Core i9-14900K

[...] I have a 14900KS, a CPU from 2 years ago and is still amongst the strongest in benchmarks like Cinebench. [...]

[...] I will just upgrade the 14700K to 14900KS CPU and wait 2 more years. Judging by the benchmarks newer CPUs aren't much better for multithreading workloads than 14900KS anyway, so it doesn't make a lot of sense to upgrade to newer CPUs, DDR5 and a new mobo.

[...] You’re now arguing that overhead is ok because its mitigated by newer hardware, I don’t believe that to be true as I run W11 on A Threadripper 3970x and an i9-14900k and the fuckers feel leagues slower than my M1 Macbook, its a joke! [...]

[...] On an i9-14900K, arguably one of the fastest CPUs in the previous few years (and excusing their design defect that causes them to die); Teams is significantly slower than on the Quallcom Snapdragon X-Elite, or my Macbook. It seems to perform the same as it would on an i9 platform as it does on i5 laptop's of the same generation (in terms of input latency and drawing to the screen etc;) I know it's apples/oranges, that ARM CPUs are substantially different than x86 ones, but the fact that it seems to be the same on significantly lower clocked (and lower consumptive) chips indicate to me that something very bizarre is happening when it comes to Teams. [...]

[...] It isn't just absent on "older AVX2-only CPUs." It's also absent on many "newer AVX2-only CPUs." For example, the i9-14900K. [...]

No desktop CPU I’ve ever used has remained stable at 100 degrees. My 14900k crashes almost immediately at that temp. 3 hours at 100 degrees is obscene.

I don't give any fucks about battery life or even total power consumption cost; I just hate that I have some crap-ass Apple mid-range (for them) laptop with only 36GB RAM and an "M4 Max" CPU, and it runs rings around my 350W Core i9-14900K desktop Linux workstation, and there is essentially no way I can develop software (Rust, web apps, multi-container Docker crap) on Linux with anything close to the performance of my shitty laptop computer, even if I spend $10,000. [...] I think we're in a kind of unique moment, but one that is good for Apple mainly, because their OS is so developer-hostile that I pay back all the performance gains with interest. [...]

[...] Sometimes I have to reset the system 3 times or more before it will boot; it hangs or crashes on DDR timing BIOS codes. [...] Huge waste of money. [...] In the meantime if I need a lot of RAM I use an Intel 14900K desktop or my new HP G1a Zbook. [...]

I think the definition of unity build is sufficiently unclear that it can be used as a pro or a con. It’s one of the problems with c++ - there’s no default build tool to compare with. II’d argue that a single unity blob with one compiler invocation isn’t a fair comparison and that when you made a token effort to configure the unity build you saw a 2x speed up. [...] Right now we’re using i9 14900k’s with 128GB RAM. [...] I tried egui last night but failed to build it due to missing dependencies, but I’ll see if I can get it running on Monday. [...]

[...] I have 4 nodes, with a 14900K CPU with 24 cores being the workhorse. [...]

That's weird, I buy the one with the most e-cores. They're great for batch processes. For example the 14900K builds the Linux kernel faster than the Ryzen 9 7950X, even though it only has 8 "real cores" versus 16.

There is no reliable way to diagnose this issue with the 14th gen, the chip slowly degrades over time and you start getting more and more (usually gpu driver under windows) crashes. [...] I highly recommend going into your motherboard right now and manually setting your configurations to the current intel recommendation to prevent it from degrading to the point where you'd need to RMA it. I have a 14900K and it took about 2.5 months before it started going south and it was getting worse by the DAY for me. Intel has closed my RMA ticket since changing the bios settings to very-low-compared-to-what-the-original-is has made the system stable again, so I guess I have a 14900K that isn't a high end chip anymore. Below are the configs intel provided to me on my RMA ticket that have made my clearly degraded chip stable again: CEP (Current Excursion Protection) Enable. [...]

[...] I own 2 machines for small scale CNN training, one 13900k and one 14900k. I have to throttle the CPU performances to 90% for stable running. [...]

I was seeing constant instability when running basically any large C++ build that was saturating all of the cores. [...] I came across Keean's investigations into the matter on the Intel forums: I think there is an easy solution for Intel, and that is to limit p-cores with both hyper-threads busy to 5.8GHz and allow cores with only one hyper-thread active to boost up to 5.9/6.2 they would then have a chip that matched advertised multi-core and single-thread performance, and would be stable without any specific power limits. [...] Had a thermal sensor been placed there the chip could throttle back the core ratio to remain stable automatically, or perhaps the transistors needed to be bigger for higher current - not sure that would solve the heat problem. Ultimately an extra pipeline stage might be needed, and this would be a problem, because it would slow down when only one hyper-thread is in use too. [...] From: Based on this, I set a P-Core limit to 5.8 in my bios and after several months of daily-use building Chromium I can say this machine is now completely stable. If you're seeing instability on an i9 14900k or 13900k see the above forum post for more details, and try setting the all-core limit. I've now seen this fix instability in 3+ build machines we use so far.

