The Intel 9th Gen Review: Core i9-9900K, Core i7-9700K and Core i5-9600K Tested
by Ian Cutress on October 19, 2018 9:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
- Intel
- Coffee Lake
- 14++
- Core 9th Gen
- Core-S
- i9-9900K
- i7-9700K
- i5-9600K
Hardware and Software Security Fixes
The Spectre and Meltdown vulnerabilities made quite a splash earlier this year, forcing makers of hardware and software to release updates in order to tackle them. There are several ways to fix the issues, including software, firmware, and hardware updates. Each generation of product is slowly implementing fixes, including some of the new 9th Generation processors.
At this point Intel has split the list down into 5/6 wide variants of different types of vulnerabilities. For all processors beyond mid-2018, here is what the fix table looks like:
Spectre and Meltdown on Intel | |||||||
AnandTech | SKX-R 3175X |
CFL-R | Cascade Lake | Whiskey Lake |
Amber Lake |
||
Spectre | Variant 1 | Bounds Check Bypass | OS/VMM | OS/VMM | OS/VMM | OS/VMM | OS/VMM |
Spectre | Variant 2 | Branch Target Injection | Firmware + OS | Firmware + OS | Hardware + OS | Firmware + OS | Firmware + OS |
Meltdown | Variant 3 | Rogue Data Cache Load | Firmware | Hardware | Hardware | Hardware | Firmware |
Meltdown | Variant 3a | Rogue System Register Read | Firmware | Firmware | Firmware | Firmware | Firmware |
Variant 4 | Speculative Store Bypass | Firmware + OS | Firmware + OS | Firmware + OS | Firmware + OS | Firmware + OS | |
Variant 5 | L1 Terminal Fault | Firmware | Hardware | Hardware | Hardware | Firmware |
The new 9th Generation processors, listed as CFL-R (Coffee Lake Refresh), has implemented hardware fixes for variant 3, Rogue Data Cache Load, and variant 5, L1 Terminal Fault.
Because the new chips have required new masks for manufacturing, Intel has been able to make these changes. The goal of moving the changes into hardware means that the hardware is always protected, regardless of OS or environment, and with the hope that any additional overhead created by a software fix can be lessened if done in hardware.
(S)TIM: Soldered Down Processors
With the desktop processors we use today, they are built from a silicon die (the smart bit), a package substrate (the green bit), a heatspreader (the silver bit), and a material that helps transfer heat from the silicon die to the heatspreader. The quality of the binding between the silicon die and the heatspreader using this thermal interface material is a key component in the processors ability to remove the heat generated from using it.
Traditionally there are two different types of thermal material: a heat conductive paste, or a bonded metal. Both have positives and negatives.
The heat conductive paste is a universal tool – it can be applied to practically any manufactured processor, and is able to deal with a wide range of changing conditions. Because metals expand under temperature, when a processor is used and gets hot, it expands – so does the heatspreader. The paste can easily deal with this. This allows paste-based processors to live longer and in more environments. Using a bonded metal typically reduces the level of thermal cycling possible, as the metal also expands and contracts in a non-fluid way. This might mean the processors has a rated lifespan of several years, rather than a dozen years. However, the bonded metal solution performs a lot, lot better – metal conducts heat better than the silicon-based pastes – but it is slightly more expensive (a dollar or two per unit, at most, when the materials and manufacturing are taken into account).
Thermal Interface | |||||||
Intel | Celeron | Pentium | Core i3 | Core i5 | Core i7 Core i9 |
HEDT | |
Sandy Bridge | LGA1155 | Paste | Paste | Paste | Bonded | Bonded | Bonded |
Ivy Bridge | LGA1155 | Paste | Paste | Paste | Paste | Paste | Bonded |
Haswell / DK | LGA1150 | Paste | Paste | Paste | Paste | Paste | Bonded |
Broadwell | LGA1150 | Paste | Paste | Paste | Paste | Paste | Bonded |
Skylake | LGA1151 | Paste | Paste | Paste | Paste | Paste | Paste |
Kaby Lake | LGA1151 | Paste | Paste | Paste | Paste | Paste | - |
Coffee Lake | 1151 v2 | Paste | Paste | Paste | Paste | Paste | - |
CFL-R | 1151 v2 | ? | ? | ? | K = Bonded | - | |
AMD | |||||||
Zambezi | AM3+ | Bonded | Carrizo | AM4 | Bonded | ||
Vishera | AM3+ | Bonded | Bristol R | AM4 | Bonded | ||
Llano | FM1 | Paste | Summit R | AM4 | Bonded | ||
Trinity | FM2 | Paste | Raven R | AM4 | Paste | ||
Richland | FM2 | Paste | Pinnacle | AM4 | Bonded | ||
Kaveri | FM2+ | Paste / Bonded* | TR | TR4 | Bonded | ||
Carrizo | FM2+ | Paste | TR2 | TR4 | Bonded | ||
Kabini | AM1 | Paste | |||||
*Some Kaveri Refresh were bonded |
In our Ryzen APU delidding article, we went through the process of removing the heatspreader and conductive paste from a popular low cost product, and we showed that replacing that paste with a bonded liquid metal improved temperatures, overclocking, and performance in mid-range overclocks. If any company wants to make enthusiasts happy, using a bonded metal is the way to go.
