you already have something like the Core i9-7900X, this generation doesn't offer the biggest boost in performance. You might want to wait another year or so before dropping a few hundred bucks, or even opt to splurge on a higher-end but pricier chip.

So which should you buy? Let's get that out of the way. Before this comparison review we updated our Best CPU feature and we said you should go with the Ryzen 9 3900X as it comes with a better stock cooler, can be overclocked, and the AM4 platform offers a significantly better upgrade path.

If you're mostly playing games on your PC, you will be happy buying either processor. Both proved to be solid options and are evenly matched with a slight advantage to the AMD chip if you don't tune up the Ryzen 9 processor. The base performance we showed for the Core i9-9900K can be achieved with $90 memory, while the Ryzen 9 3900X will require $110 - $120 memory in order to enable the frame rates shown here. It’s not a big cost difference and right now with anything less than an RTX 2070 or Vega 64 you’ll more than likely become GPU limited.

The gaming tests with an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti installed in the test system showed the Intel Core i9-9900K was more capable than many might have expected. The basic enthusiast processor from Intel that can be picked up for $530 was able to out perform the Ryzen 9 3950X that runs $710 shipped in the three games we tested on. We know that you can’t test on just three games and declare something the overall victor, but it just goes to show that 8-core processors can still manage to get by today. Being able to play current game titles and stream to Twitch on the Core i9-9900K was something we give playable results, but we were pleasantly surprised. As games become more threaded the ‘value’ in a 8-core processor continues to go down, but you can still get by with something like the Core i9-9900K in a pinch.

Now the biggest question is can Intel’s Core i9 processor play games? The answer is simply yes as it got a respectable gaming score of 97% in our benchmarks.

Regardless of those external factors, the Core i9-9900K proves it has the chops to be your main gaming system and a just as effective media creation platform – two things that are becoming intrinsically connected in this age of live-streaming, eSports and uploading gameplay videos.

That said, to squeeze out all the potential of this surprisingly potent enthusiast chip, you’ll want (and need) to splurge on an enthusiast-grade Z270, Z370, Z390 motherboard.

Fresh from a successful roll-out of mainstream Core i9 CPUs, Intel's attack on AMD now extends down into the enthusiast with its Core i9-9900K processors, which the company is making available as of Oct 2018.

Which GPU to Pick for Intel Core i9-9900K

Below is a comparison of all graphics cards average FPS performance (using an average of 80+ games at ultra quality settings), combined with the Intel Core i9-9900K.

