Skip to main content

Intel Core i9-9900K review and benchmark

'World's best gaming processor'? We put Intel's new i9 through the ringer

Intel-9th-Gen-Core-package
Luke Larsen/Digital Trends

The Core i9-9900K isn’t the first Core i9, but it’s the first one that matters to gamers.

Intel’s Core i9 platform launched well over a year ago, bringing higher core-counts and clock speeds to home desktops. Yet those chips were targeted more towards productivity because they prioritized core count over clock speed. That’s not a winning combination for game performance and, as a result, the Core i9 chips often weren’t the best pick for games.

That’s no longer true. Intel claims the i9-9900K is the “world’s best gaming processor” — in other words, a processor that the average person was meant to own and use. So, does Intel’s latest and greatest live up to the hype, or fizzle under the pressure?

The stakes

Though still built on the familiar Coffee Lake 14-nanometer microarchitecture, the Core i9-9900K is indeed the launch of an entire new generation of processors. With that comes the familiar controversies around performance claims and benchmarks typical of generational launches.

Intel came out of the gate swinging, claiming its new Core i9 bested AMD’s Ryzen processors by as much as 50 percent in some benchmarks. That’s a huge leap, especially since Intel has played catch-up in core count since AMD launched the Threadripper platform just over a year ago. Beyond that, Intel’s well-documented delay of 10-nanometer has been painful to watch, especially as AMD has been building out its 12-nanometer platform throughout all of 2018.

Real-life performance was where the Core i9 blew us away.

But Intel has done it again.

Rather than compete directly with either the Threadripper 1900X or the Ryzen 7 1800X, the Core i9-9900K promises the best of both worlds. It has a base clock speed of 3.6GHz, matching the Ryzen 7, but boosts up to an audacious 5GHz Turbo frequency. Not even the 2nd-gen Threadripper has cracked that milestone. Its core count might be far behind, but the Core i9-9900K can hit higher per-core clock speeds at default settings.

It’s priced like a Threadripper, has the core count of the Ryzen 7, and boosts faster than either. This Core i9 isn’t the same as other processors we’ve seen before.

Record-breaking processing power

We tested the Core i9 in Asus’ new ROG Strix GL12CX desktop, which also featured an Nvidia RTX 2080 and 32GB of RAM. The results weren’t just impressive. They were record-breaking.

We compared the Core i9-9900K against the Ryzen 7 1800X. We also set it side by side with AMD’s Threadripper 1920X and 1950X, both of which have higher core counts than Intel’s product. Still, the Core i9 is the clear winner in every benchmark and test we could put it through.

[infogram-responsive id="537f1c87-7bcd-4292-89cc-b72345d6560a"]

In synthetic benchmarks like Geekbench, the Core i9 beats the Threadripper 1920X in multi-core scores by around 21 percent. That increases to 28 percent in single-core. It looks even worse for the Ryzen 7, which nearly 40 percent behind Intel.

Against the previous generation Core i7-8700K, the Core i9 matched its single-core performance, but flexed its eight-core muscles by upping its multi-core score by around 25 percent. That’s the kind of improvement two extra cores provides.

Real-life performance tests are where the Core i9 blew us away. The system encoded a 4K video in Handbrake in just one minute and sixteen seconds. That’s the new record for systems we’ve tested, and well over half the time it took AMD’s Threadripper 1920X.

The best gaming processor, indeed

The Core i9-9900K is an attractive processor for any demanding use, but gaming is the headline feature. Its impressive performance makes a difference, though only in games constrained by the CPU.

Civilization VI, which performs many AI calculations simultaneously, benefited greatly from the high clock speeds and eight cores of the 9900K. The Core i9-9990K outperformed the Threadripper 1920X by 40 percent. We saw similar results in Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey, where draw distance and high numbers of NPCs tap the CPU more heavily. In games like these, the Core i9 scores like no other processor.

[infogram-responsive id="9906a430-793c-4ed9-aafb-22ffb7d1de39"]

On the other hand, we saw little improvement over the competition in Deus Ex: Mankind Divided and Battlefield 1. Regardless of whether you’re playing in 4K on Ultra or in 1080p on Medium, much of the processing power was wasted. The GeForce RTX 2080 is doing the heavy lifting here. Game performance is capped by the GPU, not the CPU.

Much of the controversy surrounding the benchmarks of the Core i9 revolve around the Threadripper’s Game Mode, which is said to improve game performance at the expense of peak processor performance. However, it should be noted they don’t ship with the setting on by default, which means gamers probably won’t experience a performance benefit. If you’re curious, though, flipping Game Mode on reduced the 40 percent lead in Civilization VI to 32 percent.

The unsurprising champion

You likely won’t be surprised to hear the world’s best gaming processor comes at a high price. The Core i9-9900K will set you back $530 if you buy it at retail. That’s a huge bump over the $360 i7-8700K or the $374 i7-9700K, and much more expensive than a Ryzen 7 processor. The pricing actually makes AMD’s Threadripper the prime competition.

Intel-9th-Gen-Core-package
Luke Larsen / Digital Trends

Luckily for Intel, the Core i9-9900K boasts game performance that beats Threadripper and, on balance, everything else. The processor’s combination of respectable core count and per-core speed is the secret sauce games love.

This doesn’t mean you have to buy the Core i9-9900K. You can enjoy an awesome gaming experience on a far less powerful processor, like Intel’s Core i5-8400 or AMD’s Ryzen 7 2700X. But if you want the best of the best, the Core i9-9900K is it.

Luke Larsen
Luke Larsen is the Senior editor of computing, managing all content covering laptops, monitors, PC hardware, Macs, and more.
AMD didn’t even need its best CPU to beat Intel
A render of a Ryzen 9000 CPU.

Looks like the competition between AMD and Intel is about to start heating up again. AMD's upcoming second-best processor, the Ryzen 9 9900X, was just spotted in an early benchmark -- and the results are shockingly good. If this is what AMD can do with a 12-core CPU, what's going to happen when the 16-core version of Zen 5 appears in tests?

The happy news (for AMD fans, at least) comes directly from the Geekbench 6.2 database, and it all comes down to a benchmark of what appears to be a retail sample of the Ryzen 9 9900X. The chip scored an impressive 3,401 points in the single-core score, and 19,756 points in the multi-core score. That puts it far above its predecessor, the Ryzen 9 7900X, but that's not its only success.

Read more
Intel just discontinued a CPU that’s only 2 years old
Core i9-12900KS processor socketed in a motherboard.

Intel is moving on. The company recently posted two Product Change Notifications (PCN) that announced the discontinuation of multiple processors, including the Core i9-12900KS that was released just over two years ago.

In addition to the special-edition version of the Core i9-12900K, Intel announced that it's discontinuing the remaining CPUs in its 10th-gen lineup. The main stack of Intel's 10th-gen lineup, including processors like the Core i9-10900K, has already been discontinued. The newest PCN includes less prominent models, such as Intel's Pentium and Celeron lineups. It also includes the Core i5-10400F, which has remained one of the more popular budget options among Intel's CPU options.

Read more
Four months later, Intel CPU stability issues remain
Intel's 14900K CPU socketed in a motherboard.

It's been over four months since the first reports of instability in Intel's top CPUs started cropping up, and we are yet to see a fix. Although Intel has been working with its partners on delivering updates that would address the problem, the company itself had to admit in a recent community post that it still hasn't found the root cause.

Meanwhile, hardware testers are finding that even using Intel's recommended workarounds still ends up in crashes and unstable performance -- and the only solutions that seem to work are things that you'll have to settle for.

Read more