F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop The top energy-efficient gaming processor available in early 2020

The top energy-efficient gaming processor available in early 2020

The top energy-efficient gaming processor available in early 2020

Pages (3): 1 2 3 Next
E
emstay26
Senior Member
441
08-17-2018, 07:48 PM
#1
The key technical distinctions lie in power delivery and core capabilities. The 9900T offers higher TDP (up to 95W) and supports boosted clocks from 2.0 GHz to 4.4 GHz with increased voltage, while the 9900K has a fixed 35W limit and caps at 4.4 GHz under similar conditions. The 9900K can reach up to 5.0 GHz with 165–180W power, but its performance drops when more cores are needed due to clock scaling. Adjusting the TDP of the 9900K to match the 9900T’s power limits would require changes like voltage adjustments, current management, or timing tweaks. Achieving 9900T-level efficiency on a 9900K would likely involve modifying voltage settings, core frequencies, and thermal constraints. Detailed guidance would be needed for specific BIOS configurations.
E
emstay26
08-17-2018, 07:48 PM #1

The key technical distinctions lie in power delivery and core capabilities. The 9900T offers higher TDP (up to 95W) and supports boosted clocks from 2.0 GHz to 4.4 GHz with increased voltage, while the 9900K has a fixed 35W limit and caps at 4.4 GHz under similar conditions. The 9900K can reach up to 5.0 GHz with 165–180W power, but its performance drops when more cores are needed due to clock scaling. Adjusting the TDP of the 9900K to match the 9900T’s power limits would require changes like voltage adjustments, current management, or timing tweaks. Achieving 9900T-level efficiency on a 9900K would likely involve modifying voltage settings, core frequencies, and thermal constraints. Detailed guidance would be needed for specific BIOS configurations.

B
blueburryx
Junior Member
30
08-18-2018, 01:22 PM
#2
The main variations among these CPUs lie in the clocks and voltages. You can adjust a 9900K to mimic a 9900T. No, Intel restricts the clock speeds on non-K models to prevent past issues with older voltage settings. Any entry-level model that can compete with higher-end ones may reduce sales in the range.
B
blueburryx
08-18-2018, 01:22 PM #2

The main variations among these CPUs lie in the clocks and voltages. You can adjust a 9900K to mimic a 9900T. No, Intel restricts the clock speeds on non-K models to prevent past issues with older voltage settings. Any entry-level model that can compete with higher-end ones may reduce sales in the range.

X
xStriKed
Member
212
08-23-2018, 12:18 AM
#3
You're wondering if it's feasible to lower the clock speed or voltage of a 9900K to achieve 9900T specifications. It’s uncertain whether that’s achievable. Back in the day, Intel sometimes modified CPUs by deactivating parts to produce cheaper versions. I don’t know how much they still do today. The 9900T behaves quite differently from the 9900K, which makes the challenge even greater. The real issue lies in the on-chip variations—Intel keeps this information confidential. It could be related to firmware or even specialized manufacturing features like laser-cut connections. It’s also possible the dies themselves are different. Trying to convert a 9900T into a 9900K would be almost impossible, effectively zero probability. Intel would have had to make a significant error to allow such a change.
X
xStriKed
08-23-2018, 12:18 AM #3

You're wondering if it's feasible to lower the clock speed or voltage of a 9900K to achieve 9900T specifications. It’s uncertain whether that’s achievable. Back in the day, Intel sometimes modified CPUs by deactivating parts to produce cheaper versions. I don’t know how much they still do today. The 9900T behaves quite differently from the 9900K, which makes the challenge even greater. The real issue lies in the on-chip variations—Intel keeps this information confidential. It could be related to firmware or even specialized manufacturing features like laser-cut connections. It’s also possible the dies themselves are different. Trying to convert a 9900T into a 9900K would be almost impossible, effectively zero probability. Intel would have had to make a significant error to allow such a change.

S
Sjittham
Member
62
08-23-2018, 03:20 AM
#4
It’s interesting you’re thinking about adjusting the voltage and clock settings. The idea is whether lowering the voltage and matching the base clock to 9900T would let the CPU run at full potential, especially with higher boost clocks. You’re wondering if turning off power limits would help it reach the 9900K performance level. Since the 8700T has already been tested under those conditions, it behaves similarly when restrictions are removed. So, for the 9900T, balancing voltage and clock settings might be key to unlocking its best performance without exceeding its power constraints.
S
Sjittham
08-23-2018, 03:20 AM #4

It’s interesting you’re thinking about adjusting the voltage and clock settings. The idea is whether lowering the voltage and matching the base clock to 9900T would let the CPU run at full potential, especially with higher boost clocks. You’re wondering if turning off power limits would help it reach the 9900K performance level. Since the 8700T has already been tested under those conditions, it behaves similarly when restrictions are removed. So, for the 9900T, balancing voltage and clock settings might be key to unlocking its best performance without exceeding its power constraints.