Graphics Card Price Cost Per Frame Avg 1080p Avg 1440p Avg 4K
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 24GB $ 1,499 $ 5.2 287.6 FPS
219.9 FPS
133.4 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 10GB $ 699 $ 2.8 250.6 FPS
191.7 FPS
116.2 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 8GB $ 499 $ 2.6 191.7 FPS
146.7 FPS
88.9 FPS
NVIDIA TITAN RTX 24GB $ 2,499 $ 14.2 176 FPS
139 FPS
84.9 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti 11GB $ 1,299 $ 7.6 171.4 FPS
135.4 FPS
82.6 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER 8GB $ 699 $ 4.5 155.5 FPS
121.6 FPS
73.8 FPS
NVIDIA TITAN V 12GB $ 2,999 $ 20.1 149.1 FPS
117.8 FPS
73.3 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 8GB $ 699 $ 4.8 147 FPS
113.8 FPS
68.5 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GB $ 759 $ 5.5 137.8 FPS
108.5 FPS
65.9 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER 8GB $ 499 $ 3.6 136.9 FPS
104.8 FPS
63.5 FPS
NVIDIA TITAN Xp 12GB $ 1,199 $ 8.9 135.1 FPS
104.8 FPS
65 FPS
AMD Radeon VII 16GB $ 699 $ 5.2 135.1 FPS
104 FPS
62 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB $ 399 $ 3 131.6 FPS
101.2 FPS
60.3 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 8GB $ 499 $ 3.8 129.8 FPS
97.9 FPS
60.1 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER 8GB $ 400 $ 3.3 122.8 FPS
91.1 FPS
54.9 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 5700 8GB $ 349 $ 2.9 120.6 FPS
92.8 FPS
55.3 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 8GB $ 499 $ 4.3 117 FPS
88.7 FPS
53 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 6GB $ 350 $ 3 115.6 FPS
83.8 FPS
49.6 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT 6GB $ 279 $ 2.5 113.7 FPS
86.8 FPS
51.6 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 295X2 4GB $ 1,499 $ 13.7 109.7 FPS
82 FPS
52.1 FPS
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB $ 499 $ 4.6 109.4 FPS
84.2 FPS
50 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti 8GB $ 409 $ 3.8 108.4 FPS
82.2 FPS
48.9 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X 12GB $ 999 $ 9.5 105.4 FPS
79 FPS
47.1 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB $ 279 $ 2.7 103.1 FPS
78.2 FPS
46.5 FPS
AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB $ 399 $ 3.9 102.5 FPS
78.8 FPS
46.9 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 8GB $ 399 $ 4 99.8 FPS
75 FPS
44.3 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER 6GB $ 229 $ 2.4 97.2 FPS
73.8 FPS
44 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti 6GB $ 649 $ 7.1 91.7 FPS
69.2 FPS
41.2 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 6GB $ 220 $ 2.4 91.5 FPS
69.4 FPS
41.3 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 590 8GB $ 279 $ 3.2 86.9 FPS
63.9 FPS
37.2 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB $ 649 $ 7.8 83.3 FPS
65.8 FPS
40.2 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER 4GB $ 160 $ 2 79.7 FPS
60.3 FPS
35.8 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 8GB 8GB $ 199 $ 2.5 79 FPS
58.1 FPS
33.7 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 4GB $ 549 $ 7 78.7 FPS
58.7 FPS
35.2 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 580 8GB $ 229 $ 3 77 FPS
56.6 FPS
32.8 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 Nano 4GB $ 649 $ 8.6 75.8 FPS
58.8 FPS
35.7 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK 6GB $ 999 $ 13.6 73.5 FPS
54.4 FPS
34 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 FURY 4GB $ 549 $ 7.7 71.6 FPS
55.3 FPS
33.2 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB 6GB $ 254 $ 3.6 71.4 FPS
53 FPS
31.6 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB 4GB $ 169 $ 2.4 70.8 FPS
52.2 FPS
30.3 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 390X 8GB $ 429 $ 6.2 68.9 FPS
53.1 FPS
32 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3GB 3GB $ 170 $ 2.5 67.8 FPS
50.4 FPS
30 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 4GB $ 329 $ 4.9 66.7 FPS
49 FPS
30.4 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 480 8GB $ 400 $ 6.2 64.8 FPS
49.4 FPS
30.1 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 390 8GB $ 329 $ 5.1 64.4 FPS
48.5 FPS
27.5 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 570 4GB $ 169 $ 2.7 63.5 FPS
47.8 FPS
27.9 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 4GB $ 149 $ 2.5 60.7 FPS
45.7 FPS
27.1 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 470 4GB $ 179 $ 3.2 56.7 FPS
42.9 FPS
25.4 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 380X 4GB $ 229 $ 4.8 47.7 FPS
35.7 FPS
21.6 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 285 2GB $ 249 $ 5.8 42.8 FPS
32.1 FPS
18.3 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 380 2GB $ 199 $ 4.7 42.5 FPS
31.8 FPS
18.3 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti 4GB $ 169 $ 4 41.9 FPS
31.5 FPS
18.7 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 280 3GB $ 279 $ 6.7 41.5 FPS
31.4 FPS
17.6 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 2GB $ 199 $ 4.9 40.9 FPS
30.5 FPS
17.9 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 3GB $ 169 $ 4.7 35.7 FPS
26.5 FPS
15.5 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 560 4GB $ 99 $ 3 33 FPS
24.3 FPS
14.2 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 2GB $ 159 $ 4.9 32.3 FPS
23.7 FPS
14.4 FPS
AMD Radeon R7 370 2GB $ 149 $ 4.7 31.7 FPS
22.3 FPS
13.7 FPS
AMD Radeon R7 265 2GB $ 149 $ 4.7 31.5 FPS
21.6 FPS
13.2 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 460 4GB $ 140 $ 4.8 29.1 FPS
21.5 FPS
12.7 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti 2GB $ 149 $ 5.3 28.1 FPS
18.5 FPS
11.4 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 550 2GB $ 79 $ 3.4 23 FPS
17.1 FPS
9.9 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 2GB $ 79 $ 3.6 22 FPS
16.2 FPS
9.2 FPS

Related Discussions and Issues

R
rocrob July 11, 2020

Warzone Low FPS On A I9-9900K AND 2080TI Please Help Me!!!!

I am about to break my PC!!

MY PC SPECS:

● CPU: Intel Core i9-9900K

● GPU: MSI GeForce RTX 2080 Ti Gaming X Trio

● Motherboard: MPG Z390 GAMING EDGE AC

● SSD: Samsung 860 EVO 500GB

● RAM: 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance 3200MHz

● Power Supply: Corsair RM850x

● CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-D15

● Case: Cooler Master H500M

My Problem: I have been playing warzone since launch and been having some issue with my pc while playing it. It never reaches its full potential when I know that my pc specs is supposed to handle this game easily but it struggles bad. I only Average 160 FPS in Game and 100-130 while streaming. This is Ridiculous. Other youtubers/streamers with almost Identical specs as me Average 190-230 FPS easily. Can someone please help me out. I think that I tried everything but still don't have a solution.

Here is my warzone benchmark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTCzZH5oB8U&t=3s

Here is someone with almost the same specs as me: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3KHKnB1pHU&t=1s

userbenchmark: https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/30458120

S
ShroudedRose July 11, 2020

"low fps" lol, anyways, have you updated your drivers or overclocked any of your components? thats a good way to get some more performance. also, you can lower some settings to gain more fps with little graphical impact

D
dogeatdawg July 11, 2020

Have you checked Windows power plan settings? Make sure it's on performance mode so it doesn't throttle power to your GPU.

V
Vitxlz July 14, 2020

Having a problem with a recently built pc. I put an i9-9900k and a EVGA Rtx 2070 Super. I’m trying to play fortnite on the lowest settings and still getting crashes at least twice a day. If someone could help me that would be great!

M
Moonfall1991 July 14, 2020

What did you try? Did you OC? What are your temps?

