Skip to main content

Pay More for Less With the Intel Core i9-9900KF

In an ideal world, a product lacking a certain feature should cost less than a full-fledged version that comes with all the bells and whistles. However, that doesn't seem to be the case with the upcoming Intel Core i9-9900KF processor, which lacks integrated graphics yet has been priced higher than the Intel Core i9-9900K.

(Image credit: B&H Photo Video)

B&H Photo Video currently sells the Intel Core i9-9900K for $529.99 (~ £402.65). It recently listed the i9-9900KF iGPU-disabled chip for preorder for $582.50 (~ £442.57), which is roughly 10 percent more expensive. Both processors are based on the Coffee Lake processor microarchitecture and came out of Intel's 14nm++ process node.

In terms of performance, the Core i9-9900K and Core i9-9900KF should perform equally at 95W. Both are equipped with eight cores, 16 threads and 16MB of L3 cache. Each processor runs at a base clock speed of 3.6GHz. For both, when one or two cores are in use, the processor boosts to 5GHz and slowly drops down to 4.8GHz when four cores are active or 4.7GHz when all eight cores are loaded.

Intel Core i9-9900KF vs i9-9900K vs i9-9900 vs i9-9900T Specs 

ModelCores / ThreadsBase FrequencyBoost FrequencyMemory SupportProcessor GraphicsCacheTDPMSRP 
Core i9-9900K8 / 163.6 GHz5 GHz (1 / 2 Core)4.8 GHz (4 Core)4.7 GHz (6 / 8 Core)DDR4-2666Intel UHD Graphics 63016MB95W$488 - $499
Core i9-9900KF8 / 163.6 GHz5 GHz (1 / 2 Core)4.8 GHz (4 Core)4.7 GHz (6 / 8 Core)DDR4-2666N/A16MB95W$499
Core i9-99008 / 16??DDR4-2666Intel UHD Graphics 63016MB65W?
Core i9-9900T8 / 161.7 GHz3.8 GHz GHz (1 / 2 Core)? GHz (4 Core)3.3 GHz (6 / 8 Core)DDR4-2666Intel UHD Graphics 63016MB35W?

The i9-9900KF, set to debut this quarter, targets hardcore enthusiasts building very high-end systems employing one or multiple discrete graphics cards. However, at this price, there is little reason to pick up an Core i9-9900KF over the Core i9-9900K. And many would point out that having integrated graphics on a processor is extremely useful for diagnosing system malfunctions.

Then there's the upcoming Core i9-9900T, which recently made a short appearance on Yahoo! Auctions. But at 35W with a potential 3.3GHz all-core boost, the Core i9-9900T shouldn't be a threat to the "K" and "KF" models.

Knowing Intel, there's a high possibility it will launch the Core i9-9900 at 65W at some point.

  • salgado18
    I thought you were benchmarking them... :/
    Reply
  • gasaraki
    But Intel has no control over how much B&H charges. B&H can charge $1000 and if they can sell it at that price, good for them. Intel can't say "well we sold this to you at $488 and you can't sell it at X dollars".
    Reply
  • gasaraki
    21720151 said:
    I thought you were benchmarking them... :/

    It's a click bait article.

    Reply
  • logainofhades
    21720155 said:
    But Intel has no control over how much B&H charges. B&H can charge $1000 and if they can sell it at that price, good for them. Intel can't say "well we sold this to you at $488 and you can't sell it at X dollars".




    Intel isn't charging less for this cpu either. Suggested price is essentially the same.

    https://ark.intel.com/compare/190887,186605
    Reply
  • jimmysmitty
    21720155 said:
    But Intel has no control over how much B&H charges. B&H can charge $1000 and if they can sell it at that price, good for them. Intel can't say "well we sold this to you at $488 and you can't sell it at X dollars".

    This.

    And why is the 9900T even listed? Its not even an official chip. The IHS even states "Intel Confidential" which means that is an ES chip that someone is trying to sell off as a official CPU.

    This has happened before plenty of times.