I
iRaine
Posting Freak
800
08-26-2018, 02:33 PM
#5
9900 isn't overclocked. 9900K is an unlocked multiplier, making it overclockable. 9900T uses a low power design, which could work in laptops or tablets if needed.
I
iRaine
08-26-2018, 02:33 PM #5

9900 isn't overclocked. 9900K is an unlocked multiplier, making it overclockable. 9900T uses a low power design, which could work in laptops or tablets if needed.

A
arod05
Junior Member
34
08-26-2018, 07:51 PM
#6
The main variation lies in the clock speed. They share identical cache and microarchitecture.
A
arod05
08-26-2018, 07:51 PM #6

The main variation lies in the clock speed. They share identical cache and microarchitecture.

P
Papery
Junior Member
42
09-03-2018, 07:50 PM
#7
According to what I understand: adjusting multipliers in BIOS can cancel out CPU overclocking benefits, leading to significantly reduced performance—particularly noticeable in games when the processor runs consistently at 2.0 GHz.
P
Papery
09-03-2018, 07:50 PM #7

According to what I understand: adjusting multipliers in BIOS can cancel out CPU overclocking benefits, leading to significantly reduced performance—particularly noticeable in games when the processor runs consistently at 2.0 GHz.

E
EGXC_RUNNER
Member
213
09-04-2018, 08:26 AM
#8
The CPU running at 2.0 GHz can slow down performance. Many motherboards, including those from MSI and Asus, provide a boost per core to adjust settings for different tasks.
E
EGXC_RUNNER
09-04-2018, 08:26 AM #8

The CPU running at 2.0 GHz can slow down performance. Many motherboards, including those from MSI and Asus, provide a boost per core to adjust settings for different tasks.

D
DD_CoolCat
Member
65
09-04-2018, 08:49 AM
#9
many choose the 9900T since it offers automatic power enhancement that benefits performance, making a 9900K seem similar only if you adjust multipliers for different tasks. it’s not fully possible but quite close. I’d pick the Ryzen 7 3700X 7nm instead, though it doesn’t handle power efficiently—reaching 4.15GHz needs 95W and even higher at 4.4GHz while claiming 65W. the main problem is that turning off PBO and precision boost keeps it stuck at 3.6GHz with decent efficiency (around 40W). compared to Intel’s 14nm T variants (50-60W), Ryzen’s boosting is more effective, hitting 4.4GHz per core below 60W, while Intel’s own boost reaches that too but uses more power.
D
DD_CoolCat
09-04-2018, 08:49 AM #9

many choose the 9900T since it offers automatic power enhancement that benefits performance, making a 9900K seem similar only if you adjust multipliers for different tasks. it’s not fully possible but quite close. I’d pick the Ryzen 7 3700X 7nm instead, though it doesn’t handle power efficiently—reaching 4.15GHz needs 95W and even higher at 4.4GHz while claiming 65W. the main problem is that turning off PBO and precision boost keeps it stuck at 3.6GHz with decent efficiency (around 40W). compared to Intel’s 14nm T variants (50-60W), Ryzen’s boosting is more effective, hitting 4.4GHz per core below 60W, while Intel’s own boost reaches that too but uses more power.

M
Mikayuu_
Member
182
09-05-2018, 05:21 PM
#10
It's also much more affordable, which is the main advantage. TDP numbers are unreliable. The 9900K uses significantly more energy than the 3700X yet their performance remains nearly identical. Avoid relying on TDP as a power indicator—it's actually a thermal measurement. TDP stands for "thermal design power."
M
Mikayuu_
09-05-2018, 05:21 PM #10

It's also much more affordable, which is the main advantage. TDP numbers are unreliable. The 9900K uses significantly more energy than the 3700X yet their performance remains nearly identical. Avoid relying on TDP as a power indicator—it's actually a thermal measurement. TDP stands for "thermal design power."

Pages (3): 1 2 3 Next