V
Vitxlz July 14, 2020

I didn’t OC, my temps are in the 40s and I had a friend try all different types of settings and everything we both could think of to fix it. I didn’t have this problem on a gaming laptop with a 1660ti and no idea why it’s happening now.

V
Vitxlz July 14, 2020

I even tried resetting my Windows to factory settings.

B
bumdude July 14, 2020

Are you having issues running other games on this build? Are you sure you plugged the monitor into the gpu rather than the video out on the mobo?

V
Vitxlz July 15, 2020

I have one monitor on the motherboard but my main one is out of the graphics card

M
monksyo July 14, 2020

What PSU are you using? Could be faulty or underpowered.

I
itsnuclear July 14, 2020

Competitive players like to use lowest setting to get more FPS and have a slight advantage, just watch some csgo pro players playing and you will see their settings are near low or the lowest

G
GlumContribution4 July 14, 2020

Check Event Viewer and see if it gives you any error/critical/stop messages. Is it the game that crashes or is your whole PC crashing?

K
kzuat July 17, 2020

I don’t know if you still need this, but this crash is pretty common and happened to me before. The reason why your game is crashing is probably cause you tab out a lot, and to fix it you need to change the game files I’m pretty sure. There are YouTube videos out there and they worked for me.

V
Vitxlz July 19, 2020

What do you mean by changing game files? I’m not finding anything on YouTube. Also sorry for the late response

A
Accomplished_Ad402 July 31, 2020

(build help) (Australia) 150mm air cooler for i9 9900k needed

Hi all,

So I've come across a deal on a i9 9900k + Asus rog strix z390-f + corsair vengeance pro 32gb rgb here pccasegear.com that I am planning on pairing with my rtx 2080ti.

My case is a corsair carbide 100r which means max cooler height is 150mm. Ram height is around 51mm I believe. Use is mainly for gaming + some CPU intensive emulation however general gaming will be most of its use.

Budget is not really a concern however I'd probably expect to pay Max 250 aud.

It would also be great if I could buy it at pccasegear.com as I would save on shipping by ordering it with the rest of the parts.

Thanks for reading.

R
Rogurzz July 31, 2020

Why did you buy such a cheap case for such expensive hardware? Gonna need a better one to fit a decent cooler.

A
Accomplished_Ad402 July 31, 2020

It started off as a cheap build that has slowly gotten better over the years. I hear you though, maybe it's best I just get a better case and go with the nh d15

_
_Iroha July 31, 2020

If you care about cooling don't restrict yourself with that case and end up getting a nonsufficient air cooler

N
Narmonteam July 31, 2020

For 250AUD you can get a top of the line aircooler and a Case that can fit it.

Otherwise,be quiet dark rock tf, shadow rock lp, Noctua C14s or U9s

I
iminusjk7 July 12, 2020

Help overclocking the i9 9900k

Hello there, So I finally saved enough money to build my first build ever, I built it last month and here are the specs:

CPU: i9-9900k

GPU: RTX 2070 Super (Gigabyte Aorus edition)

RAM: Corsair 32GB (16x2) DDR4 3600 CL18 Vengeance RGB Pro

MOBO: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi

SSD: Samsung 2TB 970 Evo Plus

PSU: Corsair HX850 80+ Platinum

AIO: Fractal Design S36

Case: Corsair Obsidian 500D

At MOBO defaults (bios F12c - latest) cpu runs at 4.7 all cores and it's super stable with thermals around 35c at idle, and 75c heavy load (quiet fans preset).

I have zero experience in overclocking. But for the last couple of days I've been trying to overclock the 9900k to 5GHz all cores and I can never seem to be able to do so. I have watched so many videos and followed many guides, even the official gigabyte one for the 9900k and a very similar mobo (aorus master), but it never got to finish even 10 minutes of Prime95. I know it makes an unrealistic torture test, but I thought that since at 4.7GHz my pc passes the test and it's very stable, I also want it to br similarly stable at 5GHz.

Max vcore I tried is 1.37, it produced a lot of heat and didn't finish 15 minutes of Prime95 Small FTTs test before crashing.

Now the weird thing is I can't even get it to be stable even at 4.9GHz and vcore 1.33 (past that not really worth thermals wise). The best I could get it to be stable at is by using Gigabyte factory "CPU Upgrade - Gaming Profile", which sets whatever they think it's good for OC, and it only got to 4.8GHz with vcore at 1.287v (tried 1.27v and it crashed).

Tried even disabling the XMP profile and manually entering the ram timings and voltage, but unfortunately to no avail.

Right now am running at 4.8GHz and it's very stable. I also set the dram voltage to 1.35 since that's what the stick has printed on (at auto it takes 1.4+).

Now I don't really need the performance gain of a 5GHz all cores neither 4.9 since right now I don't do any critical work that requires speed, so it's just for fun.

But I'd like to know if that is normal or did I just miserably lose the silicone lottery? Or am I missing something since I'm just a beginner in overclocking? I just could never find anyone on the internet who got similar results or that couldn't run the 9900k at, at least, 4.9GHz with acceptable temps. I also got the cpu new and that kind of worries me, should I ask to return it and get a new one (it was one of those tray ones, so no box)?

Any help would be very much appreciated.

EDIT: forgot to mention, that even at XMP, and even though my ram is rated for 3600, I can never get the pc to boot when memory speed is set to anything but 3400, so I have to manually set it to that speed. I don't know why that is, but if it's an indication to a problem then please let me know. Thanks.

