Test Bed and Setup

As per our processor testing policy, we take a premium category motherboard suitable for the socket, and equip the system with a suitable amount of memory running at the manufacturer's maximum supported frequency. This is also typically run at JEDEC subtimings where possible. It is noted that some users are not keen on this policy, stating that sometimes the maximum supported frequency is quite low, or faster memory is available at a similar price, or that the JEDEC speeds can be prohibitive for performance. While these comments make sense, ultimately very few users apply memory profiles (either XMP or other) as they require interaction with the BIOS, and most users will fall back on JEDEC supported speeds - this includes home users as well as industry who might want to shave off a cent or two from the cost or stay within the margins set by the manufacturer. Where possible, we will extend out testing to include faster memory modules either at the same time as the review or a later date.

Test Setup
Intel 9th Gen i9-9900K
ASRock Z370
Gaming i7**
P1.70 TRUE
Crucial Ballistix
Intel 8th Gen i7-8086K
ASRock Z370
Gaming i7
P1.70 TRUE
Crucial Ballistix
Intel 7th Gen i7-7700K
ECC Extreme
F21e Silverstone*
G.Skill RipjawsV
Intel 6th Gen i7-6700K
ECC Extreme
F21e Silverstone*
G.Skill RipjawsV
Intel HEDT i9-7900X
ASRock X299
OC Formula
P1.40 TRUE
Crucial Ballistix
AMD 2000 R7 2700X
R5 2600X
R5 2500X
ASRock X370
Gaming K4
P4.80 Wraith Max* G.Skill SniperX
2x8 GB
GPU Sapphire RX 460 2GB (CPU Tests)
MSI GTX 1080 Gaming 8G (Gaming Tests)
PSU Corsair AX860i
Corsair AX1200i
SSD Crucial MX200 1TB
OS Windows 10 x64 RS3 1709
Spectre and Meltdown Patched
*VRM Supplimented with SST-FHP141-VF 173 CFM fans

We must thank the following companies for kindly providing hardware for our multiple test beds. Some of this hardware is not in this test bed specifically, but is used in other testing.

Hardware Providers
Sapphire RX 460 Nitro MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X OC Crucial MX200 +
MX500 SSDs
Corsair AX860i +
AX1200i PSUs
G.Skill RipjawsV,
SniperX, FlareX
Crucial Ballistix
Intel Core i9-9900K at 95W Our New Testing Suite for 2018 and 2019
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • Alexvrb - Thursday, November 29, 2018 - link

    Yes yes, all those office workers running a 9900K would barely notice. Serious, man? The whole reason this issue came to light was because gamers and other demanding users complained that the processor at DEFAULT settings on pretty much any retail board was annihilating TDP, even more noticeably so than their previous flagship. Journalists are lagging well behind, and when they DO bother looking into it, it's very much a "yeah it's true, shrug" article.
  • Gastec - Wednesday, June 19, 2019 - link

    Well said, "shrugging". Automagically overclocked CPU's do make benchmark graphs look better and CPUs sell better. Reminds me of one of AngryJoe's video about a certain MMO: "Oh, you want more? That would be $15 please! $15 more, please! That would be another $15!" Same with Intel, you want more performance, that would be 75% to 100% more watts, please! Yeah, I get it. Want 10 Ghz on all cores? 1000 W, what's the problem?
  • koaschten - Thursday, November 29, 2018 - link

    Check https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmAWqyHdebI
  • LindseyLopez - Wednesday, December 19, 2018 - link

  • nicolaim - Thursday, November 29, 2018 - link

    Missing link to TDP article on first page.
  • Exodite - Thursday, November 29, 2018 - link

    Thanks for this!

    It would be interesting, though perhaps not entirely related to this article in particular, to get a comparison on actual power draw and load temperatures as well. Similar to what you provide in your usual CPU reviews, to get a fair comparison to both the "unlocked" 9900K as well as the other slew of processors in the bench.

    I'd imagine the 9900K would look much better on those numbers, though obviously worse on performance, when actually adhering to TDP.
  • Wingartz - Thursday, November 29, 2018 - link

    *You can read it all [here], although what it boils down to is this diagram*

    [here] doesn't have a link to the article
  • :nudge> - Thursday, November 29, 2018 - link

    For easy comparisons it's great to see Geekbench making an appearance
  • Alexvrb - Friday, November 30, 2018 - link

    *worthless comparisons barely better Dhrystone and Whetstone
  • SirMaster - Thursday, November 29, 2018 - link

    How many people are actually buying a $500 CPU and capping it's power limit to 95W?

    Can't be many, how about buy a different CPU if you plan on capping it's power limit like that.

    I have an SFF mini-ITX build and my old overclocked haswell CPU is running at like 180W and staying cool just fine.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now