Intel Core i9-9900KS Review

Enthusiast Desktop processor released in 2019 with 8 cores and 16 threads. With base clock at 4GHz, max speed at 5GHz, and a 127W power rating. Core i9-9900KS is based on the Coffee Lake Refresh 14nm family and part of the Core i9 series.
Price 18.7%
Speed 94%
Productivity 86%
Gaming 98%
Category Desktop
Target enthusiast
Socket Compatibility LGA1151
Integrated Graphics Intel UHD Graphics 630
Cooler Included No
Overclock Potential 0 %
Year 2019 Model
Price 1499 USD
Number of Cores 8 Cores
Number of Threads 16 Threads
Core Frequency 4 GHz
Boost Frequency 5 GHz
Max Stable Overclock 5 GHz
Power Consumption 127 W
Manufacturing Process 14 nm
L3 Cache 16 MB
Maximum Supported Memory 128 GB
Price-Value Score 18.7 %
Speed Score 94 %
Productivity Score 86 %
Gaming Score 98 %
Max 1080p Bottleneck 4 %
Max 1440p Bottleneck 2 %
Max 4K Bottleneck 1 %
Overall Score 58/100

The Core i9-9900KS is one of Intel's enthusiast Desktop processors. It was released in 2019 with 8 cores and 16 threads. With base clock at 4GHz, max speed at 5GHz, and a 127W power rating. The Core i9-9900KS is based on the Coffee Lake Refresh 14nm family and is part of the Core i9 series.

Core i9-9900KS is also the successor of Intel's last gen Core i9-9800X processor that was based on the Skylake and 14nm process and was released in 2018.

The Intel Core i9-9900KS 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 i9-9900KS can handle them with ease.

What this all means is that the Intel Core i9-9900KS 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 i9-9900KS.

Bear in mind, however, that if you already have something like the Core i9-9800X, 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.

When it comes to gaming it’s fair to say there’s no wrong option here and the Ryzen 9 3950X and Core i9-9900KS are evenly matched. The Core i9-9900KS is at times faster thanks to better game support and lower latencies, but the Ryzen 9 3950X is often able to ensure smoother frame rates thanks to its support for twice as many threads.

For general computing the Ryzen 9 3950X can take advantage of multi-threading capabilities and will be considerably faster than the Core i9-9900KS on heavy application workloads. Remember the Core i9-9900KS is only marginally faster than the Core i9-9800X, so you can safely use the older model as a measuring stick. For rendering and encoding workloads the Ryzen 9 3950X can up to 77% faster.

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 i9-9900KS can be achieved with $90 memory, while the Ryzen 9 3950X 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.

Moving beyond games, it’s an easy win for the Ryzen 9 3950X. The Ryzen 9 upgrade path on A320, B350, B450, X370, X470, X570 motherboards, all support upcoming Zen 2 processors. So if you buy a nice A320, B350, B450, X370, X470, X570 board now with the Ryzen 9 3950X, you’ll be able to slap a Coffee Lake Refresh processor on there later in the year, or whenever you deem it necessary.

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 98% in our benchmarks.

Regardless of those external factors, the Core i9-9900KS 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 i9-9900KS processors, which the company is making available as of Oct 2019.

Which GPU to Pick for Intel Core i9-9900KS

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 i9-9900KS.

