Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:: Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Name
Email
Subject
Message icon

Other options

Return to this topic
Don't use smileys

Verification:

Please leave this box empty:

Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by Imglidinhere

- August 27, 2019, 19:22:30

I really wish people would stop believing Intel is able to maintain 4.4GHz at only 35w. Turbo Boost frequencies are still a thing, so no, it's 2.1GHz at 35w and likely 4.4GHz at 80w, which is pretty standard for an Intel CPU to pull for those numbers. I know my laptop CPU pulls up to 78w for the full 3.9GHz 6-core boost, which is impressive... until the chip throttles at 100*C and you realize the point is moot.

The boost frequencies should go away imo. Yeah it's nice, but the ability to shut that off in lieu of getting better temps, or lowering power consumption (which is the entire point of a T-labeled processor in the first place), sounds like a far better option than getting quick bursts of speed, only to be severely underwhelmed after 60 seconds and feel like it's a lot slower than it actually is.

But what would I know? I'm just another dumb consumer, right? :P

Posted by Redaktion

- August 23, 2019, 13:51:20

The Core i9-9900T remains unavailable in most regions, but several Geekbench listings give an insight into the performance of the 35 W CPU. Essentially a hamstrung Core i9-9900, the Core i9-9900T bests processors with up to 3x the TDP in multicore workloads and is a big upgrade over the last 35 W CPU to enter our offices.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Core-i9-9900T-scores-up-to-11-more-than-the-Ryzen-7-2700X-in-Geekbench-with-3x-lower-TDP-comparable-single-core-performance-to-the-Core-i7-8700.431233.0.html

News:

Post reply

Topic summary

Posted by Imglidinhere

Posted by Redaktion