D
DZCreeper July 12, 2020

That 300MHz extra requires quite a bit more voltage. Hence why Intel boosts to 5GHz, but only on 2 cores. You didn't win the silicon lottery, but you didn't lose it either. Prime95 small FFT's is extremely demanding, and needing above 1.35V for 5GHz is common.

Rather than doing a full manual overclock, I recommend you set the ratio per core. Meaning when 6-8 cores are loaded, raise the ratio from 47 to 48. Then maybe raise the 1-2 core ratio from 50-51 for some extra single thread performance.

If you are looking for FPS in games, most of the gains will come from cache ratio and memory tuning.

https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4%20OC%20Guide.md

I
iminusjk7 July 12, 2020

Thank so much @DZCreeper, But as I'm just a beginner in overclocking, I didn't exactly understand what you mean in your recommendation. You're recommending to set only 2 cores to 5GHz and the rest at 4.8GHz?

If not, could you please elaborate more? Or link me to somewhere where this is explained a bit more?

I'm not looking for more fps in games as the way it's right now is pretty good and decent for me as I'm not really into competitive games (like pubg, warzone, and the rest), although a bit more than 60-70 fps in AC Odyssey at 1440p would be happily welcomed. The whole point of overclocking for me is just for fun and to see how much juice can I squeeze out of the parts that I paid alot for (in my country I paid at least $1500 more for the rig than what the price in the USA would be).

M
Matzvey July 12, 2020

First, what is your uncore set to? Also play around with creating or using some fan curves. I bet you see a 10c+ difference at load with higher aio fans and pump speed. AIO pumps can run at 100% all the time without affecting longevity. Just a matter of noise level for different models. Use HWinfo64 for all sensor readings, it's the most reliable.

I
iminusjk7 July 12, 2020

Thanks for the reply!

I tried uncore set to Auto, 2, and 3. Didn't help much.

The problem isn't just thermals at this point. The problem is I can't get the cpu stable even at 4.9GHz using vore 1.33v. Also 5GHz won't go stable even at vcore 1.37v.

If I at least can get it to stable at 4.9GHz or 5GHz, I'll try to figure out the thermals afterwards.

I'm a bit noise sensitive so that's why I leave it at quiet preset, I don't use HDDs for the simple reason that they generate unnecessary noises.

I
iminusjk7 July 24, 2020

So if anyone sees this, I figured out what the problem is.

It was all because of memory.

It's 3600MHz 32GB (16x2) CL18 ram kit. Timings from factory come at 18-22-22-42. So when doing the auto xmp thing it would use those timings and WILL NOT boot windows at any other speed other 3400mhz or 3466mhz. And even if used those speeds, cpu overclocking was basically a no-no.

I noticed that all of the similarly speed-wise and size-wise ram kits from G.Skill which were validated for my MOBO (Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro Wifi) had timings set at 16-19-19-39.

I set manually my ram kit to those timings and my pc actually booted at 3600mhz ram speed.

Even more than that, I overclocked my cpu (i9-9900k) to 4.9GHz and it works just fine (if you need full settings I chose you can reply here or message, can't be bothered to post here now since I haven't seen many cases similar to mine), with Aida64 test fully stable at temp avg of 75C and max of 82C.

5GHz is still kinda out of reach since it reaches some very high temps.

M
m8nearthehill August 03, 2020

Can you give me your full bios settings? I am getting a 9900k and have the Same mobo as you.

Thanks

Intel Vs AMD: Which CPU is Best?

Jul 12, 2020 - A rivalry for the ages, and a question often asked and wondered about. Whenever you want to build or upgrade your PC, you have to make a decision: Buy an Intel or AMD processor?

Impact of RAM Size and Speed on Gaming Performance

Jul 5, 2020 - Does RAM size and speed affect your gaming performance? should you invest in a high performance RAM kit? Find out here.

Why You Should Always Buy a Mid-to-High-Range Gaming PC?

Jun 23, 2020 - Mid- and high-range builds perform very well for their price, and are better than the entry-level in terms of power, longevity, and reliability, and they offer more bang for your buck especially when looking at their price-by-year advantage.

Should you buy a Pre-Built PC or a Custom PC?

Jun 11, 2020 - Pre-built systems are an attractive option for those who are less concerned with the minute details of every component in their build. Building your own PC is the best solution for those who want full control over every aspect of their build. It provides the most thorough customization options, from the CPU to the fans and lighting.

How to use CPUAgent To Find The Right CPU

Jun 2, 2020 - How to find the Right CPU? Whether you’re building or upgrading a PC, the processor matters a lot. CPUAgent is the right tool to help you find and choose the right CPU for your needs.

RTX 3070 with 10600k vs 3700x Bottleneck Comparison

Sep 03, 2020 - Save your CPU money and invest it in a powerful GPU instead. So, which affordable yet powerfulrt CPU strikes the best performance-price balance with the NVIDIA RTX 3070?

10600K vs 3600X: Battle of the mid-range CPUs

May 23, 2020 - The best performance to price value mid-range cpus are here. Find out more in this comprehensive review and summary of the Core i5-10600K vs Ryzen 5 3600X's capabilities.