Graphics Card Price Cost Per Frame Avg 1080p Avg 1440p Avg 4K
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 24GB $ 1,499 $ 5.1 295.9 FPS
222.9 FPS
134.3 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 10GB $ 699 $ 2.7 257.8 FPS
194.3 FPS
117 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 8GB $ 499 $ 2.5 197.2 FPS
148.6 FPS
89.5 FPS
NVIDIA TITAN RTX 24GB $ 2,499 $ 13.8 181.1 FPS
140.9 FPS
85.5 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti 11GB $ 1,299 $ 7.4 176.3 FPS
137.2 FPS
83.2 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER 8GB $ 699 $ 4.4 160 FPS
123.3 FPS
74.4 FPS
NVIDIA TITAN V 12GB $ 2,999 $ 19.6 153.4 FPS
119.3 FPS
73.8 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 8GB $ 699 $ 4.6 151.3 FPS
115.3 FPS
69 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GB $ 759 $ 5.4 141.8 FPS
110 FPS
66.3 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER 8GB $ 499 $ 3.5 140.9 FPS
106.2 FPS
63.9 FPS
NVIDIA TITAN Xp 12GB $ 1,199 $ 8.6 139 FPS
106.2 FPS
65.4 FPS
AMD Radeon VII 16GB $ 699 $ 5 139 FPS
105.4 FPS
62.5 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB $ 399 $ 2.9 135.4 FPS
102.6 FPS
60.7 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 8GB $ 499 $ 3.7 133.5 FPS
99.2 FPS
60.5 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER 8GB $ 400 $ 3.2 126.4 FPS
92.3 FPS
55.3 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 5700 8GB $ 349 $ 2.8 124.1 FPS
94.1 FPS
55.7 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 8GB $ 499 $ 4.1 120.4 FPS
89.9 FPS
53.3 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 6GB $ 350 $ 2.9 118.9 FPS
84.9 FPS
49.9 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT 6GB $ 279 $ 2.4 117 FPS
88 FPS
51.9 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 295X2 4GB $ 1,499 $ 13.3 112.9 FPS
83.1 FPS
52.5 FPS
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB $ 499 $ 4.4 112.5 FPS
85.4 FPS
50.4 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti 8GB $ 409 $ 3.7 111.6 FPS
83.3 FPS
49.3 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X 12GB $ 999 $ 9.2 108.5 FPS
80 FPS
47.4 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB $ 279 $ 2.6 106.1 FPS
79.3 FPS
46.9 FPS
AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB $ 399 $ 3.8 105.5 FPS
79.8 FPS
47.2 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 8GB $ 399 $ 3.9 102.7 FPS
76 FPS
44.7 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER 6GB $ 229 $ 2.3 100.1 FPS
74.8 FPS
44.3 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti 6GB $ 649 $ 6.9 94.4 FPS
70.1 FPS
41.5 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 6GB $ 220 $ 2.3 94.2 FPS
70.3 FPS
41.6 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 590 8GB $ 279 $ 3.1 89.4 FPS
64.8 FPS
37.5 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB $ 649 $ 7.6 85.8 FPS
66.6 FPS
40.5 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER 4GB $ 160 $ 2 82 FPS
61.1 FPS
36.1 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 8GB 8GB $ 199 $ 2.4 81.3 FPS
58.9 FPS
34 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 4GB $ 549 $ 6.8 81 FPS
59.5 FPS
35.4 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 580 8GB $ 229 $ 2.9 79.3 FPS
57.4 FPS
33 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 Nano 4GB $ 649 $ 8.3 78 FPS
59.6 FPS
36 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK 6GB $ 999 $ 13.2 75.6 FPS
55.1 FPS
34.2 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 FURY 4GB $ 549 $ 7.4 73.7 FPS
56.1 FPS
33.4 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB 6GB $ 254 $ 3.5 73.5 FPS
53.7 FPS
31.8 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB 4GB $ 169 $ 2.3 72.9 FPS
52.9 FPS
30.5 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 390X 8GB $ 429 $ 6.1 70.9 FPS
53.8 FPS
32.2 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3GB 3GB $ 170 $ 2.4 69.8 FPS
51.1 FPS
30.2 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 4GB $ 329 $ 4.8 68.6 FPS
49.7 FPS
30.6 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 480 8GB $ 400 $ 6 66.7 FPS
50.1 FPS
30.4 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 390 8GB $ 329 $ 5 66.2 FPS
49.1 FPS
27.7 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 570 4GB $ 169 $ 2.6 65.4 FPS
48.5 FPS
28 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 4GB $ 149 $ 2.4 62.5 FPS
46.3 FPS
27.3 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 470 4GB $ 179 $ 3.1 58.3 FPS
43.4 FPS
25.6 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 380X 4GB $ 229 $ 4.7 49.1 FPS
36.2 FPS
21.8 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 285 2GB $ 249 $ 5.6 44.1 FPS
32.6 FPS
18.5 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 380 2GB $ 199 $ 4.6 43.7 FPS
32.2 FPS
18.5 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti 4GB $ 169 $ 3.9 43.1 FPS
31.9 FPS
18.8 FPS
AMD Radeon R9 280 3GB $ 279 $ 6.5 42.7 FPS
31.8 FPS
17.7 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 2GB $ 199 $ 4.7 42.1 FPS
30.9 FPS
18 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 3GB $ 169 $ 4.6 36.7 FPS
26.9 FPS
15.6 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 560 4GB $ 99 $ 2.9 33.9 FPS
24.6 FPS
14.3 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 2GB $ 159 $ 4.8 33.3 FPS
24.1 FPS
14.5 FPS
AMD Radeon R7 370 2GB $ 149 $ 4.6 32.6 FPS
22.6 FPS
13.7 FPS
AMD Radeon R7 265 2GB $ 149 $ 4.6 32.4 FPS
21.9 FPS
13.3 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 460 4GB $ 140 $ 4.7 30 FPS
21.8 FPS
12.8 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti 2GB $ 149 $ 5.2 28.9 FPS
18.7 FPS
11.4 FPS
AMD Radeon RX 550 2GB $ 79 $ 3.3 23.7 FPS
17.3 FPS
10 FPS
NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 2GB $ 79 $ 3.5 22.6 FPS
16.4 FPS
9.2 FPS

Related Discussions and Issues

Khelge May 29, 2020

Help overclocking i9-9900KS

I can't seem to find any videos or texts revealing which values people are using when overclocking the i9-9900KS to say 5.1. Are there anyone on here that have overclocked one and could give me some reference values/pointers?

I am really inexperienced and don't want to fry my CPU, but at the same time I don't want to sit here with a KS and not try to at least push it to 5.1 to get some of its extra potential.

asus z390-f gaming kraken x72 gskill trident z 3200 c14

jaaval May 14, 2020

There is a flowchart with most of the stuff.

The really relevant thing is the CPU speed and voltage. If you want 5.1GHz all core set multiplier to 51 for all cores and then look for the lowest core voltage that works (start from ~1.35V).

Bass_Junkie_xl May 17, 2020

my 6th 9900 ks ( keeper ) i bought does 5.0 ghz @ 1.23v bios load line level 6 asus
passes prime 95 small ftts @ 1.23 v bios / 4.7 cache vdrop = 1.18 v

you guys being big boys and using prime 95 small ffts 29.8 avx 2 off ( avx on ) ?

