Gadgetory

welcome back to our unbox today I can finally show you how the new 8 quart ninth gen processors perform there's a lot to go over in this video so I won't waste too much time going over the specs and all that plus they've been up for pre-order now for about 10 days so none of that stuff really is a mystery at this point on hand for testing I have the core I 999 - okay I actually ended up with a few of those processors so I will be out of hand one of them off to Tim and then he can do some additional testing perhaps look at things like streaming performance because I know the few of you guys that are interested in those kind of benchmarks and then we also have the 9700 K which is basically the same CPU but crucially with hyper-threading disabled so the core oh nine ninety nine hundred K is an eight core processor with hyper-threading enabled for 16 threads and operate to the base frequency of 3 point 6 gigahertz but will boost as high as four point seven G coats on all caused with a maximum single core frequency of 5 gigahertz the l3 cache has been increased from the 87 k's 12 mega byte capacity up to 16 megabytes and quite shockingly despite packing two extra cores and 4 megabytes more cache the TDP rating remains at 95 watts which was already suspiciously low 487 or okay and we will explore the impact of this a little bit later on in the video as I said the 97 K is also an 8 core processor but it lacks hyper-threading support meaning it packs just 8 threads it comes clocked at the same 3.6 Q have base frequency while the alcorn single core clock speeds have been devalued by 100 megahertz and the l3 cache capacity dropped down to 12 mega bytes for testing I'm using the MSI z3 90 godlike but I've also confirmed the results with as rocks as in 390 Taichi ultimate both boards were tested using ddr4 3200 sale 14 memory and the same memory was used on all platforms without any manually tuned timings the graphics card of choice is gigabytes RTX 20 atti gaming OC and we have loads of results to go over so let's get started first up we have the memory bandwidth results and unsurprisingly the new coffee-like refresh cpus are on par with previous models such as the core i7 87 okay so everything is as expected here let's check out some Cinebench results as expected the 9900 K and 97 or okay provide the highest out-of-the-box single-thread scores that we've seen to date easily breaking the 200-point barrier thanks to the five hero and 4.9 gigahertz clock speeds when using just a single core with all cores active the 99er okay breaks the 2000 point barrier making it 14 percent faster than the risin 720 700 X meanwhile the 9700 K managed to score of just over 1500 points and that placed it just behind the old 1800 X and just ahead of the 87 okay that also meant it was 26% slower than the 9900 a given what we saw in Cinebench it's no surprise that the no hurricane outclassed the 2700 X in blender reducing the workload completion time by a rather large 23% that said the eight core rise in CPU was a fraction faster than the 9700 K moving on to Corona and here we find a similar story the 99 hurricane reduced the render time by 20% from the 2700 X taking just 96 seconds that said though I should just point out if you're mostly rendering then something like the thread Ripper 2950 X makes more sense and I will talk about this a bit more later on in the video the last rendering application that we tested with is VRA and here the 1900 Kaine reduced the render time by 18% taking just 62 seconds opposed to 76 seconds for the 2700 X the 9700 K was a lot less impressive taking a few seconds longer than the 8700 K making it slower than both the 1,800 X and 2,700 X the PC marked in synthetic gaming benchmarks is happily on both the core clock speed and the core count that said it's interesting to see the 19 her okay only matching the 2700 X here while the 97 or ek was only just able to edge ahead of the older 1800 X when it comes to file compression performance the 99er okay is roughly on par with the 78 20x while the 9700 K fell just short of the 87 okay which meant it was also slower than the 2700 X decompression performance is significantly stronger on the AMD CPUs and here even the horizon 7 1800 X is able to edge ahead of the 99er okay the 9700 K was able to slot back in ahead of the 87 okay making it just a fraction faster than the 2600 X moving on to our excel testing here we see a rapid completion time of just 1.8 seconds for the noisy Rek reducing the completion time by third two percent when compared to the 97 or okay and 19% compared to the 2700 X so a solid result for the 9900 cave the 9700 K though was much less impressive only slotting in between the 87 RK and risin 520 600 X the core i7 87 okay already had the rise in seven 2700 beat in hand break so the new 8 core models take that a step further even the 97 RK was seen to be faster than the 87 okay here when compared to the 2700 X the 99 K was 32% faster though it was 20% slower than the 2950 X for those of you like me who use Premiere Pro CC a lot or any other video software on a daily basis these numbers will be of great interest here the encoding performance of the 99 or okay is roughly on par with the 78 20x meaning it was 8% faster than the 2700 X and 17 percent faster than the 97 Rek that said it was almost 20% slower than the 2950 X so if time really is money that's still a better option editing performance with our warp stabiliser test sees the 1900 can Li just edged ahead of the 8700 K and 9700 K this meant while it was a bit faster than the rise in 720 700 X it was quite a bit slower than the 2950 X okay so time to check out total system consumption as expected the new 8 core models are serious power pigs the 9700 K