10700K vs 3700X: Specs, 80+ Game Benchmarks, Bottleneck, and Streaming Analysis

May 22, 2020 - Which one is worth it, Core i7-10700K or Ryzen 7 3700X? Find out in this comprehensive review and summary of the Core i7-10700K vs Ryzen 7 3700X's capabilities.

10900K vs 3900X: Specs, 80+ Game Benchmarks, Bottleneck, and Streaming Analysis

May 21, 2020 - 10 cores vs 12 cores. Top-of-the-line very high-end cpus duke it out.

2500K vs 3570K vs 4670K vs 6600K vs 7600K vs 8600K vs 9600K vs 10600K: Should you consider upgrading?

May 21, 2020 - In this massive comparison across 8 generations of Intel Core i5 series CPUs, we explore the performance improvements by generation and whether it is reasonable or not to upgrade to Intel's latest.

Critics Reviews

Specifications Mfr Part Number: BX80684I99900K Model: Intel Core i9-9900K Processor Core Name: Coffee Lake Core Count: 8 Thread Count: 16 Clock Speed: 3. 6 GHz Max Turbo Frequency: 5. 0 GHz Smart Cache: 16 MB DMI3: 8. 0 GT/s Lithography: 14nm Socket: LGA 1151 Max Thermal Design Power: 95W Memory Type: DDR4-2666 Processor Graphics: Intel UHD Graphics 630 Graphics Base Frequency: 350 MHz ...
Intel's Core i9-9900K is a serious processor for serious tasks like advanced gaming and editing. To get the most out of the CPU, you need one of the best motherboards capable of supporting the ...
Core i9-9900K stretches up to 5.0 GHz when two cores are active, outstripping the Core i7-8086K and its ability to hit 5.0 GHz on one core. As you can see in the chart above, Intel is pushing the ...
For starters, while the original Core i9-9900K topped out at a maximum boost clock of 4.6GHz on all cores, the Core i9-9900KS bumps things up to a solid 5GHz, from a base clock of 4GHz.
The Intel Core i9-9900KS is essentially a tweaked Intel Core i9-9900K, which means a lot of the specs carry over. It's still an 8-core, 16-thread processor, with 16MB of cache.
While the 8-core Core i9-9900K had an official base clock of 3.6GHz and officially would push one or two two cores to 5GHz on Turbo Boost, the 8-core Core i9-9900KS Special Edition can push all ...
The Intel Core i9-9900KS is borne from the battle. In essence it looks like an overclocked Core i9-9900K, however by that logic everything is an overclocked version of something else. In order for ...
Both the stock and overclocked Core i9-9900K sip power. The fact that the Ryzen 5 2600X lands at the top of our chart is confirmed by our bad sample. This is definitely not a general AMD problem ...

Related Comments

D
Danovic July 15, 2020
Buy 2080 Ti or wait for the new GPUs ?
Hello,
i need some advice. I was planing to buy a PC in August with an i9 9900k and a RTX 2080 Ti.
So is it better to wait for the new Nvidia GPUs or should i go with the RTX 2080 Ti ?
And what will the price be, if someone can guess for the new GPUs?

Thanks in Advance.
R
Rogue Leader December 22, 2014
Do not buy a 2080ti especially in August. They average around $1200 and very likely the new Nvidia GPUs will be both faster and cheaper and out Sometime in September or October. If you can wait it would very much benefit you.
M
masonsatt July 03, 2020
Can You Check My Build and Give Personal Feedback? Please and Thank you
So first off I'm trying to stick to a build around $1,500 for all the new parts that I don't currently own.

I currently own a gaming laptop (Asus g752VL) which I plan on selling and I own an external 500 GB Samsung SSD, mouse, mouse pad, keyboard, and 144hz Asus monitor. Now I also own a eGPU (Razer Core X) with a RTX 2060 super inside. Basically I want to upgrade to something better that will last me a couple years.

This is the current build I have on PC part picker: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/ymqQHB .

1 x Intel Core i9-9900K 3.6 GHz 8-Core Processor
1 x be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4 50.5 CFM CPU Cooler
1 x Gigabyte Z390 DESIGNARE ATX LGA1151 Motherboard
1 x G.Skill Trident Z Neo 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3600 CL16 Memory
1 x Samsung 970 Evo 1 TB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive
1 x NZXT H510 ATX Mid Tower Case
1 x Windows Home

My first question would be do I really need to get a separate PSU? The PSU inside of the eGPU is 650 watts and model name is PS - 8651 - 2. I'm open to getting a new one if I physically have to but I'd like to save money to put towards other things.

I'm extremely open to changing the case, motherboard, and cpu cooler.

I'm acceptable to CPU and memory changes. When it comes to CPU though I want something that I will be able to do stuff such as stream, code, and video edit. Memory I would also like 32 GBs and fast obviously.

I plan on getting another external monitor with a better refresh rate but that'll probably be a birthday present from my girlfriend soon so no need for any monitor upgrades.

Any suggestions you have will be greatly appreciated! Basically I just want best bang for my buck that I know will work when I put everything together.
D
Darkbreeze June 24, 2014
And if we're being honest, going from what you had to what you'll have, this probably makes MUCH more sense than what either of us posted above.