5.1 ghz needs 1.28v
5.2 gzh needs 1.31 v

8 gb x 4 = 32 gb ram @ 4200 mhz cl17

first 9900 ks i got needed 1.32v for 5 ghz to pass prime 95 small ffts it went back

Khelge May 20, 2020

I guess I just got a really bad cpu then... Trying to go LLC 6 , multiplier 51 and everything else auto and it crashes on prime95 no avx after about 5-10 seconds. When I set LLC to auto and only have multiplier 51 going it runs fine, but the vcore starts at 1.376 and climbs steadily the first minute up to 1.4-1.41 and stays there at 231 W power usage. Under auto and x51 I idle at 1.31v

My problem with this is the shitty VRM on my mobo overheats after 15-20minutes at 100C. I just keeps climbing from idle 40c ish slowly until my pc shuts down. Only during stresstest ofc, works fine in everyday use (gaming etc). My cpu (5.1ghz) is steady at 82-85c after 20min of full prime95 no avx load so that is not a problem.

Guess I'll just have to pay someone who knows how to oc, cuz my cpu can't be that bad, I must be doing something wrong? Some asus settings in bios or something? under the parameter thing in AI tweak that ppl say is scoring cpus it says 166, but hey

SherriffB May 29, 2020

Not much point in using someone elses values, even as a guide. Any two chips can be very different.

Your best bet is to pick a medium level of LLC so you have some nice healthy droop to give you good transients and then start either working up from a voltage or working down from one till you find stability.

If you really want some numbers you can see two different 5.1Ghz KS overclocks in my submitted but it's best to figure it out for yourself. :)

quanquan16 May 26, 2020

My 9900KS 5.1 Ghz all cores takes 1.33 High LLC or 1.355 Medium LLC to be stable. Which options do you think better in the long term?

I see gaming temp range during 65-73

Sn8ke_iis May 23, 2020

Here's a guide from an ASUS engineer that goes through the important parts of ASUS BIOS.

And here's the guide that the previously posted flowchart is from.

Intel XTU is real user friendly tool for noobs and has a nice GUI with the important variables for overclocking.

9gxa05s8fa8sh May 14, 2020

I am really inexperienced and don't want to fry my CPU

step 1: the ks is already really well overclocked from the factory.

step 2: you don't have any idea how to overclock, so don't do it.

step 3: intel provides an automatic overclocking tool which will do the work for you and keep it stable, so use that if you must do anything.

step 4: you won't notice a difference between overclocked and not-overclocked, so don't waste your time.

murenitu1984 May 08, 2020

I do not agree very much, it shows it shows! It is little but it shows.

TehKoncept June 04, 2020

Need help\advice on 9900KS

Greetings. Sorry in advance for the long story and maybe wrong sub to get such piece of advice, but I thought that's the exact place I can get help with my CPU, since I seem to locate a problem.

I built 9900KS gaming PC during mid November 2019 with specs as follows:

9900KS + Maximus XI Hero mobo + 2x HyperX Predator 16gb each + 2080TI

Didn't plan to OC at all, 5GHz on all cores during turbo is more than OK for me. So I am air-cooled by Noctua, temperatures do not go above 75C during heavy load.

Stock settings (defaults in BIOS) except I turned off RGBs in powerstates and switched to shutdown state when everything is off, so no RGBs or USBs working, don't remember how it is correctly called, but anyway. HWInfo says it always stays in 5022-5027 range, VCORE fluctuates a ton, runs ok, no problems in idle.

Everything went smooth for the 2-3 months, then I encountered random BSODs during playing one game. Got suspicious cause I saw in Windows event log, that sometimes rarely WHEA-correctable errors occur (cache hierarchy errors with different process IDs) right before BSODs, all of BSODs were different, no specific time interval of occurrences (could play that game for a month and no BSODs), nothing to get a clue from, except that the majority of them (not all) had those WHEA-logger errors before bugcheck. Asked for help on Sysnative forums, so they could have analyzed my dumps and said maybe it is driver\software related problem. During that time I have run memtests with full OK passes (note: I couldn't swap sticks and test them 1 by 1 for clearer results, cause Noctua is huge and blocking free access to them); spent countless of hours with driver-verifier running - still to no avail, could not catch or provoke a BSOD, to get a clue what's wrong.

Dropped that game. Picked up another (old good modded skyrim), during modding I needed to run some tools to generate distant objects in high quality - resource demanding process that goes heavy on CPU during generation process (all of the cores go up to 90-100% utilization in HWInfo, temps are ok.) And can you guess? Now I can almost stably BSOD it (tried 4 times, only 1 of passes was successful). All of the times it ran, it generated a lot of those whea-correctable cache hierarchy errors and bugchecked. 2 bugchecks were with driver irql not less or equal - seen before, 1 of them was with corrupted dump, but from 0x101 code (assuming it was correct, and not random whatever was on top of memory stack) I read it is clock watchdog timeout, basicaly a deadlock or non-responsive core.

Anyway, after reading all the above you may ask, why I came here with this, and not back to troubleshooting forums? So the answer is, after googling what might be the cause of whea-errors, every time I saw that it is due to insufficient VCORE, I tried after troubleshooting to set VCORE in Bios to manual mode (went with 1.265), but since the crashes were random, I could not confirm that it helped (didn't test if it had any effect), so rolled back to auto every time just in case. Now when I got the way to stably crash my system, I went ahead and again set VCORE to manual mode with 1.265 - and as you can expect, I am no longer BSODing during that generation process, and still at same default 5022-5027 range.

