9900K vs 8700k benchmarks: Intel Core i9-9900K @ 3.60GHz vs Intel Core i7-8700K @ 3.70GHz [cpubenchmark.net] by PassMark Software

• Maternal board: ASUS PRIME q370m-
• GB DDR4-2666 MT/s Kingston (2x)
• SSD: 240GB Patriot Burst (2x in RAID 1 — a habit developed over the years).

Intel i9-10900K

• Motherboard: ASUS Pro WS W480-ACE
• RAM: 16GB DDR4-2933 MT/s Kingston x2
• SSD: 240GB Patriot Burst 2pcs in RAID 1.

Both configurations use single-unit water-cooled platforms. But there is a caveat… In order not to lose the TVB frequencies and start the Intel i9-10900K normally, I had to assemble a powerful custom water cooling system (hereinafter referred to as CBO) for the platform with the tenth generation Core. This required some effort (and a lot of it), but this solution allowed us to get stable 4.9 at the most peak loads.GHz into each core without going over a temperature threshold of 68 degrees. Bow to the heroes-customizers.
Here I will allow myself some digression from the topic and explain that such an approach to business is dictated by purely pragmatic considerations. We find technical solutions that give maximum performance with minimum rack disposal, while getting an adequate cost. At the same time, we do not overclock the hardware and use only the functionality that was laid down by the hardware developers. For example, regular overclocking profiles, if the platform has any at all. No manual setting of timings, frequencies, voltages. That allows us to avoid all sorts of surprises. As, in fact, and preliminary testing, which we conduct before we give ready-made solutions into the hands of customers.

It is no coincidence that we always test in single-unit configurations — such testing is quite enough to make sure that the solution found is reliable. As a result, the client receives proven equipment and maximum speed at the lowest price.

Returning to our i9-10900K, I note that the temperature of none of the compared processors did not rise above 68 degrees. And this means that the solution, with other advantages, also has a good overclocking potential.

Software part:

OS CentOS Linux 7 x86_64 (7.8.2003). Kernel: UEK R5 4. 14.35-1902.303.4.1.el7uek.x86_64 Optimizations made relative to stock installation: kernel launch options added elevator=noop selinux=0 Testing was done with all patches against Specter, Meltdown and Foreshadow attacks backported to this kernel.

Tests used

1. Sysbench 2. Geekbench 3. Phoronix Test Suite
Test details Geekbench test
A set of tests that can be run in single and multi-threaded mode. The result is a performance index for both modes. In this test, we will consider two main indicators:

• Single-Core Score — single-threaded tests.
• Multi-Core Score — multi-threaded tests.

Units: abstract parrots. The more «parrots», the better.
Sysbench test

Sysbench is a package of tests (or benchmarks) for evaluating the performance of various computer subsystems: processor, RAM, storage devices. The test is multi-threaded, for all cores. In this test, I measured one indicator: CPU speed events per second — the number of operations performed by the processor per second. The higher the value, the more efficient the system.

Phoronix Test Suite

The Phoronix Test Suite is a very rich test suite. Almost all the tests presented here are multi-threaded. The only exceptions are two of them: single-threaded Himeno and LAME MP3 Encoding tests.

In these tests, the higher the score, the better.

1. John the Ripper multithreaded password guessing test. Let’s take Blowfish cryptalgorithm. Measures the number of operations per second.
2. Himeno test is a linear Poisson pressure solver using Jacobi point method.
3. 7-Zip Compression — 7-Zip test using p7zip with integrated benchmarking feature.
4. OpenSSL is a set of tools that implement the SSL (Secure Sockets Layer) and TLS (Transport Layer Security) protocols. Measures the performance of RSA 4096-bit OpenSSL.
5. Apache Benchmark — Measures how many requests per second a given system can handle with 1,000,000 requests, with 100 requests running concurrently.

And in these, if less, then better — in all tests, the time it takes to pass is measured.

1. C-Ray tests CPU performance on floating point calculations. This test is multi-threaded (16 threads per core), will shoot 8 rays from each pixel for anti-aliasing, and generate a 1600×1200 image. The test execution time is measured.
2. Parallel BZIP2 Compression — The test measures the time required to compress a file (Linux kernel source .tar package) using BZIP2 compression.
3. Encoding of audio data. The LAME MP3 Encoding test is performed in one stream. The test time is measured.
4. Video encoding. The ffmpeg x264 test is multi-threaded. The test time is measured.

Test results

i9-10900K is better than its predecessor by as much as 44%

. In my opinion, the result is simply gorgeous.

The difference in the single-threaded test is only 6.7%

, which is generally expected: the difference between 5 GHz and 5. 3 GHz is the same 300 MHz. It’s just 6%. And there were 9 conversations0006

But on the other hand, in the multi-threaded test, the “parrots” of the novelty are almost 33%

more. Here TVB played an important role, which we were able to use almost to the maximum with a custom CBO. At the peak, the temperature in the test did not rise above 62 degrees, and the cores worked at a frequency of 4.9 GHz.