PCPartPicker Part List

CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 3.6 GHz 8-Core Processor ($273.47 @ Amazon)
CPU Cooler: Thermalright Le Grand Macho RT 73.6 CFM CPU Cooler ($79.98 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: ASRock B550 Steel Legend ATX AM4 Motherboard ($203.94 @ Amazon)
Memory: G.Skill Trident Z Neo 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3600 CL16 Memory ($179.99 @ Amazon)
Storage: Crucial MX500 1 TB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($114.99 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: Corsair TXM Gold 650 W 80+ Gold Certified Semi-modular ATX Power Supply ($130.49 @ Amazon)
Total: $982.86
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-07-03 03:37 EDT-0400
C
connor.j2000 July 02, 2020
Ryzen vs Intel
Hi all,

I'm putting together a high budget build for a friend and simply not make my mind up on the CPU. After doing some research, I am leaning towards AMD's Ryzen 9 3900x - this is partly due to reports that Intel's 1200 socket is only going to be used for two generations, meaning AMD may be a more future proof option. But also, price vs performance seems better with AMD.

However, this is a gaming pc and from what I can tell, Intel is still king when it comes to gaming performance.

Current prices are as follows:

Ryzen 9 3900x - £433.98
Ryzen 9 3950x - £689.99 (not ideal)

Intel i9-9900k - £449.99
Intel i9-10900k - £529.98

These chips will be cooled by a Corsair H150i Pro XT and partnered with an ASUS RTX 2080 SUPER STRIX GAMING and 32GB of DDR4-3600MHz memory.

The idea behind the build is to be as good as it can be right now, with the option to upgrade going forward.

Yes, I know the new 3080 cards are coming out soon but my friend doesn't want to wait unfortunately.

Any suggestions? Would be massively appreciated!
R
Rdslw August 01, 2017
3900x will not be suported for very long, its platofrm that will be replaced in 2021 so you will get 1 or 2 more cpu gens that fits the socket and new board, and that's it. Then we will get am5 with ddr5 support.
so if you would try go get on am4 3 years ago, it would still can take 3900x now, but soon support for this socket will end.

its by few %. If all she want is pure gaming fps intel will be stronger.
if you want either good price to performance or she will stream, amd will do better.

going for ryzen9 for gaming is an overkill, very little games benefit from this.
I would go for 3700x/3800x as its already plenty for games (unless she streams, then 3900x)
and use cash for more storage.
also ryzen really likes fast ram, so consider 4200 if they are not more than 25% pricier than 3600
A
A S I A N June 28, 2020
I7 10700k better than i9 9900k for gaming?
I7 10700k better than i9 9900k for gaming and recording?
Thankssss!
G
GarrettL December 04, 2019
Gaming performance is almost the same. The 10700k would be my choice between the two.
Y
ykaeric June 26, 2020
Custom Build ASUS WS-390 PRO with i9-9900K --- not booting
Putting together a brand new build as follows:

ASUS WS-Z390 PRO MB
Intel Core i9-9900K.
Noctua NH-D14,
Samsung 970 EVO Plus M.2 2280 1TB,
G.Skill Ripjaw V Series 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4 3200 RAM
Silverstone Strider Series 600W ATX PS (PS-ST60G-TI)
Phanteks Eclipse P600S case.

I intend to use the Intel integrated graphics on the CPU, so no dedicated GPU.

The motherboard power button and reset button both light up when connecting the power supply to power. But I can't get a boot. With everything connected, if I clear CMOS, the fans will cycle and the Post State LEDs will quickly flash red (CPU) and yellow (DRAM), but not white (VGA) or yellow-green (Boot).

I've disconnected everything except SSD, RAM, and CPU and can get the same Post State LEDs. Reconnecting Case Fans, I get the same Post State LEDs and fans spin up and then down.

I've double-checked the 24 pin ATX power and the 8 pin CPU power. When putting the 8-Pin CPU power in the EATXv_1 input, I get the above. If I move that to the EATXv_2 input, nothing happens (other than power showing on the onboard power-on and reset buttons).

Could this be a CPU issue? A bad MB? RAM? How does one go about conducting additional triage?

I really appreciate any and all suggestions.
Y
ykaeric April 18, 2010
I resolved the issue. Everything works, not sure why it didn't first time. I have a separate, operational PC running the same i9 processor on a Gigabyte Auros Z390 Ultra motherboard. I ran all new parts on that MB and get them working. I ran all existing parts on the new MB and they worked. I then reinstalled all new parts on new MB in new case and everything works.

Not exactly how I wanted to spend a Sunday, but very pleased I'm not RMAing parts.
S
ShawnCZek June 21, 2020
RAM after upgrade stuck at 2,400 MHz
After upgrading RAM by buying the exact same sticks, I ran into an issue with their frequency. While before installing them, they were running fine at 4,000 MHz (as they should be), after upgrading to full 32 GB, they are stuck at 2,400 MHz no matter what I do. Enabling XMP profile changed nothing, manually selecting the DRAM configuration did nothing either. Even when I tried lower frequency, in the end, the speed stayed at the default value; 2,400 MHz. I am so confused with this as the XMP profile tells me it should be running at 4,000 MHz but it is not.

Motherboard: MSI MEG Z390 ACE
RAM: 4x Kingston HyperX 4000MHz 19CL Predator RGB 8 GB
CPU: Intel Core i9-9900K

Therefore, I am rising my question here at the forum seeking any help or experience with a similar setup and how to fix such an issue.
Thanks in advance for your help.
S
Schlachtwolf June 22, 2019
So you had 16 gb and bought another 16 gb of the same RAM, maker, speeds etc.... correct?