Well my newbie question is - is it the right way for stabilizing VCORE with just manually setting it in BIOS and leaving everything else on default auto (Maximus XI Hero defaults, bios updated just in case), or is there a better way to achieve 5k on all cores with stable VCORE? I read that I can tweak LLC and bunch of other settings, but I am really lost and have a fear that I can mess something up. My simple goal is to stabilize VCORE (my guess is: defaults with this mobo, cause it to fluctuate down sometimes under heavy load, and then I get a bunch of wheas and a usually a BSOD) with maintaining 5GHz on cores. I don't know if Noctua could handle some basic OC, never planned to touch anything, but if better results are possible within same 75C temp range - I would gladly listen to such pieces of advice. Thx for reading.

tl;dr: For some reason 9900ks with default settings in Maximus XI mobo, spits out whea errors and sometimes bsods when under stress. Setting VCORE from auto to manual fixes it, but as someone who never planned or overclocked before, I am unsure that it is the right way to stabilize it. What can I do besides just changing 1 thing in BIOS to maintain 5GHz or maybe tweak it to more potential with respect to my air-cooler? Thx.

falkentyne May 11, 2020

Sometimes you need to take manual control. The auto settings are not always geared for your CPU sample. I also do not have an Asus board so I have no idea what auto LLC is. On Gigabyte, Auto is "Intel spec defaults"-max vdroop, unless MCE is enabled, where Auto becomes the same vdroop as "Turbo" LLC. I have no idea what Asus sets. But in their UEFI Bios, they should tell you what they are setting.

Can you play with 1.30v vcore Bios set, with LLC=5 ? Is this still stable? This is a very good setting for a 9900KS. If this is 100% fully stable, you can try lowering it slowly, 10mv at a time, until you reach 1.250v bios set.

Also set system agent voltage (VCCSA) to 1.20v and VCCIO to 1.15v if your memory XMP is below 4000 mhz. This can help a bit also.

TehKoncept May 29, 2020

Thx for the reply. Will try to play around. I don’t have xmp enabled, I believe it runs at default 2.400 (or whatever is non-xmp), will check that as well.

Grouch-7 May 23, 2020

Do you have the latest bios? Because I have seen this before where the bios wasn’t updated for the ks and it was crashing because of voltage. But during manual settings it wouldn’t crash. Update bios and if it doesn’t fix it then just do everything manual.

TehKoncept May 08, 2020

Updating BIOS is the first thing I have done when I suspected it has something to do with CPU, it didn’t help. No updates on Asus website ever since. Thx for reply, I currently set Vcore back to auto, but changed LLC to level 5 (auto was 6), so far so good, I will be actually surprised if it fixes it for good.

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

The Intel Core i9-9900KS is a processor that takes the chance out of the lottery, and instead just hands you the winning numbers for a slightly higher cost. The standard Intel Core i9-9900K still ...
The Core i9-9900KS has an tray price of $513 (when purchased in 1000 unit bulk), which means we’re likely to see an on-shelf price of $529-$549, depending on if it gets packaged in its dodecanal ...
The Intel Core i9-9900KS arrives in an odd time for Intel: its latest desktop platform is a year older, and it continues to lose market share to a rival that it was handily defeating just a few ...
The Core i9-9900KS’s main features are unchanged from the Core i9-9900K. As we’ve mentioned, the Core i9-9900KS is designed for Intel’s socket 1151, just like 8th Gen parts, and it will work ...
The Intel Core i9-9900KS is a processor that takes the chance out of the lottery, and instead just hands you the winning numbers for a slightly higher cost. The standard Intel Core i9-9900K still ...
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 ...
Higher clock speeds are the Core i9-9900KS's real attraction. The -9900KS's premium silicon supports a 4 GHz base clock, which is a 400 MHz improvement over the -9900K that leads to a beastly 127W ...
Intel launched today the "new" Core i9-9900KS processor which appears to be a pointless release, similar to the Core i7-8086K that we never bothered to look at. Intel says this new processor ...
Core i9-9900KS is a stopgap solution to ensure Intel can lay claim to the fastest gaming performance, but AMD is almost certainly going to come out on top in any multithreaded testing—if not ...
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 ...

Related Comments

PhoenixBRnnf August 01, 2020
BIOS not recognizing Sata SSD
I've built months ago my new PC with these specs:
Motherboard - MSI MAG Z390 Tomahawk
CPU - i9-9900KS
Memory - 4 G.Skill 8Gb
GPU - EVGA 2080 ti
Storage - 2 HDDs (one of 4TB another of 3TB), 2 SATA SSDs (Samsung with 500gb and Intel with 250GB) and a XPG M.2 500gb SSD for windows.

I bought a new Samsung 1TB 970 Evo Plus M.2, them I opened the windows installation, format my XPG M.2 and turned off the PC. Swap the old M.2 with a new one, switched the RAM places, and went to installing windows on the new M.2. Then on the hard drive selection menu I've noticed that my Samsung SATA SSD was missing (I didn't even touch the Sata cables).
So I've switched him with another Sata port that was working (I know because it recognizes the SSD there) and nothing, it just doesn't show on the BIOS and Windows. Just this Samsung SSD is dead. I even switched the SATA cable and nothing.again.

Also what is this Hot Plug on Sata ports?

