The Intel Core i9-9990XE Review: All 14 Cores at 5.0 GHz
by Dr. Ian Cutress on October 28, 2019 10:00 AM ESTChromium Compile: Windows VC++ Compile of Chrome
A large number of AnandTech readers are software engineers, looking at how the hardware they use performs. While compiling a Linux kernel is ‘standard’ for the reviewers who often compile, our test is a little more varied – we are using the windows instructions to compile Chrome, specifically a Chrome 56 build from March 2017, as that was when we built the test. Google quite handily gives instructions on how to compile with Windows, along with a 400k file download for the repo. This is by far one of our most popular benchmarks, and is a good measure of core performance, multithreading performance, and also memory accesses.
In our test, using Google’s instructions, we use the MSVC compiler and ninja developer tools to manage the compile. As you may expect, the benchmark is variably threaded, with a mix of DRAM requirements that benefit from faster caches. Data procured in our test is the time taken for the compile, which we convert into compiles per day. The benchmark takes anywhere from an hour on a fast single high-end desktop processor to several hours on the slowest offerings.
Prior to this test, the two CPUs battling it out for supremacy were the 16-core Ryzen Threadripper 2950X, and the 8-core i9-9900K. By adding six more cores, a lot more frequency, and two more memory channels, the Core i9-9990XE plows through this test very easily, perfoming the compile in 42 minutes and 10 seconds, and is the only processor to broach the 50 minute mark, let alone the 45 minute mark.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
145 Comments
View All Comments
Arc1t3ct - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
I'd like to see the cinebench score for this cpu. It's probably the single most important performance metric for Architects and engineers.ballsystemlord - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
Spelling error:"Blender can take advantage of more cores, and whule the frequency of the 9990XE helps compared to the 7940X, it isn't enough to overtake 18-core hardware."
"while", not "whule":
"Blender can take advantage of more cores, and while the frequency of the 9990XE helps compared to the 7940X, it isn't enough to overtake 18-core hardware."
ballsystemlord - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
What's interesting about this processors benchmarks is that even at 5.0GHz AMD's Zen2 processors are still fairly close. -- Not that I'm trying to attract fanboys, it's just interesting to compare the IPC, memory latency, etc.TitovVN1974 - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
IMHO, Linpack (Intel® Math Kernel Library (Intel® MKL) Benchmarks) with not-too-many cores gives good upper bound estimation of practically obtainable perfomance in engineering and science.ballsystemlord - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
But only for Intel processors...edwardhchan - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
Caseking is selling them for 1799 Euro with stock promised from Nov. 12.... So I guess the demand is low?cschlise - Thursday, October 31, 2019 - link
As I look at this and the struggle to make predictable quantum computing hardware, I see us reaching an inflection point where "traditional" methods will have to adapt a hybrid quantum piece because the features will have shrunk to the point where quantum effects become the norm, vice the exception.cschlise - Thursday, October 31, 2019 - link
What all this testing is showing me is that I should buy a mainstream Ryzen 9 3900X for $530 at newegg right now.yetanotherhuman - Friday, November 1, 2019 - link
Wow. There are times when it doesn't even touch a 3900X. This is not a desirable product.Icehawk - Friday, November 1, 2019 - link
So no latency testing of any kind... which is what this machine is about.