If you did not buy the full 32gb in a kit then there is no guarantee that even from the same maker etc they will run the full speed as they are from a different batch with slightly different silicon quality, chips etc. That is why RAM is sold in kits. Buying 2 sticks and then another 2 later might work but also may not.

Sounds to me the Mobo sees a difference and is running at the safe default settings. Not much you can do other than try to manually overide the timings but I doubt if it would be stable.

If you really want or need 32gb RAM I would sell the 4x8 sticks and get 2x16gb instead.
B
BlazingSword June 20, 2020
RTX 2080ti performance far below average.
Hello people,
I've been running a ROG-STRIX-RTX2080TI-O11G-GAMING for about a year and a half and recently I noticed that it's performance is quite far from what it's supposed to be. I've been running some benchmarks and comparing FPS with friends and some videos online, and while I do understand that these kinds of stats can be deceiving and far from perfect, the results tend to show about 30% performance loss most of the time, not a single result seems within tweaking margin, as in OC, Drivers and such.

Could you guys help me properly test my GPU and give advice on how to fix this?

Some examples of my testing include:

Unigine Heaven: Score 3754, Max FPS 347.5
Tested using standarized settings used in a thread in this website with 7 different people showing their results, people scored an average of ~5800 and ~470 Max FPS, with a minimum of ~5400 and 422 Max FPS.

UserBenchmark: GPU Scored 134%, while average is 168%

Black Desert Online: ~60FPS @1440p Maxed settings, while a friend with a nearly identical setup gets >90FPS
(only difference is an i9 9900k vs my 9700k)


My system specs:
Aorus Z390 Ultra Mobo
i7 9700k clocked @4.8GHz, 1.28v Max temp 67c
RTX 2080ti Asus Strix, stock settings Max temp 73c
Corsair Vengeance RGB PRO 3000MHz 2x8GB
Seagate Seasonic Focus Plus 850W Gold PSU

Please tell me whatever info you may need that i didn't add. TY in advance.
D
Darkbreeze June 24, 2014
So, just put a limit you can live with on your boost clocks using Afterburner (Or whatever utility you prefer), and that should completely fix the issue, or at least put a legit band aid on it. You won't get the full boost the card was intended to be capable of, but play around with the boost settings manually to see where the fine line is between performance and where it starts goofing up. You might even want to manually configure the fans so that they run a bit higher and a bit sooner than what they do on the default cooling profile to try and avoid the throttling behavior altogether.

Could even be worth tearing the card down and repasting the various heatsinks.

AND, it would be a very good idea to contact ASUS anyhow, especially on their forums, because there is OFTEN somebody who has had the same problem with the same card that knows a work around already PLUS many of their tech support people wander around on their product forum as well so you might actually catch tech support assistance there as well.
R
rokdoombeast June 19, 2020
why are my idling temps so high?
Hello. Today while playing World of Warcraft I noticed people with my setup were running wow at much greater fps than me. (I'm around 70 at max settings in deserted cities, not even raiding or pvp)
When trying to discover what might be making my setup slower I found something interesting: my CPU idle temperatures are 60ºC and my GPU idle temperatures are 67ºC. can anyone give any advice on how I can possibly fix this? my pc already has water-cooling, it isn't normal to idle that high is it?

specs:
i9-9900k
RTX 2080ti
32gb ddr4 ram
750W PSU
dual monitor 1440p 165hz & 1080p 60hz
thank you in advance for the replies!
PS: there is no option to change the fan curve/speeds on the BIOS, and if it helps anyone it's a prebuilt HP Omen Obelisk.
P
Phaaze88 December 30, 2016
1)9900K, as you may, or may not have heard, is a hot chip. Intel defines this cpu has having a 95w TDP, or Thermal Design Power.
The system integrators - well, the ones that don't know any better - take that fact, and apply the adequate cooler for the cpu. They are technically correct, using the 120/140mm liquid cooler.
The problem is, Intel's TDP ratings only apply for their cpus across all 16 threads while running at the BASE frequencies - in the case of the 9900K, that's 3.60ghz.
Add Turbo Boost and Turbo Boost 2.0 into the mix, and the 95w TDP may as well be a slice of cake; it's a lie. This cpu can easily pull 200w or more across all 16 threads - a 120/140mm liquid cooler can't cope with that.

You're definitely not using 16 threads in WoW, but you don't need to in order to overwhelm the cooler.

2)The Omen Obelisk doesn't have the greatest airflow either - *pointing to that front panel.

3)That's not a high end motherboard in there either. Overclocking isn't an option.

4)The 2080Ti runs toasty too? I see air restriction - *looking at the front panel and the gpu's proximity to the power supply.