What can I do? Did my SSD just died?
piechockidocent9 August 30, 2017
Make sure your drives are placed with conjunction with m.2 & SATA combination table (page 29 of your mb manual).
alexcoulter111 July 21, 2020
4400 CL19 vs 3200 CL16
I have a 9900KS and I am looking to buy RAM for it. I am in Australia and I can buy 32GB 3200 CL16 for ~ $215 AUD or I can locally buy a 32GB kit of 4400 CL19 RAM for $220 AUD. Which would be better for gaming with the 9900KS?
DeauteratedDog December 11, 2013
The 4400 CL 19 has about 8.6 ns latency, the 3200 CL 16 has about 10 ns latency.

The 4400 MHz ram is both faster and has more bandwidth.
christopheduron April 07, 2020
9900KS throttles down to 4.5ghz from 5ghz at 70°C
When my cpu isn't under any load all cores sit nicely at 5ghz, but as soon as i turn on prime95 they jump down to 4.5ghz while the temperature sits between 65°C-70°C. These temperatures seem a bit too low for it to throttle down. I assume it has something to do with my BIOS settings, but since i'm an absolute amateur when it comes to that i need some help.

If you have any idea why this happens, please let me know! All the information necessary should be within the links below. My apologies for supplying links and not the pictures directly into the thread, but i can't figure out how to get them to show here. Even after following the sticky guide it keeps telling me something went wrong.

EDIT: i tested it during some games and all cores stay at 5ghz also at around 70°C with a load of about 35%. So why does it go down at 100% load with prime95?


prime95 = off

prime95 = on
h ttps://

BIOS settings:
bignastyid June 19, 2011
It's the AVX offset. When running AVX instructions(prime95 uses AVX) the system will down clock to that offset.

Your screenshot currently has that set to auto(on many boards auto its seems to go to ~5). So when you run an AVX instruction set with an offset of 5 it will take the multiplier(50 in your case) and subtract 5(so you'll have a multiplier of 45).

You can adjust that, but it will produce alot more heat and use more power the lower the offset number is.
Nightwielder March 31, 2020
i9-9900KS vs i9-9900K
Hi all,

I'm just looking to buy the last few parts for my new gaming rig, and I am trying to decide if I should cash out for the special edition i9-9900KS vs i9-9900K. I looked around and saw that the original retail for the i9-9900KS was originally very close to the i9-9900K , but now the special edition is going for almost double the mundane version. I don't know if it's worth the extra money, could you advise? My build is as follows (purchased items are striked through):

Corsair CC-9011141-WW Carbide Series SPEC-OMEGA RGB - $100 on eBay

GIGABYTE Z390 DESIGNARE Gigabyte - $213.66 on Amazon

Hydro Seriesâ„¢ H115i RGB PLATINUM SE 240mm Liquid CPU Cooler - $141.08

Power Supply
Corsair HX750i - $120 on eBay

CORSAIR Vengeance RGB Pro 64GB (4 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDR AM DDR4 3600MHz - $342.24 on Amazon

Dell S2417DG QHD - $201.39 on eBay
Dell S2417DG QHD - $230 on eBay

Intel Core i9-9900KS - $1000+ on eBay
Intel Core i9-9900K - $519.99 on eBay
Intel Core i7-9700 - $346.99 on eBay

RTX 2080 Super - $650 on eBay
Nvidia GeForce RTX 2070 Super - $470 on eBay
Gigabyte RTX 2080 Ti - $900

HHD (M.2)
Samsung 970 EVO Plus 1 TB - $220 on Amazon
Barty1884 April 16, 2015
I'm sure each review was in the context of the small price bump at the time though.
If you can't compare retail to retail anymore, all bets are off - and certainly a complete waste of money at roughly 2x on eBay etc.

Pretty much this, OP. Unless you have a reason not to wait (or go Ryzen), of course.
The 9900K/KS/KF are solid chips, for what they are.... but you don't want to have near immediate buyers remorse, if you can avoid it.
Aliency March 25, 2020
Upgrade CPU and Motherboard Question
Hello guys,

I want to upgrade my CPU and motherboard (only). This is the first time I will do this, thus I have the following question:

-Will Windows still work? (As the key is embedded in the current BIOS) - I have upgraded from 8.1 to 10 several years ago. If not do I need to reinstall windows again?

Finally Im thinking to purchase the 9900KS as i currently have the 5960x. Do you think is worth waiting for the next gen extreme processors?

Below is my current build full specs:

-x99 rampage v extreme
-5960x @4.2ghz all cores
-16gb ram @3000mhz
-1500 PSU corsair
-2x 2080TI
-cpu cooler: thermaltake 360 AIO floe riing
gtarayan March 02, 2011
If your Windows key is OEM, then yes. On the other hand, a retail version will allow you to activate the same license on your new build.

I am wondering what makes you want to change platforms at this point when Intel is about to introduce a new socket and a new chipset for the upcoming Comet Lake CPUs? If you had to upgrade now, AMD's current platform is significantly more diverse.

I think buying into 9900KS + Z390 motherboard now is going to be a bad decision which you will regret very soon.

Ironically, I just built an X99 workstation with i7 6850K which I plan to run into oblivion to the point when $2k processor for 2011-3 will cost under $100. (Executed the same plan with X58 workstation which has been running 24/7 for the past 11 years now!)
bit_user February 08, 2020
Is Intel now shipping i9-9900K with the newer R0 stepping?
The i9-9900KS shipped with R0 stepping (stepping 13) dies. Since those have gone out of production, I wonder if Intel now switched over the regular i9-9900K to that stepping. Does anyone know?