matched the 78 20x for the total system drive 235 watts when running our handbrake workload the 9900 K pushed total system consumption 9% higher hitting 255 watts which is 13% more power than the 16 core thread Ripper 2950 X system consumed we find a similar story when testing with blender though the AMD CPUs did perform better in this application as a result the 2950 X was able to work a bit harder but even so it still consumed a less power than the 1900 a lesson of power consumption data for the moment let's check out some overclocking performance right so overclocking these eight core parts to 5.1 gigahertz wasn't easy it required 1.37 5 volts and a massive liquid cooler you aren't hitting this frequency with a 240 millimeter closed-loop cooler life Geerts is probably off the table as well and we will look at thermal performance in a moment looking at the Cinebench r15 multi-threaded results the no no okay saw an eight percent performance boost while the ninety seven okay saw a seven percent boost I should also note that I have two 1900 K samples and both struggled with the 5.1 gigahertz overclock they could boot into windows at five point two gigahertz and run a few basic tests but anything more would result in the blue screen of death even at one point four five volts moving on to Corona the nine hundred K was seven percent faster once overclocked well the ninety seven okay enjoyed a nine percent performance bump finally we have the premiere results and again the 9700 case or a nine percent performance boost and the 1900 an eight percent boost so only single digit gains making it hard to justify the increase in power consumption and operating temperatures speaking of power the 9700 K configuration consumed fifteen percent more power once overclocked and the ninety nine hundred K system an additional 19 percent taking the total system consumption to 294 watts now when it came to operating temperatures I have nothing but bad news these eight core CPUs might have a stim pack I mean soldered thermal interface but you wouldn't necessarily know it stock out of the box with either a premium air cooler or a decent closed-loop liquid cooler you're looking at low temperatures well into the 80s and overclocking is basically out of the question sure five units might be okay for games but if you're placing all that cause under prolonged stress temperatures will hit 100 degrees and I was testing in a relatively cool room inside a well ventilated case using a custom liquid cooling setup only reduced the stock operating temperature by eight degrees and we're talking about a 400 to 500 dollar u.s. kit here it was possible to run up to five point one gigahertz but even then temperatures were still knocking on the door of 100 degrees which is obviously quite insane so the 99 hundred K might be fast but good luck keeping it at a reasonable temperature I ran out of time to test the thermal performance of the 9700 K but I will include that data in a future content peace for now let's move on to games again due to time and how much we were had to cover in this single video we're only going to show the gaming performance of half a dozen titles starting with Assassin's Creed Odyssey here we see the 1900 K boosting frame time performance by just 4% at 1080p when compared to the 87 or okay while the 97 arcade was slightly better providing a 7% increase sometimes we see CPUs performing better with SMT disabled if they have more than enough cause the horizon process is certainly get mugged at 1080p while looking at the average frame rate here the 9900 K was 23% faster that was just 10% faster 41% low result again we are using an RT X xx atti and we see when moving to the more appropriate or realistic 1440p resolution that the margins start to really shrink here we see that the new 8 core models offer basically no performance advantage over the 87 RK that said the performance advantage over Verizon was still reasonably significant and it's not until we hit the 4k resolution of the margin is almost entirely eliminated still this isn't a good title for Eisen so let's move on to Star Wars Battlefront 2 here we see much more respectable performance from the Rison processes and even at 1080p the intel core i7 + i9 processors don't offer a noticeable performance gains over the 2700 X the 9900 K was just 5 percent faster than nearly 700 K while the 97 or Kate was 7 percent faster then at 1440p we see no real difference between the Intel processors and now Rison is less than 10% slower finally at the 4k resolution we see the playing field neutralized and now all 5 chest to the CPUs enable the same 76 FPS on average next up we have Forza horizon 4 which isn't a particularly CPU demanding title so unsurprisingly all CPUs enabled a similar level of performance this is a good example of how most games will behave as most games are indeed GPU bound like Assassin's Creed Odyssey hitman is a tunnel that plays a little oddly with horizon and this gave the Intel CPUs a serious performance advantage particularly at 1080p and 1440p the 1900 was also up to 12% fast and the 87 are ok which can be seen when comparing the 1% low results at 1080p Rainbow six siege shows a little to no performance gains for the 8 core 9th gen process over there December okay even at 1080p meanwhile the Intel processors did offer a performance boost over the horizon 720 700 X even at 1440p though the gains aren't exactly noticeable the last game we're going to look at the shadow of the Tomb Raider and here the 2700 X gets trounced at 1080p limiting the RT X xx atti to around 90 FPS on average while the Intel CPUs pushed on hit around 120 fps that said for the most part the 99 Hurricane 9700 offered no real performance advantage over the 80s 