5)While your idle temps aren't good, I could imagine the loads also aren't.
The 9900K has a critical limit of 100C. It's frequencies are not affected by operating temps, EXCEPT for the critical.
The 2080Ti, on the other hand, does care about operating temps; the cooler it runs in game, the higher it's boost clocks will be - to an extent. Also, most 20-series gpus thermal throttle around 84C, with the critical at 88C.
C
culzone June 17, 2020
Why does HT off give better OC results?
Is it because of the temperature decrease of HT?
9900k
Z390 aorus master
Prime95 no avx
Need 1.284v for 5ghz with ht on
And with ht off
5ghz 1.236v
Both runs around 2 hours each can prob do longer
R
rgd1101 November 07, 2011
when cores does less, it usually mean temp drop.
T
Terry1978 June 11, 2020
New build final parts question !!!
Hi all again 🆒 !!!
My new build part by part as folowing exept for bootable drive and second drive for storage .
Case : Lian Li 011 - XL
Motherboard: ROG GENE XI Z390
CPU : i9 9900k
CPU COOLER : KRAKEN x 72
GPU : EVGA 2070 SUPER
Ram : GSkill 3600 cas 17 trident Z 2 x 16 GB
Storage drive : SAMSUNG 860 evo 1 TB
Boot drive : ? Asus lists the NVMe samsung 970 pro 1 TB as combatible but it costs 339 to 380 euros depending where i order it from and it is to expensive for me but i also wish to have the quality and the fast loading times so i was thinking of the Samsung 970 Evo Plus 1 TB at 208 euros this one is just about afordable for me also comparing them i do not understand what the diference is the pro lives longer and is more reliable and the other is faster and has half the life of the pro version ?
What is the deal with these NVME drives pro compatible and Evo plus not so compatible with the gene xi z390 ?
I do plan on overcloking at least 4,2 or 4,6 which ever is more stable and lowest thermals
Thank you all in advance
L
Lutfij October 07, 2009
Samsung make the 860 Evo, not Asus You might want to have the OS/boot drive be a lot more smaller like 500 GB or 256GB for the OS, app's and games. The 970 Evo and 970 Evo Pus are both the same sort of drives underneath. you're good to go with the 970 Evo Plus since they're both M.2 NVMe drives.
H
Hellomyself72 June 11, 2020
Will an i7-9700K bottleneck an RTX 2080 Ti?
I'm saving up to build a gaming PC. I plan to buy an Intel Core i7-9700K for the CPU, and a NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti as the graphics card. Will the i7-9700K bottleneck the RTX 2080 Ti at 1440p gaming? If there will be a bottleneck, should I upgrade the CPU to an i9-9900K? Or get a weaker graphics card? Thanks for reading.
R
RTX 2080 June 08, 2020
I own a i7-9700k and an RTX 2080 Founders Edition; not a 2080 Ti, but I think I can help.

First, the 9700k shouldn't bottleneck you at 1440p. I run mine with a H115i AIO and have an all core boost clock of 5.1 Ghz and it works great for me. It might be possible for you to bottleneck at 1080p if you were pushing for really high fps, but I seriously doubt it at 1440p.

Secondly, I would a) recommend the i9-9900k over the 9700k, and b) a tenth-gen processor even more strongly than the 9900k. Why? It doesn't make sense for me to upgrade my motherboard and CPU to the latest and greatest because it is only a generation old and still works very well. However since you are saving up to start fresh and obviously can afford to spend more than most (you're asking about a 9900k and 2080 ti after all), you should future-proof yourself by getting the most current hardware. Apparently the i7-10700k is similar in performance to the i9-9900k while costing 9700k money. That's an appreciable gen on gen improvement. Whether you go 9900k, 10700k or 10900k, having hyperthreading enabled in your CPU is a solid boost and will be valuable down the road as games start to scale more and more over multiple cores and threads.

The 9700k is solid, no doubt about that, but in retrospect I wish I had gone for the 9900k so I just want to save you that same regret.

Also worth thinking about is the impending release of Ampere. Just as 9th vs 10th gen Intel chips have seen a solid gen on gen improvement, we can expect a big jump in performance to the 30XX series of Nvidia chips. I'm going to be the first in line to buy the 3080 Ti or whatever they're going to call it. If you can wait and keep saving up until September/October, I think it'll be worth it.
W
wildjake4 June 04, 2020
Is this dangerous for my components?
So, I recently bought an MSI RTX 2080 Ti Gaming X Trio, which is amazing, but I may have gone overkill, as my current CPU is only an i5 8600 @ 3.1GHz. I've been testing games like Red Dead Redemption 2 and been monitoring the temperatures closely. I've noticed that the temperatures for the CPU itself are around 70°C - 80°C , with its usage being at 100%. As for the GPU the temperatures, they're around 65 °C - 70 °C. Are these temperatures okay? I would upgrade my CPU to something like an i9 9900k, but I would then need to upgrade my motherboard (Z370-A Pro), which I really don't want to do. What's my best option?
W
WildCard999 July 18, 2014
This will work much better and does fit in your case. These are much better then the garbage cooler Intel ships with the locked CPU's.

PCPartPicker Part List
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 Black Edition 42 CFM CPU Cooler ($38.99 @ Amazon)
Total: $38.99
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-06-04 20:29 EDT-0400

There's a RGB version also if desired.

PCPartPicker Part List
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 RGB Black Edition 57.3 CFM CPU Cooler ($39.34 @ Amazon)
Total: $39.34
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-06-04 20:30 EDT-0400
L
luka1000 June 03, 2020
ram support
hi right now i have a i7 7700k with 4x4gb 2400hz ram. I plan on going to a i9 9900k soon ish i just wanted to confirm my research was correct. the i7 caps at 2400hz ram speed and the i9 caps at 3000hz.