Last year, Intel showcased a CPU during its keynote a processor with all of its cores at 5 GHz. Today, that becomes a reality – Intel is set to launch a processor that promises that frequency in any scenario. The new Core i9-9900KS is an 8-core processor that will run at 5.0 GHz during single core workloads and multi-core workloads.

That demo last year was on an overclockable 28-core Xeon CPU, but in reality was clocked way lower. There was even a good amount of controversy, as Intel didn’t state at the time they were using a sub-zero chiller to achieve that result. But this year we’re getting something a little more realistic. The new Core i9-9900KS uses the same silicon currently in the i9-9900K, but selectively binned in order to achieve 5.0 GHz on every core, all of the time.

Technically the CPU has a base frequency of 4.0 GHz, however it will only ever go down to that amount based on a default Intel BIOS (no consumer board uses the base BIOS specifications). The new CPU will be enabled in the same motherboards as the Core i9-9900K, but with a small firmware update. The CPU also has the same integrated graphics as the Core i9-9900K.

Intel did not tell us the TDP yet, but we will update this article when we know. Pricing and the launch date are also an unknown, however Intel SVP and GM Gregory Bryant is running a keynote here at Computex in a couple of days, and we expect to have the details then.

Update 05/28: As part of his Computex keynote, Gregory Bryant has confirmed that the processor is launching in Q4 of this year. Pricing and TDP will presumably be announced much closer to the actual launch.

Intel 9th Gen Core 8-Core Desktop CPUs
AnandTech Cores Base
All-Core Turbo Single
Core Turbo
i9-9900KS 8 / 16 4.0 GHz 5.0 GHz 5.0 GHz UHD 630 2666 ? ?
i9-9900K 8 / 16 3.6 GHz 4.7 GHz 5.0 GHz UHD 630 2666 95 W $488
i9-9900KF 8 / 16 3.6 GHz 4.7 GHz 5.0 GHz - 2666 95 W $488
i7-9700K 8 / 8 3.6 GHz 4.6 GHz 4.9 GHz UHD 630 2666 95 W $374
i7-9700KF 8 / 8 3.6 GHz 4.6 GHz 4.9 GHz - 2666 95 W $374

The main difference compared to the Core i9-9900K is currently that all-core turbo value, which is a flat 5.0 GHz, a 300 MHz increase. There's a slight chance Intel might have increased the TDP, especially given that the base frequency (which TDP is built on) has increased 10% from 3.6 GHz to 4.0 GHz.

Why Intel Processors Draw More Power Than Expected: TDP and Turbo Explained

Intel did have a demo system for us to look at, which used a standard off-the-shelf motherboard and a closed loop liquid cooler. Intel confirmed that the chip is soldered, and that this is just simply the same silicon as the 9900K but better binned.

More info in a couple of days.

Want to keep up to date with all of our Computex 2019 Coverage?
Follow AnandTech's breaking news here!
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • mode_13h - Wednesday, May 29, 2019 - link

  • Kevin G - Sunday, May 26, 2019 - link

    They should name this chip something else. It boosts both base and turbo up a notch. Why not i9 9910K? That'd distinguish it enough without having to use a secret decoder ring to figure out that the suffix means.

    Speaking of, I do suspect that we may see a handful of i9 9900KFS (or 9900KSF) chips that disable the GPU too but have the same clocks.

    Intel's naming conventions have sucked for the past few years.
  • eastcoast_pete - Sunday, May 26, 2019 - link

    I am likely the odd one out here, but wouldn't having the capability to turbo a single core to, let's say, 5.5 GHz or higher as factory stock be more useful in real life than the one or all eight core turbo to 5 GHz instead of 4.7? There are still enough single core/single thread apps out there that could benefit from faster single core performance, and this newest and hottest (also in temperature) i9 cannot go faster in single core than the 9900K.
  • jospoortvliet - Tuesday, May 28, 2019 - link

    5.5ghz is just not stable, even on a single core. 5 is on the due already, they have to bin these cpus...
  • Bp_968 - Sunday, May 26, 2019 - link

    So, this is Intel grasping at straws to try and maintain the "the best chip for gaming is Intel" title.

    So if you overclock the overpriced chip, and don't enable any of the security mitigations, then its the "fastest"? Lol

    Lets see what AMD drops, but I strongly suspect the entire reason behind this CPU being announced right now is a lame attempt to try and pee in AMDs cheerios.
  • AshlayW - Sunday, May 26, 2019 - link

    Last ditch effort to sell their Skylake++++ architecture before Ryzen 3000 and makes their entire 14nm+++++ lineup obsolete. I'll pass on the 250W 8 core, with all the security vulnerabilities, Intel, thanks. Wouldn't notice the difference between this likely £500+ potato and my 2700X anyway, even in games lol.
  • Hrel - Sunday, May 26, 2019 - link

    I think Intel is just trying to stay relevant. Everyone is going AMD. Its not nearly as bad as Pentium vs Athlon, but Intel Kinda Looks Like They're standing still.

    Besides, my last 5 machines have been Intel, a few AMD builds are overdue.
  • Santoval - Sunday, May 26, 2019 - link

    This should have a TDP of at least 125W, maybe even 135W. Binning can only get you so far..
  • sorten - Sunday, May 26, 2019 - link

    The AMD horde is at the gates. Do you think Intel execs will be drinking shots tonight?
  • kwinz - Sunday, May 26, 2019 - link

    Yet another 9900K refresh is not what we need to hear from Intel right now.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now