For more info on the R0 stepping, see:
JonathanCole88 May 05, 2015
Yes, my Intel Core i9 9900K that I bought back in August 2019 is on the latest stepping R0
elderdrake January 15, 2020
i9 9900KS Cooling
Intel just replaced my i9 9700k with a step up to a i9 9900ks (long story but Intel does right by their customers or at least this one in this situation) but reading on the CPU I am worried about my current cooler given the high listed TDP and reported heat output. The CPU arrives tomorrow but I was/am running a H100i Pro RGB (â„¢-H100i-PRO-RGB-Liquid-CPU-Cooler/p/CW-9060033-WW ) and I am worried it may not be able to keep it cool enough.

I do not plan on pushing the CPU hard and I am using a Z390 Gigabyte Auros Master for a mobo in a Cooler Master Silencio 600 case. Ambient room temps are 60'ish degrees and I live in Iowa so basically in a refrigerator when it hits say -40 outside. That said I read up and I know the king is the Noctua NH-D15 but the wife has said no more PC parts after I spent a bit too much on this build, happy wife happy life right? So the question is gents, do you think that cooler will be ok with the combo I have listed here as long as I do not push the CPU? I believe the mobo I have will try to auto OC the damn thing and Gigbytes BIOS is a load of fun to play with /s . Any input would be greatly appreciated because one thing is certain, I do not want to fry a chip this expensive. It is that or wait a month to be safe and next paycheck I pick the NH-D15 up which sucks in two ways, the thing is ugly as can be and is a monster in size leading to case and clearance concerns not to mention I am not a fan (no pun intended) of massive blocks like that putting pressure on the mobo. I know Noctua has incredible mounts to mitigate this but still does not rule out someone bumping the PC and it warping the board, or at least that is what my fevered nightmare situation is playing out in my head as I had a V8 cooler do that to me a long time ago.
Darkbreeze June 24, 2014
The 9700k IS an i7. The 9900k and ks are i9's. Just to be clear. Nothing idiotic about it, in fact it's lame that they felt the need to call it an i9 instead of just an i7 when it's not even an HEDT processor, which is where the i9 designation really belongs.

Anyhow, I'm not a fan of water cooling either, to be honest.

This is something you might consider, and you can find used NH-D14 coolers on Ebay for around 20-50 dollars quite often. If you are using rather tall memory modules to where clearance would be a problem, then you will want to look at something else like the D15, although there are a good many other coolers out there that with heatsinks that are just as good as the D15. It's the fans that really make the difference.

Noctua NH-D14 Redux: Modern Fans On An Old Heatsink - Overclockers Various combinations of fans were tried on the NH-D14, especially the NF-A15 and the NF-A14. We found a winner.

Any of these would probably do fine.

Noctua NH-D14 (Replace stock fans with NF-A14 industrialPPC 2000rpm)
Noctua NH-D15/D15 SE-AM4
Noctua NH-D14 (With original fans)
Thermalright Silver arrow IB-E Extreme
Phanteks PH-TC14PE (BK,BL, OR or RD)
Cryorig R1 Ultimate or Universal
Thermalright Legrand Macho RT
Deepcool Assassin III
Sarin- January 15, 2020
New system build help, also is worth waiting for new heardware releases?
I have chosen a Cool Master H500 for my case, it's cheap and large (ATX) with huge 220mm intake fans so overall great for cooling.

For a LGA 1151 motherboard I chose the MSI Z390-A PRO it's cheap but also has good reviews on amazon so I don't see any issues apart from less modern ports on the back right?, I didn't read of any cooling issues.

I already own ddr4 ram, SSD, corsair 110i AIO, 550w corsair power supply by looking at pcpartpicker for the power usage I think 550w is okay but I'm totally fine buying a new one.

I cannot decide on a CPU and GPU
I own a full HD 144hz monitor which would make you think if it's not 2K or 4K just buy- I don't know 2060s or 5700 but I like to play modern games, metro exodus, outer worlds, BFV, red dead redemption 2 etc etc and I basically want to run them on as high setting with with as many frames possible, maybe I'm blind but I notice fluidness/snappiness etc more than 2K resolutions or even maybe stretching it slightly some 4K games I don't like 60fps.

My budget isn't too helpful because the Irish market doesn't translate well to the majority of users here, but I'd say I'm flexible I'd be extremely happy at 1,000 euro but would be willing to go to 1,500 euro since I would like this system to last me years to come, my previous system is hitting 4 years old in April of this year.
I will only game on this system, still I am really open to some overkill for longevity .

I just don't how much the CPU matters for gaming.
A huge thing that worries me, isn't new CPU and GPU releases bound to be around the corner within months? should I wait? I thought CES past would of had some info. I can wait if it's a smart choice if anyone knows the rough time release of newer GPUs.