    Just an FYI I did some digging and found this site:

    http://intel.fusionmedia.com/technical-library/cfl-s/technical-library-old.html?grouping=rdc%20Content%20Types&sort=title:asc
    The CPU, i9 9900T, has a SPEC code of QQC0. If you search for that you will find a DCL (Dear Customer Letter) for that which states its an ES from 7/2018. The 9 series launched in 10/2018.

    Now I cannot access the letter as this looks to be an Intel internal site page with a log in but that alone says that the 9900T is nothing more than an ES that was found and is being sold. You can find plenty of Intel ES chips for sale, especially in other countries.

    Now maybe I am wrong and Intel might launch a low power i9 9900. They have launched low power i7s before but it seems odd that the SPEC code is that old. I would expect the SPEC code to change at this point in time as they hammer out bugs and issues.
    Reply
  • King_V
    21720162 said:
    21720151 said:
    I thought you were benchmarking them... :/

    It's a click bait article.

    I don't think so. Even ignoring the B&H portion of it . . that the MSRP of the non-F is equal to or LESS than the F version is pretty appalling.
    Reply
  • King_V
    21720155 said:
    But Intel has no control over how much B&H charges. B&H can charge $1000 and if they can sell it at that price, good for them. Intel can't say "well we sold this to you at $488 and you can't sell it at X dollars".

    I'm not sure.... now, keep in mind this is from 30 years ago... but when the original Nintendo Entertainment System was a big deal in the late 80s, they controlled the price with an iron fist.

    The regular NES sold for $99.99. I worked at Toys R Us part time when I was in high school, and I saw how much Toys R Us paid per unit. We could've offered sales and still made money, but Nintendo forbade it. Toys R Us wasn't what you'd call a bit-player back then.

    When Tengen had their issues with Nintendo, and Nintendo said "Pull Tengen games off your shelves" . . . . Toys R Us couldn't comply fast enough.

    They said jump, we always replied "how high?"


    Not sure if any company could get away with that these days, but if anyone could, it would be Intel. They've pressured Dell and similar companies to not sell AMD machines in the past.


    Granted, I don't really think Intel's got any motivation to keep any sort of control on the prices. So far...
    Reply
  • cryoburner
    21720151 said:
    I thought you were benchmarking them... :/
    They did. Follow the in-article link to their 9900K review. Performance should be identical, minus the integrated graphics. I suppose it could be worth investigating whether the KF chips are as likely to overclock as well as the K ones, but that would require a number of samples from different sources to get a clear picture, and is probably best left to reports from companies like Silicon Lottery.

    As for the pricing at B&H, they are primarily a camera store that has branched out into other electronics, so it wouldn't surprise me if whoever decided on the pricing for that pre-order wasn't entirely aware of how a 9900KF differs from a 9900K, just that its a newer version of the processor. So, they might simply assume that it's something people will be willing to pay extra to pre-order. And some people who are similarly unaware probably will.

    Even so, Intel really should give these things a lower MSRP, even if it's just a $10 difference. Integrated graphics might not be an essential feature on a higher-end processor like this, but they can be convenient to have. With the Ryzen 3000-series processors likely coming within a matter of months, and likely offering very competitive performance to this CPU at a much lower price, you would think Intel would try to be a little more competitive with their pricing. Perhaps they just want to get as much price-gouging in while they still can. : P
    Reply
  • jaexyr
    (The Review is in another article)
    If given the choice between two new identical vehicles, one has heated seats, the other does not. Same price. Which would you pick?
    Reply
  • kinggremlin
    21720917 said:
    (The Review is in another article)
    If given the choice between two new identical vehicles, one has heated seats, the other does not. Same price. Which would you pick?

    If I lived in a hot place, I wouldn't care. I may even prefer the one without heated seats as they can make the seats uncomfortable over time. Not everyone needs integrated graphics. If the CPU without IGP was $.50 cheaper, I'd go with that one. I haven't had an IGP in years and have never missed it.
    Reply