For several years, Intel has always stated that they are there for enthusiasts. In the distant past, as the table above shows, Intel provided processors with a soldered bonded metal interface and was happy to do so. In recent times however, the whole product line was pushed into the heat conductive paste for a number of reasons.
As Intel was continually saying that they still cared about enthusiasts, a number of users were concerned that Intel was getting itself confused. Some believed that Intel had ‘enthusiasts’ and ‘overclockers’ in two distinct non-overlapping categories. It is what it is, but now Intel has returned to using applying STIM and wants to court overclockers again.
Intel has officially confirmed that new 9th generation processors will feature a layer of solder making up the TIM between the die and the IHS. The new processors with solder include the Core i9-9900K, the Core i7-9700K and Core i5-9600K.
As we’ll show in this review, the combination of STIM plus other features are of great assistance when pushing the new processors to the overclocking limits. Intel’s own overclocking team at the launch event hit 6.9 GHz temporarily using exotic sub-zero coolants such as liquid nitrogen.
Motherboards and the Z390 Chipset
One of the worst kept secrets this year has been Intel’s Z390 chipset. If you believe everything the motherboard manufacturers have told me, most of them had been ready for this release for several months, hence why seeing around 55 new motherboards hit the market this month and into next.
The Z390 chipset is an update to Z370, and both types of motherboards will support 8000-series and 9000-series processors (Z370 will need a BIOS update). The updates are similar to the updates seen with B360: native USB 3.1 10 Gbps ports, and integrated Wi-Fi on the chipset.
Intel Z390, Z370 and Z270 Chipset Comparison | |||
Feature | Z390 | Z370 | Z270 |
Max PCH PCIe 3.0 Lanes | 24 | 24 | 24 |
Max USB 3.1 (Gen2/Gen1) | 6/10 | 0/10 | 0/10 |
Total USB | 14 | 14 | 14 |
Max SATA Ports | 6 | 6 | 6 |
PCIe Config | x16 x8/x8 x8/x4/x4 |
x16 x8/x8 x8/x4/x4 |
x16 x8/x8 x8/x4/x4 |
Memory Channels | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Intel Optane Memory Support | Y | Y | Y |
Intel Rapid Storage Technology (RST) | Y | Y | Y |
Max Rapid Storage Technology Ports | 3 | 3 | 3 |
Integrated 802.11ac WiFi MAC | Y | N | N |
Intel Smart Sound | Y | Y | Y |
Integrated SDXC (SDA 3.0) Support | Y | N | N |
DMI | 3.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 |
Overclocking Support | Y | Y | Y |
Intel vPro | N | N | N |
Max HSIO Lanes | 30 | 30 | 30 |
Intel Smart Sound | Y | Y | Y |
ME Firmware | 12 | 11 | 11 |
The integrated Wi-Fi uses CNVi, which allows the motherboard manufacturer to use one of Intel’s three companion RF modules as a PHY, rather than using a potentially more expensive MAC+PHY combo from a different vendor (such as Broadcom). I have been told that the cost of implementing a CRF adds about $15 to the retail price of the board, so we are likely to see some vendors experiment with mid-price models with-and-without Wi-Fi using this method.
ASRock Z390 Phantom Gaming-ITX/ac
For the USB 3.1 Gen 2 ports, Type-A ports are supported natively and motherboard manufacturers will have to use re-driver chips to support Type-C reversibility. These come at extra cost, as one might expect. It will be interesting to see how manufacturers mix and match the Gen 2, Gen 1, and USB 2.0 ports on the rear panels, now they have a choice. I suspect it will come down to signal integrity on the traces on the motherboard.
For the Z390 chipset and motherboards, we have our usual every-board-overview post, covering every model the manufacturers would tell us about. Interestingly there is going to be a mini-ITX with Thunderbolt 3, and one board with a PLX chip! There are also some motherboards with Realtek’s 2.5G Ethernet controller – now if only we also had consumer grade switches.