700 K the 9900 K did allow for a 10% boost to the 1% low result at 1080p but other than that not much to report here I also took a bit of time to test gaming performance with the NOAA hurricane 97 Erica overclocked a 5.1 gigahertz interesting that we see no performance game when testing with Assassin's Creed Odyssey even at 1080p we found in the past that overclocked and a decent Roque led to almost no performance gains or at least very small performance gains at 1080p with the 1080i and the same appears true with the RT X 20 atti again we see this time when testing with Star Wars Battlefront 2 that there's really no performance advantage to overclocking these CPUs a mere 3% performance boost to sing with the 900k and even less for the 90s 700 K that said hitman is a title that did see double-digit performance gains from their overclock here the 9th gen8 core processors were up to 12% faster at IEP and 1440p once overclocked ok so I've got two photographs I'd like to discuss which compared the performance of Intel's new 99 K on a flagship is m390 motherboard to that of a budget 370 motherboard MSI's said 370 PC pro packing a real for phase vrm and for reference I've included the core i7 87 okay and three Ripper 29 50 X results so starting with these stock out-of-the-box performance we saw that the MSI z3 90 god-like allowed the 900k to produce a score of 2048 points now slotting that CPU onto the z3 70 PC Pro resulted in a score of just 17 hundred and ninety points after a six run average initially the score started up around nineteen hundred points but on the second pass we saw a lot more Vera Moda lling and this continued as we ran the test for more times to report an average of six runs this met on average the non-owner Kate was 13% slower on the budget 370 board it is possible to enter the BIOS and remove the power limits and this did see full performance restored but even then we still saw some vera modeling going on and I did have a 120 millimeter fan directly over the vehicle verum heatsink so this is likely shortening your life of the mother but I don't recommend removing limits on boards with them in place interestingly if you overclock the 9rk on these at 370 but with the limits in place the performance is much worse than if we did nothing at all basically the increase v core voltage sees their verum throttle even harder with the limits in place and these further reduces the CPU core clock speeds again removing the power limits does mostly restore performance to what we're seeing on the zeb 390 board but if you're placing this board under heavy load for extended periods of time on a regular basis I don't imagine it will have a long and happy life likely expect fireworks in the short term wrapping things up let's take a quick look at a few application price vs. performance charts for this I'm using the current market price with the exception of the core i7 78 20x here I'm just using the MSRP as the current market price is inflated by about $300 it's not worth buying one at the MSRP as it is so let's just go with that as a best-case scenario quite clearly if you want to get some rendering work done on a serious budget there's no bidding the risin 520 600 right now it's really not that much slower than the core i7 700 X and it's a heck of a lot cheaper but let's focus on the new CPUs the 99 3k and 9700 K the 9700 K is better than the 8700 K in terms of value but still much worse than the cheaper Rison 727 or X meanwhile the 1900 case smokes the 2700 X in terms of forwards but at almost twice the price its poor value in comparison if time really is money than the much more expensive 29 50 X seems like the obvious choice here also please note these price versus performance charts don't factor in motherboard and cooling costs I will discuss those shortly the Intel CPUs stack up much better in a handbrake and do offer more bang for your buck when compared to the competing AMD CPUs that said this really is a worst case scenario from Rison at least in our battery of benchmarks as previously the Rison 720 700 X really is the ultimate value option for budding content creators and the new 8 core Intel CPU simply can't hold a candle to it in terms of value the 99er okay doesn't offer anything new heat when compared to the 78 20x while the 97 RK was no better than the e7 or okay so a disappointing set of results here for Intel in Adobe Premiere right so we've just seen a boatload of graphs it's now time to try and make sense of it all these new 8 core coffee-like processors certainly are interesting animals and I'm not entirely sure who they're for but before I try and work there I probably should just touch on pricing quickly since I haven't actually mentioned that in this video yet so the core I nine nine are okay that comes at an MSRP a $500 US but as we've just seen it currently costs more like five hundred and eighty dollars us and then we have the 97 okay and that's meant to sell for well in thousand la quantities three hundred and seventy four dollars us it should be around that price and we're currently seeing it a fair bit over that at 420 US of course the core i7 8700 K is also a little over the MSRP right now priced at $399 us that it was selling for a few months ago before the supply shortages and all that stuff kicked in anyway we've now established that the new eight core parts aren't cheap but who are they designed for exactly well I know a lot of you guys are gamers and Intel has been touting the 9 100 K as the world's best gaming CPU which I suppose technically it is but at 1080p with an RT X xx atti it's barely any better than the 87 okay previously the world's best gaming CPU and arguably still the best in terms of value though we're talking about extreme high