Difference 52.5%

. Just like in the Sysbench and multi-threaded Geekbench tests, such a significant lead is achieved due to CBO and TVB. The temperature of the hottest core is 66 degrees.

In this test, the difference between processors of different generations is 35.7%

. And this is the same test that keeps the processor under maximum load 100% of the time, warming it up to 67-68 degrees.

97.8%.

The probability of almost twofold superiority due to 2 cores and a few megahertz is “extremely small”. Therefore, the result is more like an anomaly. I assume that either the optimization of the test itself or the optimization of the processor takes place here. Or maybe both. We will not rely on the results of this test in this case. Although the figure is impressive.

And here I am absolutely sure that optimization was made in the test itself. This is also proven by repeated tests of AMD Ryzen, which pass it much better, despite the fact that Ryazans are not so strong in single-threaded tests. Therefore, the advantage in 65%

will not count. But it was simply impossible not to talk about it. Nevertheless, we write one — we keep two in mind.

Difference between generations — 44.7%

. Everything is fair here, so we count the result. After all, this is exactly the test in which the maximum performance is squeezed out in a single-threaded load. On the one hand, here you can see the work done on finalizing and optimizing the kernel — a refresh with a refresh, but something under the hood was clearly optimized. On the other hand, such results may indicate that you squeezed the maximum last time in the same test with i9-9900K we failed. I would love to read your thoughts on this in the comments.

The tenth generation confidently overtakes the ninth by 50.9%

. Which is quite to be expected. The cores and frequencies added by the Intel i9-10900K rule here.

Difference between generations — 6.3%

. In my opinion, the result is rather controversial. In future articles, I’m thinking of dropping this test altogether. The fact is that in systems with more than 36 cores (72 threads), the test does not pass at all with standard settings, and the difference in results sometimes has to be calculated by the third decimal place. Well, we’ll see. You can share your opinion on this matter in the comments.

Difference by 28%

. There are no surprises, anomalies and optimizations noticed. Pure refresh and nothing more.

i9-10900K outperforms i9-9900K by 38. 7%

. As in the case with the results of the previous test, the difference is expected and well shows the real gap between processors on the same microarchitecture.

So let’s summarize. In general, nothing unexpected — the i9-10900K outperforms its predecessor i9-9900K in all tests. Q.E.D. The price for this is heat dissipation. If you are looking for a new processor for home use and are going to squeeze the maximum performance out of the tenth generation Core, I recommend thinking about the cooling system in advance, because coolers alone will not be enough here. Or come to us for dedikov. A ready-made solution on a good platform and with a very decent CBO, which, in addition to all other advantages, as we found out, also has overclocking potential.

In testing, dedicated 1dedic.ru servers based on Intel Core i9-9900K and i9-10900K processors were used. Any of them, as well as configurations with an i7-9700K processor, can be ordered with a 7% discount using the promo code INTELHABR

. The discount validity period is equal to the payment period selected when ordering the server. The promo code discount is summed up with the discount for the period. The promo code is valid until December 31, 2020 inclusive.

Why do you need such powerful processors as i9

Yes, Intel Core i9 are very powerful and very expensive processors. What are they needed for? Well, the i7 is definitely enough for you to enjoy all the modern games. And multitasking your home computer can handle even the i5. It’s all the past. But technology doesn’t stand still. Take a look around. From all sides, virtual reality is trying to penetrate our lives, starting from a virtual journey through interesting locations and virtual dramatizations for the purpose of education and ending with 3D-VR games that require more and more computing resources. This is on the one hand.

On the other hand, artificial intelligence is a no less resource-hungry “creature”. Of course, this animal is waiting for the first real quantum computers to appear in the world to show what it is capable of. But even now it is necessary to somehow prepare it for a new round of evolution. Therefore, processors will become more powerful and more powerful. And Intel Core i9 and AMD Ryzen Threadripper confirm this.

Conclusion

And to sum up this article, I can say that I am glad that, finally, noticeable progress in central processors has begun. I’ve been waiting for him for a long time. And then from year to year, minimal progress in this area led to depression and suggested: “But what about our high-tech future? Will I live to see him at this rate? Now more and more believe it.

As for your home computers, I doubt you’ll have to upgrade to i9 in the next few years. So do not resent the prices of these processors. Those guys who need such performance will have the means to buy them, I’m sure.

Intel Core i9 — the next generation processor for today’s demanding tasks!

Intel Core i9-9900K — Best Expensive Gaming Processor

Introduction

Today, Intel launched what is probably the most anticipated processor this year, the 8-core Core i9-9900K representing the 9th generation called «Coffee Lake Refresh». Finally, the fun began, AMD forced Intel to double the number of processor cores for the mainstream LGA115x platform; after nearly eight years of 4-core products. We all remember how Intel lived happily ever after last year, almost carefree, but with the advent of AMD’s «Zen» architecture, calm quickly vanished and now the blue giant hastily creates a 6-core 8th generation «Coffee Lake» processor to fend off the onslaught of Ryzen. When AMD maintained, and most importantly, continued its growth trajectory in performance and adequate cost for the second generation of Ryzen, Intel was forced to react radically by increasing the number of cores in the next generation, the top one being considered today.

The launch of the Core i9-9900K comes at a time when the promotion of the Intel foundry. The company is interested not only in the satisfaction of customers with the “new and improved” product, but also in the satisfaction of shareholders. Right now, it’s crucial for Intel to lead in performance over AMD; the thesis is indisputable, at least today’s move will take AMD a lot of time (although who knows) to adequately respond. In this way, Intel can take over the next generation foundry and build its next generation microarchitecture on top of it. Indeed, at the heart of today’s sample, Intel Core i9The -9900K hasn’t changed much since the 6th generation «Skylake». Intel carried over the same core design for four generations, focusing on increasing the number of cores and making improvements to the 14nm fabrication process to increase efficiency.

The highlight of the review was the new 178mm² 8-core ‘Coffee Lake Refresh’ die built on the same 14nm process as the previous 6-core ‘Coffee Lake’ die. The chip has 8 physical cores and 16MB of L3 cache, which is exactly double what it was two years ago, like the 4-core “Kaby Lake” gem. Intel has developed an integrated memory controller to support up to 128 GB of RAM, adding support for 32 GB memory modules, and rolling out some fixes at the hardware level to close the issue of speculative vulnerabilities that dominated the media headlines for most of the year. This is actually important because, in theory, a hardware patch has less of a performance impact than a software patch deployed via microcode or operating system updates.

Intel used this 8-core die to build two different products, the Core i9-9900K and the Core i7-9700K. And this means that the i9-9900K is not a successor to the i7-8700K, as it offers a completely new segment, for about $500 and up. The Core i9-9900K fully maximizes the matrix. On the other hand, the i7-9700K also has all 8 cores, but the HyperThreading feature is blocked; L3 cache is also reduced to 12 MB. This processor costs around $400 and it reaches the laurels of the i7-8700K in both price and performance. Intel hasn’t significantly changed its Core i5 lineup, which is still showing 6 cores/6 threads from 9MB of L3 cache.

Next, with the new chips, Intel introduced the new Z390 Express chipset. This is a top-of-the-line chipset above the Z370 Express, as it received higher CPU VRM requirements to provide the highest possible overclock headroom for the new 8-core processors. The chipset offers a newer integrated USB 3.1 controller; helping people identify motherboards that guarantee support for 9th generation Core processors. All other Intel 300-series LGA1151 chipsets, including h410, B360, h470 and Z370, also support the latest processors, but through a BIOS update.

In this review, the Intel Core i9-9900K processor will be put through a host of performance, scientific, content creation, and gaming tests.

Specifications

	Price	Cores / Threads	Basic frequency	Max. Boost	L3 Cache	TDP	Architecture	Process	Socket
Core i5-8600K	259$	6 / 6	3.6 GHz	4.3 GHz	9 MB	95 W	Coffee Lake	14 nm	LGA 1151
Ryzen 5 2600	200 $	8 / 16	3.4 GHz	3.9 GHz	16 MB	65 W	Zen	12 nm	AM4
Ryzen 7 1700	290 $	8 / 16	3.0 GHz	3.7 GHz	16 MB	65 W	Zen	14 nm	AM4
Core i5-9600K	350 $	6 / 6	3.7 GHz	4.6 GHz	9 MB	95 W	Coffee Lake	14 nm	LGA 1151
Core i7-6700K	350 $	4 / 8	4. 0 GHz	4.2 GHz	8 MB	91W	Skylake	14 nm	LGA 1151
Core i7-7700K	340 $	4 / 8	4.2 GHz	4.5 GHz	8 MB	91W	Kaby Lake	14 nm	LGA 1151
Core i7-8700	300 $	6 / 12	3.2 GHz	4.6 GHz	12 MB	65 W	Coffee Lake	14 nm	LGA 1151
Ryzen 5 2600X	$229	6 / 12	3.6 GHz	4.2 GHz	16 MB	95 W	Zen	12 nm	AM4
Ryzen 7 1700X	290 $	8 / 16	3.4GHz	3.8 GHz	16 MB	95 W	Zen	14 nm	AM4
Ryzen 7 2700	300 $	8 / 16	3. 2 GHz	4.1 GHz	16 MB	65 W	Zen	12 nm	AM4
Core i7-8700K	$359	6 / 12	3.7 GHz	4.7 GHz	12 MB	95 W	Coffee Lake	14 nm	LGA 1151
Core i9-9700K	420 $	8 / 8	3.6 GHz	4.9 GHz	12 MB	95 W	Coffee Lake	14 nm	LGA 1151
Ryzen 7 2700X	330 $	8 / 16	3.7 GHz	4.3 GHz	16 MB	105 W	Zen	12 nm	AM4
Ryzen 7 1800X	320 $	8 / 16	3.6 GHz	4.0 GHz	16 MB	95 W	Zen	14 nm	AM4
Intel Core i9-9900K	530 $	8 / 16	3.