274 Comments
View All Comments
evernessince - Saturday, October 20, 2018 - link
I'm sure for him money is a fixed resource, he is just really bad at managing it. You'd have to be crazy to blow money on the 9900K when the 8700K is $200 cheaper and the 2700X is half the price.Dug - Monday, October 22, 2018 - link
Relative to how much you make or have. $200 isn't some life threatening amount that makes them crazy because they spent it on a product that they will enjoy. We spend more than that going out for a weekend (and usually don't have anything to show for it). If an extra 200 is threatening to your lively hood, you shouldn't be shopping for new cpu's anyway.close - Saturday, October 20, 2018 - link
@ekidhardt: "I think far too much emphasis has been placed on 'value'. I simply want the fastest, most powerful CPU that isn't priced absurdly high."That, my good man, is the very definition of value. It happens automatically when you decide to take price into consideration the price. I also don't care about value, I just want a CPU with a good performance to price ratio. See what I did there? :)
evernessince - Saturday, October 20, 2018 - link
A little bit extra? It's $200 more then the 8700K, that's not a little.mapesdhs - Sunday, October 21, 2018 - link
The key point being, for gaming, use the difference to buy a better GPU, whether one gets an 8700K or 2700X (or indeed any one of a plethora of options really, right back to an old 4930K). It's only at 1080p and high refresh rates where strong CPU performance stands out, something DX12 should help more with as time goes by (the obsession with high refresh rates is amusing given NVIDIA's focus shift back to sub-60Hz being touted once more as ok). For gaming at 1440p or higher, one can get a faster system by choosing a cheaper CPU and better GPU.
There are two exceptions: those for whom money is literally no object, and certain production workloads that still favour frequency/IPC and are not yet well optimised for more than 6 cores (Premiere is probably the best example). Someone mentioned pro tasks being irrelevant because ECC is not supported, but many solo pros can't afford XEON class hw (I mean the proper dual socket setups) even if the initial higher outlay would eventually pay for itself.
What we're going to see with the 9900K for gaming is a small minority of people taking Intel's mantra of "the best" and running with it. Technically, they're correct, but most normal people have budgets and other expenses to consider, including wives/gfs with their own cost tolerance limits. :D
If someone can genuinely afford it then who cares, in the end it's their money, but as a choice for gaming it really only makes sense via the same rationale if they've also then bought a 2080 Ti to go with it, though even there one could retort that two used 1080 TIs would be cheaper & faster (at least for those titles where SLI is functional).
If anything good has come from this and the RTX launch, it's the move away from the supposed social benefit of having "the best"; the street cred is gone, now it just makes one look like a fool who was easily parted from his money.
Spunjji - Monday, October 22, 2018 - link
Word.Total Meltdowner - Sunday, October 21, 2018 - link
This comment reads like shilling so hard. So hard. Please try harder to not be so obvious.Spunjji - Monday, October 22, 2018 - link
I think they placed just the right amount of emphasis on "value". Your post basically explains why it's not relevant for you in terms of you being an Intel fanboy with cash to burn. I'll elaborate.The MSRP is in the realm of irrational spending for a huge number of people. "Rational" here meaning "do I get out anything like what I put in", wherein the answer in all metrics is an obvious no.
Following that, there are a HUGE number of reasons not to pre-order a high-end CPU, especially before proper results are out. Pre-ordering *anything* computer related is a dubious prospect, doubly so when the company selling it paid good money to paint a deceptive picture of their product's performance.
Your assertion that Intel have never launched a bad CPU is false and either ignorance or wilful bias on your part. They have launched a whole bunch of terrible CPUs, from the P3 1.2Ghz that never worked, through the P4 Emergency Edition and the early "dual-core" P4 processors, all the way through to this i9 9900K which is the thirstiest "95W" CPU I've ever seen. Their notebook CPUs are now segregated in such a way that you have to read a review to find out how they will perform, because so much is left on the table in terms of achievable turbo boost limits.
Sorry, I know I replied just to disagree which may seem argumentative, but you posted a bunch of nonsense and half-turths passed off as common-sense and/or logic. It's just bias; none of it does any harm but you could at least be up-front that you prefer Intel. That in itself (I like Intel and am happy to spend top dollar) is a perfectly legitimate reason for everything you did. Just be open and don't actively mislead people who know less than you do.
chris.london - Friday, October 19, 2018 - link
Hey Ryan. Thanks for the review.Would it be possible to check power consumption in a test in which the 2700x and 9900k perform similarly (maybe in a game)? POV-Ray seems like a good way to test for maximum power draw but it makes the 9900k look extremely inefficient (especially compared to the 9600k). It would be lovely to have another reference point.
0ldman79 - Friday, October 19, 2018 - link
I'm legitimately surprised.The 9900k is starving for bandwidth, needs more cache or something. I never expected it to *not* win the CPU benchmarks vs the 9700k. I honestly expected the 9700k to be the odd one out, more expensive than the i5 and slower than the 9900k. This isn't the case. Apparently SMT isn't enabling 100% usage of the CPU's resources, it is allowing a bottleneck due to fighting over resources. I'd love to see the 9900K run against it's brethren with HT disabled.