refresh rate gaming value their $150 u.s. the horizon 520 600 is now without question the best value gaming CPU overall that's just a ridiculously good buy at that price in my opinion the minor performance gains the 9700 K and 9000 k offer in some games using unrealistic settings doesn't make them better gaming CPUs than the 87 okay at least right now the added power consumption and heat makes and less attractive options in my opinion they really are getting too hot to handle for almost a 50% increase in price you're looking at maybe a 5% increase in performance assuming you don't game at 4k so while certainly very fast gaming CPUs I feel like neither the 97 okay or 9 are okay make that much sense for those looking to game exclusively they might be useful as streaming processors we haven't actually looked at that yet as not enough if you actually care about streaming benchmarks for that to be part of our day 1 coverage but Tim will follow up with that testing soon then if we look at application performance it's still hard to justify buying either of these 8 core processors for the most part the 9700 K is slower than the 2,700 X while the 9 RK is up to 30% faster so that is pretty impressive at least when overlooking the fact that it costs 90% more not factoring in the cost of the additional cooling another subject that's a real issue for this CPU there's simply no way you're going to avoid thermal throttling without spending around $100 u.s. on the cooler at least without your PC you sounding like a jet about to take off throw in the course at H 100 I Pro and the 1900 K now cost $700 u.s. and you still can't really overclock it at least without running it dangerously high temperatures later this month the thread Ripper 29 20 X will be landing for $650 u.s. and that means you can land at this upcoming 12 core processor with cooler for the same price as the 9rk with a cooler and I'll leave it up to you guys to work out which one's probably going to be faster for productivity workloads granted x3 900 motherboards do cost about $100 more but you get twice as many DIMM slots way more PCIe lanes and well a serious workstation platform there for purely for productivity than I are okay it really makes no sense in our opinion in fact the only scenario where it might make sense is for someone who's after an extreme high refresh rate gaming system that also does a lot of cool heavy productivity work so I guess it's basically the perfect CPU for a YouTube gamer for someone who doesn't want to run to different systems like I do the 900k might make sense for work I have a thread Ripper 2950 X workstation and for play I have a core i7 8 Center okay gaming rig it allows me to enjoy the best of both worlds the 90 on her okay is every bit as good as the 87 okay for gaming but not nearly as good as the 29 50 X for most core heavy productivity workloads so you can't exactly say it's the best of both worlds but if you lean more heavily to the gaming side of things than I guess it is a better choice obviously no matter your preference only those with money to burn will consider buying a 9r okay at its current market price or even the $500 u.s. MSRP for that matter for me it's just too expensive and too impractical keeping it cool seems like a daily challenge and unless you're going all out on custom cooling it's a challenge you'll likely fail basically you can build a rise in seven 2700 scamming rig with a gtx 1080i and still save over $100 on the no no okay build using a gtx 1070 so like I said unless you have money to burn the known arcade makes a little to no sense at the current asking price the core i7 9700 okay well that's an even worse proposition in my opinion and although I haven't done all the thermal testing that I would like to just yet and what I noticed when testing sort of my initial impressions of it is it does appear to run a bit hotter than the a7 okay which is quite shocking because it is a salted ship so yes not sure what's going on there but I will be probably looking into that as you're watching this video so there'll be some follow-up content our looking into several performance a bit more closely it also consumes a bit more power than 87 or okay and for the most part really only offered a minor performance bump so I'd like in this comparison to what we saw earlier in the week with the RT X 2070 and GT X 1080 in the sense that the newer product is mostly faster by a very small margin but it also costs a little bit more and as I said unfortunately whereas the RT X 27 he used less power than the GTX 1080 we're not seeing that with the 9700 K it isn't more fuel efficient than the 8700 K at this point I don't have too much more to add or at least to much more than I feel like I could add in this video it's probably being quite long as it is and we will have a week or twos worth of content no doubt there's plenty more testing and things to look at no doubt you guys will have some ideas of things that you would like us to look into so yeah I will be doing that for the next few weeks but yeah it's been a busy week this week we had the g4s RGX 2070 launched just a few days ago and that was a really rushed review yes so still recovering from that one but anyway interesting look at the new core and I know hurricane core i7 97 okay very very keen to hear your thoughts on these new processes in the comments section below so as always I will be reading those and responding to a good amount of them anyway that is going to do it for this one if you did enjoy the video be sure to the like button subscribe for more content and if you appreciate that work with your hammer box then consider supporting us on patreon thank you for watching I'm your host Steve and I'll see you again next time