I did a comparison of common parts in my budget for the (new) market here by cheapest, all prices are in euros:​ ​ i5 9600k = 170​ i7 9700k = 419​ i9 9900ks = 548​ Ryzen 5 3600x = 206​ Ryzen 7 3700x = 330​ Ryzen 7 3800x = 375​ Ryzen 9 3900x = 520​ ​ RTX 2080s = 723​ RTX 2070s = 560​ RTX 2060S = 428​ 1660ti = 291​ RX 5700 XT = 466​ RX 5700 = 361​ ​ Everything else will cost me:

MOBO = 115

Case = 115
86zx November 01, 2019
The more cores the better for the future for instance my pc is 10 years old and I slapped a 1070 in it and it still plays games well due to having 12 cores and 24 threads and perhaps wait for the rx5900 series to lunch I’m not too sure of what they will cost but it’s likely they are gonna be truly next gen .
WaccTM January 11, 2020
high end pc feels low end
Okay so after 2 months of asking on forums and searching on google and trying to fix it myself, i have given up. My specs are 2080 ti, i9 9900ks, 64gb ddr4 ram, NVme 2tb ssd, asus rog strix z390-e gaming motherboard. and none of my games run like you would expect a beast pc like this to run, csgo runs at 100- 190 fps with stutters and just feels wierd, while my friends with 1070's run it at 300+ fps no problem, and rust, escape from tarkov, cod modern warfare, arma, black ops4, watch dogs 2, etc just run really really dissapointing, rust runs at a 70 - 100fps with stutters and certainly doesnt feel smooth, escape from tarkov is just laggy and stuttering, and just feels like absolut dog <Mod Edit> , modern warfare has input lag and is just wierd. and so on, and idk what to do at this point, ive tried changing bios settings, changing ram mhz, downgrading windows, updating windows, reinstalling windows, used different ingame settings, used g-sync, changing monitor settings, and so on, i am so god damn insanely sad and annoyed at the same time right now, i just simply dont know anymore, a pc like this should just work and i feel like i have wasted so much damn money on something a damn 1070 could beat easily.. Any help would be VERY VERY VERY appreciated. temps are fine so thats not it either. im on a 144hz monitor. Please no ''you tried restarting your pc?'' , ''have you tried lowering your settings?'' comments.. sorry if i sound rude but i am just very annoyed. Its been 2 months of just trying and asking for help, ive just recently contacted the place i bought my pc from and im awaiting a responds from them. Is this normal? am i expecting too much? I remember playing the VR game called boneworks the day it came out, and i was very dissapointed in the perfomance. A guy LITERALLY RAN THE GAME ON A F*CKING MACBOOK AND RAN THE GAME BETTER THAN ME..
Jason H. October 20, 2013

Well, this may not be the issue but its something I learned once that helped me understand a lot more about how fps is transferred to monitors.

When you run fps above your monitors fps, yes it helps with frametimes, and all that good stuff that us gamers love. However it can create issues with stutter because your monitor is trying to output frames at a faster rate (even when limited by its own hz rate) than it can produce. 2 times your Hz rate seems to be the norm however when you have a 144hz monitor , 2x your fps isnt always optimal as not much hardware, nor monitor can support a 300+fps input.

And the issue scales the higher you get into fps.

For example I have a 75hz monitor, but I play apex legends with an avg fps of about 170fps. But it almost looks like im playing on a 60fps monitor because for 1 , I didnt buy the best monitor for 75hz, and 2, 170fps is well above 2x the refresh rate of my monitor.

Im not technically explaining this in a good way, I get that, I just learned it recently, but it may help you narrow down why your getting great fps on higher end hardware but when you visually see it, it dont look good.

Another option would be micro screen tearing. For some reason if I run 74hz on my 75hz monitor, (or even 75hz) I have the WORST screen tearing. But the higher in fps I go, it kind of smooths out where I dont really notice it. BUT this can also create that "stutter" effect that makes the game LOOK like its stuttering because of the monitor, but its not on the hardware.
nahyan_121 December 31, 2019
upgrading from i7 6700k to i9 9900KS or i should wait for 10Th Gen
guys every time when i wanna upgrade to the latest i see another one coming soon like wtf just imagine buying the latest and after Few Days another New one Drop it Sucks i wanna do full upgrade to the latest for the future my current my pc parts was the best parts from the end of 2016 since 980 ti dropped let me tell you my parts GA-Z170X-Gaming G1 Motherboard / i7 6700k / 1000w psu Corsair / Hyper x Fury 32gb / 980 ti Xtreme Gaming / and corsair cooling 2 fans i forget the name

The upgrade am gonna do :
Motherboard support 9thGen gonna be GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS Ultra

cpu i9 9900KS or wait for 10th gen idk am gonna see what you gonna say

upgrade my 2tb Hard drive to 6tb

and SSD from 120 idk to 1tb m.2 or 2TB
Newtonius September 25, 2019
Your 6700K is plenty fine right now.

Honestly 10th gen isn't going to be much of an upgrade from 9th gen as many people are speculating. Especially since the 10980XE was just another refresh of a refresh and was outdated within 6 hours of launch by AMD.

Just wait for the new CPU's to come and see what the performance is. It might also drop down the prices for the 9900KS as well.
DDP2020 December 21, 2019
I9 9900ks Air cooler
I bought the Intel i9 9900ks CPU and at the same time bought the Deepcool Assassin iii CPU cooler to cool it. Not thinking about whether it will fit into my Aerocool mechatron x mid tower case i was all gitty. It got here and I see tge size of this thing and am wondering if maybe I need to buy a new case. That is my reason for this thread should I send the cooler back and get another? Or buy a new case? Will not be overclocking but if the opportunity for 5ghz all core is there i would like to be able to run it at the rated speed without the worry of overheating. Hoping to keep the case but will get new one if need be. I am not comfortable with liquid cooling yet so that is not a option. Thank you guys for your help.
Karadjgne December 26, 2012
There is no guarantee. Everything, and I mean Everything, is subject to Murphy's Law. If it's going to leak, it will. When is a different question.

I've only ever had to fix 1 pc (clients) that had a leak from an aio, and he installed it himself. He was in a hurry to get the pc back up and running, so just shoved the hoses in, putting undue torque stress on the pump fittings, causing a break in the seal and a consequential leak. My boss (at the time also fixed one). I've installed over 100 aios (at a conservative count) and never had one come back to me.

Leaks can happen. Pumps can fail. I've had a Phanteks aircooler with a warped base, Noctua aircooler with a leaking heat pipe. CoolerMaster/Corsair fans DOA. **it happens. You are at the mercy of the little guy who just finished the component you bought, on a Friday at 4:59 so rushed it or on a Monday morning after fighting with the wife Sunday night.

No guarantee. There's over a million aios manufactured and sold every year. And 10 videos on YouTube about leaks from this year. It's a pretty acceptable failure rate, even if there were 100 videos. There's an exponentially larger amount of psu failures, gpu failures even storage failures than there are leaks from aios.

Best warranty I know of from personal experience? Evga or Corsair. The pc my boss fixed was from a hose that blew on a Corsair aio (old style plastic hoses, no longer used) and sprayed everything inside. Corsair replaced the entire pc.

Theres only a handful of manufactures of pumps and rads used in aios, mostly Asetek or Coolit designs some with custom details like rgb/argb etc. So the basic performance possible is pretty equitable. The differences will be with individual fans. Plain fans work better than rgb/argb. Rgb/argb can look better. Or be more desirable. But overall, the differences are minor with the big name brands. Corsair, Thermaltake, Fractal Design, CoolerMaster, Evga, Nzxt, all similar. Just depends on the model, the included fans, the gimmicks.

Gonna withhold judgment on the new Arctic for a while. The previous gen units were not too shabby at all, got very decent performance at very good sound levels. The only issue was the coolant used, I'm guessing there wasn't a good mix of anti-fungal in it, so pumps were failing on some ppl at the 1-2 year mark after getting bunged up by bad coolant. Shame really.
Gintama69 December 17, 2019
Performance difference between 1080p vs 1440p vs 4K
Just googled "fps difference between 1080p and 1440p" and the first answer that pops up(from Linus Tech, April 2017):
" 1440p is 1.77 times as many pixels, so the FPS will be roughly 1/1.77 as much compared to 1080p (around 56%). Plus or minus some margin of error. The 1080 Ti will get more than double the FPS of the 970, so that should boost you up to a little higher than what you get right now "

So according to Linus Tech, performance difference between 1080p and 1440p is around 56%.
But according to my test, that's totally incorrect.. cos I get:
9.2% - 22.6% performance difference(depends on quality setting) between 1080p and 1440p on CoD MP.
33.3% performance difference(at highest quality) between 1080p and 1440p on Borderlands 3 benchmark.

My Results (i9 9900KS, MSI RTX2080Ti Gaming X, 32GB DDR4 4000 RAM, NVidia 441.66 driver - everything at stock speed)
CoD MP (Average FPS using MSI Afterburner & Rivatuner Statistics Server after 5 consecutive MP match at selected resolution/settings)
133fps - 1440p highest(rtx on) - View:

155fps - 1440p highest(rtx off) - View:

218fps - 1440p lowest - View:

163fps - 1080p highest(rtx on) - View:
= 22.6%
185fps - 1080p highest(rtx off) - View:
= 19.4%
238fps - 1080p lowest - View:
= 9.2%

Borderlands 3 (Average FPS using built in Benchmark)
90fps - 1440p highest - View:

120fps - 1080p highest - View:
= 33.3%
sizzling October 18, 2006
You are assuming the only limiting factor is the gpu and everything will scale accordingly. With a 2080Ti at 1080p I would strongly expect you are cpu limited. The relatively small difference in COD with low settings at 1080p and 1440p supports my theory.
Gintama69 December 15, 2019
240Hz monitor - worth it?
Hi I have 27" Samsung CHG70 QLED atm(1440p, 144Hz, 1ms) but thinking of buying 24"(24.5" or 23.8") 240Hz monitor as 2nd monitor for CoD MP.. is worth it?

I think most pros use 24" 1080p 240Hz over 27+" 1440+p 144Hz for shooter.. but not sure if it's for smaller screen/res(less eye movement = faster eye movement = faster reaction) or for 240Hz(or both).
Also do you think it'll make noticeable difference to average player like me?

If I end up getting 24" 240Hz, what should be my average fps on CoD? I'm happy to reduce the quality for best result.

I have i9 9900KS and RTX2080Ti and my average fps in CoD MP: (checked with MSI Afterburner + Rivatuner Statistics Server)
1440p max with ray tracing = 130fps (after 1 MP match, small map)
1440p max without ray tracing = 146fps (after 5 consecutive MP match)
1080p max without ray tracing = 176fps (after 3 consecutive MP match)
So atm I run 1440p max without ray tracing for average 146fps since my monitor is 144Hz, but if I get 1080p 240Hz monitor then will I need average 240fps for best result?

Thank you.