[...] As I no longer use a laptop (don't need it, too expensive, breaks, no upgrades, but that is just me), browsing through that channel looks like he focuses on laptops. [...] [Edit] Someone suggested looking at Geekbench Clang, which brought some insights for my desktop usage: (it looks like top CPUs are more or less the same, 15% difference) "Randomly" picking M2 Ultra 233.9 Klines/sec 7950x 230.3 Klines/sec 14900K 215.3 Klines/sec M3 Max 196.5 Klines/sec

[...] My current PC, which is rocking a Core i9 14900k (pray for me) and an ASUS W680M ACE SE motherboard, allowed me to install some 5600MHz speed DDR5 ECC memory, and it works flawlessly. [...]

This has been exactly my experience, and why I love single thread perf. I've had 12900k, 12900ks,13900k processors, I'm going to build a new one with either a 14900k or ks. I own a P5800x optane ssd to match.

I'm dealing with this right now (Asus ROG Z790, 14900k, Noctua NH-D15). [...]

As a data point, I just built a new dev machine with a 14900K on a new ASUS board. [...] I am glad to know that with your field data, I've inadvertently sidestepped a potentially catastrophic bug. [...] And the FPGA tools already crash on their own enough.

[...] Their AirPods routinely score the best on noise cancellation performance, battery etc. [...] MacBook hardware pre-ram price issues was incredible. [...] It replaced an i9-14900k and did it with almost no change in performance and it doesn’t sound like I’ve got a leaf blower in my office. [...] It was at is best 5 years ago and just gets buggier every release. It’s impossible to not sound like an Apple shill but this has been my experience for 35 years of computing.

The Intel warranty in unfortunately not advanced replacement, so I would be without my CPU for an indeterminate amount of time while they give it a think. The issue with the 7950X is that it isn't faster on my workload than an i9-14900K, even one that has been detuned to work correctly. The "issues" with the 9000 seem to be contained to MS Windows, an operating system I haven't used since the 1990s.

[...] Phoronix coverage seems more relevant Games are not one of my PC use cases so I am pleased to see that the 9950X is the new king of the hill for compiling software. My 14900K is glitching out so I need to replace it and the 9950X is a lot cheaper than a Threadripper or Xeon-W.

I have the 14900K too. [...]

I have my 14900K power capped at 225W/125W using RAPL and that seems to have stabilized it. [...] I feel that if Intel can fix it they should provide owners with working replacements, a refund, and a goodwill discount on a future Intel product.

Yeah, all I need to do to reliably show the drastic performance difference is open 5 different windows with 5 different versions of our monorepo. [...] When I start VS Code, it often re-opens all the windows, and it is slow as hell right away (on Linux 14900K + fast SSD + 64GB RAM, or on macOS on a Mac Studio M2 Ultra with 64GB RAM). [...] (Which, tbh, is better than just being that slow without showing any indication of what it is doing, but still.) I've tried to work with it using one window at a time, but in practice I found it is better for my needs to just quit and relaunch it a few times per day. [...] The remote development features are extremely good; you can be working from one workstation doing all the actual work on remote Linux containers — builds and local servers, git, filesystem, shell. [...] The TypeScript completion and project-wide checking is indeed way slower than we want it to be, but it's also a lot better than any other editor I've seen (in terms of picking up the right completions, jumping to definition, suggesting automatic imports, and flagging errors). [...] I don't use many (because I suspect they make it even slower). [...]

[...] They would be less expensive and you could upgrade then too over the years. [...] But regarding the article or rather M$ PC"+", my 14900k has AI features, apparently. [...]

Sure they do, so long as there are enough performance cores to go with it. 9th gen i9 had 8 cores, 10th gen i9 had 10 cores, 11th gen went back to 8 and it's been stuck there since the 14900k is benchmarking worse than the 14700k there's only so much windows crap running in the background that needs e-cores The CPU segment is years ahead of where it needs to be in regards to gaming, there's absolutely zero practical concern in gaming around e-cores. speak for yourself, my machine is CPU capped in esports titles after about 300fps or so more e-cores sat idle does nothing here

For the curious like me, here's the script running on consumer gaming Intel hardware (i9 14900K, 2x 48GB DDR5 6600MHz CL32 XMP, Windows 11): 1 27.6 2 50.5 3 62.5 4 68.3 5 75.6 6 82.6 7 87.4 8 90.7 9 93.0 10 94.3 ...repeating I expected a bit more, my guess would have been around 120 GB/s. I've been playing with LLMs and this hardware is about as fast as memory gets on consumer Intel without overclocking. Screenshot showing usage: