---
product_id: 82233783
title: "Intel Core i9-9900K Desktop Processor 8 Cores up to 5.0 GHz Turbo Unlocked LGA1151 300 Series 95W"
brand: "intel"
price: "£438.00"
currency: GBP
in_stock: true
reviews_count: 13
category: "Intel"
url: https://www.desertcart.co.uk/products/82233783-intel-core-i9-9900k-desktop-processor-8-cores-up-to
store_origin: GB
region: United Kingdom
---

# Up to 5.0 GHz Turbo Boost speed 16 MB Smart Cache for rapid data access 8 Cores / 16 Threads powerhouse Intel Core i9-9900K Desktop Processor 8 Cores up to 5.0 GHz Turbo Unlocked LGA1151 300 Series 95W

**Brand:** intel
**Price:** £438.00
**Availability:** ✅ In Stock

## Summary

> ⚡ Unleash the beast: Power, speed, and precision in one chip!

## Quick Answers

- **What is this?** Intel Core i9-9900K Desktop Processor 8 Cores up to 5.0 GHz Turbo Unlocked LGA1151 300 Series 95W by intel
- **How much does it cost?** £438.00 with free shipping
- **Is it available?** Yes, in stock and ready to ship
- **Where can I buy it?** [www.desertcart.co.uk](https://www.desertcart.co.uk/products/82233783-intel-core-i9-9900k-desktop-processor-8-cores-up-to)

## Best For

- intel enthusiasts

## Why This Product

- Trusted intel brand quality
- Free international shipping included
- Worldwide delivery with tracking
- 15-day hassle-free returns

## Key Features

- • **Turbocharged Speed:** Boost your productivity and gaming with up to 5.0 GHz turbo frequency that crushes lag and bottlenecks.
- • **Multithreaded Mastery:** 8 cores and 16 threads deliver seamless multitasking and powerhouse performance for demanding workflows.
- • **Smart Cache Advantage:** 16 MB cache ensures lightning-fast data retrieval, accelerating complex applications and rendering tasks.
- • **Intel UHD Graphics 630:** Integrated graphics support for smooth visuals and backup GPU power when needed.
- • **Unlocked for Overclocking:** Push your system beyond limits with an unlocked processor designed for enthusiasts who crave peak performance.

## Overview

The Intel Core i9-9900K is a high-performance 9th Gen desktop processor featuring 8 cores and 16 threads, capable of turbo boosting up to 5.0 GHz. Designed for Intel 300 Series motherboards, it includes 16 MB of smart cache and supports Intel Optane memory. Unlocked for overclocking, it delivers exceptional multitasking, gaming, and creative performance, making it a top-tier choice for professionals and enthusiasts seeking raw power and responsiveness.

## Description

9th Gen Intel Core i9-9900k desktop processor with Intel Turbo Boost Technology 2.0 offers powerful performance for gaming, creating and productivity. Thermal solution not included in the box.

Review: A BEAST in its day - This CPU was a monster when it came out. Intel was finally forced by Ryzen to put more than 4 cores on consumer chips and we got the 8700K and 9900K, two of the best CPUs ever for their respective eras. That Coffeelake was also the best IPC jump Intel had since Haswell made it a great platform. Both were fast enough to keep up for several generations. And being 8c16t, 9900K still has very relevant performance today. It still performs well in the latest titles excepting a few broken ones; especially so when overclocked. All that being said this was where Intel started to hit the wall with 'Lake' architecture, and it is a fairly power hungry CPU. With even a mild overclock to 4.9GHz this chip uses around 180-200W to achieve what a 5700X or 5800X can do at 65W and 105W respectively. The Ryzen chips even outperform it in emulators and in many modern PC games. Also, at the time anyway, this CPU was not a worthwhile upgrade over 8700K unless you had a specific use-case. The 8700K with an overclock got pretty much identical performance in most things and threw WAY less heat into the room. For me 9900K gave a nice boost in RPCS3 and a few compression related things and not much else. I ended up moving on from it earlier than planned and jumping to a 7900X3D. 3D V-cache gaming performance, combined with the high clock scaling of the non-3D CCD, in a 12c24t CPU makes it a perfect jack of all trades. Nearly twice as fast as 9900K in a few scenarios. That it can do all this at 120W makes the 9900K seem very silly indeed. Granted Zen 4 is a newer CPU by a few years, but that was the comparison I experienced. 10th and 11th gen only got hotter and more power hungry and Zen 4 spanks them pretty hard too. I used this CPU to push a 3080 and then a 3080Ti at 1440p and it did the job wonderfully. I'd still be using it if it weren't for emulators. The 9900K still gave me top-tier performance in most dedicated PC titles and did workstation tasks very nicely. My 7900X3D absolutely mauls it in RPCS3 and Dolphin though. And those are applications where CPU performance legitimately matters and can make a difference between playable and unplayable. Nowadays I wouldn't recommend buying this CPU new OR used. It's still expensive and you can match or beat its performance with a 5700X/3D or 5800X/3D for much cheaper, using less power, and on a platform with newer capabilities. If you can get it very cheap however, or are still using one, there's not an urgent need to get anything better. Particularly if you only use a mid-range GPU like a 4070 or game at 4K where the chance of a CPU bottleneck is less.
Review: Are you risky enough to go for medium price MB and beast 9900k? - At first I ordered the 9700k and Asus Z390 Prime-A motherboard. You may ask Why ASUS board why not Gigabyte etc? I used to use Asus all my life (beginning from core 2 duo processors or even Pentium 4). So, the system was ready to go and it was fast, quiet desktop with Fractal Design R4 case and Noctua D15 cooler( with two fans). No more fans than stock ones in my FD case (one for intake and other for outtake at the back). I OCed the system to 48Ghz at 1.26 Adaptive voltage or so (I don't remember exact number of voltage but 100% it was lower than 1.3v). And I created my computer and I looked at it and it was nice :) But then I started to view benchmarks, assessments in syntetic tests and noticed that 9700k is faster than 8700k in most cases. It faster than 7820x in most scenarios but.... But 9900k is much more faster in rendering, photo editing and streaming tasks. In two words, in those cases where multithreading takes place and all real cores + virtual cores are used at their 100%. And ... I made a decision to purchase 9900k. It's a costly investment but I thought I would sell my current X99 5820k computer + sell 9700k processor. It's as good as done. My 9900k was in my hands and.... And only then I discovered from various reviews about bad VRMs out there for medium line ASUS Z390 boards. I was frustrated. How come? Why ASUS did so? Should I buy new motherboard now? My Z390 Prime-A is a medium line MB (in one line with Strix and maybe a little worse than Z390 Maximus Hero). I started to research and came to conclusion (having tons of sources in the net, including video reviews + comments to them, articles, reviews from community etc etc) that my ASUS Z390 Prime-A will be suffice for 9900k with moderate OC. To which extent - this is the question. Will I surrender or try? Am I a risky person? No I am not. But... how hard I wanted to try... I could not control myself and I did it. So... ASUS z390 Prime-A + 9900k + 32Gb 4x8 Corsair Vengence + Noctua D15 + PSU Corsair 650X + two more 140mm fans for my case (one for upper outtake and one additional for front intake) Thermal paste I applied to the processor is Arctic MX2 Also, I must specifically note for people who will use the config. I used discreet graphics card (XFX RX 580), I did not use internal graphics. Maybe usage of internal graphics may cost you more in temperatures and wattage. When I first started my computer I entered BIOS and I STRONGLY RECOMMEND YOU TO IT: TURN MCE OFF IN BIOS. This is the most important thing you can do. Why? Main reason to do so is the MCE puts very high default voltage to the processor. Then increase power limits: Long Duration Package Limit is 190W Package power time window is 2sec Short duration power limit is 220W. Current CPU capability is 170% CPU SVID support Enabled VRM Spread Spectrum Disabled SVID Behaviour Typical Scenario IA AC and IA DC load lines to 0.01 CPU Load Line Level 5 (not sure this parameter works at all due to set previous ones to 0.01) VT-D enabled (ignore if you don't use virtual machines like VmWare or Virtualbox) VMX enabled (ignore if you don't use virtual machines like VmWare or Virtualbox) Now, I played a lot with core multipliers and voltages and came to these results: Core mutlipliers for 2 first cores: 50 Core mutlipliers for another 6 cores: 49 Cache multiplier 43 AVX offset: 3 (I strongly recommend to put this offset) Voltage: Adaptive (I know, many reviewers and commenters do not like adaptive voltage. I like it.) Adaptive Additional Turbo voltage 1.25 Adaptive Offset : +0.015 For memory I set XMP I profile (3200Ghz 16-18-18-36 2T) For your system these voltages may not be appropriate, all depends on your die's quality. Also I played a lot with offset for the Adaptive voltage (see below why). Now the system is ready to go. My ambient temperature in room is 22 C Tests I used: 1/ Prime95 Small FFT non-AVX version. 30 minutes with 4900 on all cores. CPU package temp (hottest core as usual): 75 C Total power to processor according to hwInfo utility: 177W (max) 2/ Prime 95 Small FFT AVX version 30 minutes with 4600 on all cores CPU package temp (hottest core as usual): 76 C Total power to processor according to hwInfo utility: 179W (max, though I notices some peaks to 181W rarely) Where I played the most was the Prime95 with AVX enabled. The issue was that some cores stopped intermittenly (one or two cores) during full load (in 5 minutes or even in 15 minutes). The community recommend to increase VCore a bit in that case. In the continuous process of playing with all this I came the above voltages. I suppose I could put 50 to all cores and 3 AVX offset and get 80 C temperatures but I did not do it as I don't like so high temps. Of course, with regular apps and even other stress testing apps like Cinebench, Realbench, Aida or Asus Exteme Tuning Utility you do not get those temps at all. I double you can actually load the processor that hard (16 threads with 100% load) with any regular app. Let alone for so continuous time... Also I tuned my fan curves so they spin at 90% when CPU temp goes upper than 65 C. So at high load even so super silent case like Fractal Design R4 is loud like a rocket. This all makes me conclude that all those talks about loose VRMs on these boards are no more than just talks. Of course I don't know for how long the processor + MB will last in my scenarios but it works nice so far (3 weeks) with regular loads: compilation, photo editing, virtual machines etc. From this point I can compare my old computer (Asus X99-E + 5820k overclocked to 4200Ghz) to this new one. Forgot to mention, by the way, I use NVME Samsung 960 EVO 500Gb drive in my system. On older one I used Samsung 860 EVO 500Gb. Everything runs faster, and works blaze faster on newer PC. The system with 5820k even OCed at 4200 was somewhat meditative at moments (maybe old Win7 OS with bunch of trash slowed it down or what). I will make additions to the review when I will have something to add.

## Features

- 8 Cores/ 16 Threads
- 3.60 GHz up to 5.00 GHz/ 16 MB Cache
- Compatible only with Motherboards based on Intel 300 Series Chipsets
- Intel Optane Memory supported
- Intel UHD Graphics 630

## Technical Specifications

| Specification | Value |
|---------------|-------|
| ASIN | B005404P9I |
| Best Sellers Rank | #69 in Computer CPU Processors |
| Brand | Intel |
| CPU Manufacturer | Intel |
| CPU Model | Core i9 |
| CPU Socket | LGA 1151 |
| CPU Speed | 5 GHz |
| Cache Memory Installed Size | 16 |
| Customer Reviews | 4.8 out of 5 stars 6,255 Reviews |
| Global Trade Identification Number | 00675901763660, 00735858392426 |
| Item Dimensions L x W | 2.91"L x 4.41"W |
| Item Type Name | Unlocked Desktop Processor |
| Item Weight | 0.5 Grams |
| Manufacturer | Intel |
| Mfr Part Number | BX80684I99900K |
| Model Number | BX80684I99900K |
| Platform | Not Machine Specific |
| Processor Brand | Intel |
| Processor Core Count | 8 |
| Processor Count | 8 |
| Processor Number of Concurrent Threads | 16 |
| Processor Series | Core i9 |
| Processor Socket | LGA 1151 |
| Processor Speed | 5 GHz |
| Secondary Cache | 16 MB |
| UPC | 735858392426 675901763660 |
| Warranty Description | Altering clock frequency or voltage may damage or reduce the useful life of the processor and other system components, and may reduce system stability and performance. Product warranties may not apply if the processor is operated beyond its specifications. Check with the manufacturers of system and components for additional details. |
| Wattage | 95 watts |

## Product Details

- **Brand:** Intel
- **CPU Manufacturer:** Intel
- **CPU Model:** Core i9
- **CPU Socket:** LGA 1151
- **CPU Speed:** 5 GHz

## Images

![Intel Core i9-9900K Desktop Processor 8 Cores up to 5.0 GHz Turbo Unlocked LGA1151 300 Series 95W - Image 1](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71VnctbNogL.jpg)
![Intel Core i9-9900K Desktop Processor 8 Cores up to 5.0 GHz Turbo Unlocked LGA1151 300 Series 95W - Image 2](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/61layBfXIyL.jpg)
![Intel Core i9-9900K Desktop Processor 8 Cores up to 5.0 GHz Turbo Unlocked LGA1151 300 Series 95W - Image 3](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71wVcm3qirL.jpg)

## Available Options

This product comes in different **Style** options.

## Questions & Answers

**Q: Is amazon going to have in stock on release date?**
A: I ordered on 10/20 and had to cancel it today on 11/13 and order it from newegg because they said the estimated date is 12/20. I don't think you should even bother ordering the i9 from amazon if you want it by any reasonable date....

**Q: is october 19th the estimated shipping date for all pre-orders?**
A: Not one person on Amazon got any shipment.  I think there was never any stock from Intel.
Only 50 units shipped out to Youtube reviewers a month ago and then Intel say can't disclose any testing results till after October 19th.

October 19th arrives but due to an Intel sponsored reviewer skewing the results in Intel's favor they feel it's better to not ship out the CPUs so no one can verify their own results for comparison to prove it was biased.

Regardless I still want the CPU I Pre-ordered.  Give me my octacore CPU damn it!

**Q: Does anyone have their cpu shipped yet on 10/19/18?**
A: I also ordered one from b&h since I didn’t know when my preorder would be available from amazon. I ordered it on 10/8 and they still haven’t shipped it either.  It was said to have an estimated ship date of 10/20 but like my amazon order it has not been shipped and i still have absolutely no updates on the order. Very odd that everyone is in the same boat.

**Q: These release on 10/19/2018 is the when they will ship?**
A: I pre-order from new-egg , from the siliconlottery website the 9900K will be ETA on novermber 11 ( was 10/26)

## Customer Reviews

### ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ A BEAST in its day
*by J***I on August 19, 2024*

This CPU was a monster when it came out. Intel was finally forced by Ryzen to put more than 4 cores on consumer chips and we got the 8700K and 9900K, two of the best CPUs ever for their respective eras. That Coffeelake was also the best IPC jump Intel had since Haswell made it a great platform. Both were fast enough to keep up for several generations. And being 8c16t, 9900K still has very relevant performance today. It still performs well in the latest titles excepting a few broken ones; especially so when overclocked. All that being said this was where Intel started to hit the wall with 'Lake' architecture, and it is a fairly power hungry CPU. With even a mild overclock to 4.9GHz this chip uses around 180-200W to achieve what a 5700X or 5800X can do at 65W and 105W respectively. The Ryzen chips even outperform it in emulators and in many modern PC games. Also, at the time anyway, this CPU was not a worthwhile upgrade over 8700K unless you had a specific use-case. The 8700K with an overclock got pretty much identical performance in most things and threw WAY less heat into the room. For me 9900K gave a nice boost in RPCS3 and a few compression related things and not much else. I ended up moving on from it earlier than planned and jumping to a 7900X3D. 3D V-cache gaming performance, combined with the high clock scaling of the non-3D CCD, in a 12c24t CPU makes it a perfect jack of all trades. Nearly twice as fast as 9900K in a few scenarios. That it can do all this at 120W makes the 9900K seem very silly indeed. Granted Zen 4 is a newer CPU by a few years, but that was the comparison I experienced. 10th and 11th gen only got hotter and more power hungry and Zen 4 spanks them pretty hard too. I used this CPU to push a 3080 and then a 3080Ti at 1440p and it did the job wonderfully. I'd still be using it if it weren't for emulators. The 9900K still gave me top-tier performance in most dedicated PC titles and did workstation tasks very nicely. My 7900X3D absolutely mauls it in RPCS3 and Dolphin though. And those are applications where CPU performance legitimately matters and can make a difference between playable and unplayable. Nowadays I wouldn't recommend buying this CPU new OR used. It's still expensive and you can match or beat its performance with a 5700X/3D or 5800X/3D for much cheaper, using less power, and on a platform with newer capabilities. If you can get it very cheap however, or are still using one, there's not an urgent need to get anything better. Particularly if you only use a mid-range GPU like a 4070 or game at 4K where the chance of a CPU bottleneck is less.

### ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ Are you risky enough to go for medium price MB and beast 9900k?
*by S***Y on February 11, 2019*

At first I ordered the 9700k and Asus Z390 Prime-A motherboard. You may ask Why ASUS board why not Gigabyte etc? I used to use Asus all my life (beginning from core 2 duo processors or even Pentium 4). So, the system was ready to go and it was fast, quiet desktop with Fractal Design R4 case and Noctua D15 cooler( with two fans). No more fans than stock ones in my FD case (one for intake and other for outtake at the back). I OCed the system to 48Ghz at 1.26 Adaptive voltage or so (I don't remember exact number of voltage but 100% it was lower than 1.3v). And I created my computer and I looked at it and it was nice :) But then I started to view benchmarks, assessments in syntetic tests and noticed that 9700k is faster than 8700k in most cases. It faster than 7820x in most scenarios but.... But 9900k is much more faster in rendering, photo editing and streaming tasks. In two words, in those cases where multithreading takes place and all real cores + virtual cores are used at their 100%. And ... I made a decision to purchase 9900k. It's a costly investment but I thought I would sell my current X99 5820k computer + sell 9700k processor. It's as good as done. My 9900k was in my hands and.... And only then I discovered from various reviews about bad VRMs out there for medium line ASUS Z390 boards. I was frustrated. How come? Why ASUS did so? Should I buy new motherboard now? My Z390 Prime-A is a medium line MB (in one line with Strix and maybe a little worse than Z390 Maximus Hero). I started to research and came to conclusion (having tons of sources in the net, including video reviews + comments to them, articles, reviews from community etc etc) that my ASUS Z390 Prime-A will be suffice for 9900k with moderate OC. To which extent - this is the question. Will I surrender or try? Am I a risky person? No I am not. But... how hard I wanted to try... I could not control myself and I did it. So... ASUS z390 Prime-A + 9900k + 32Gb 4x8 Corsair Vengence + Noctua D15 + PSU Corsair 650X + two more 140mm fans for my case (one for upper outtake and one additional for front intake) Thermal paste I applied to the processor is Arctic MX2 Also, I must specifically note for people who will use the config. I used discreet graphics card (XFX RX 580), I did not use internal graphics. Maybe usage of internal graphics may cost you more in temperatures and wattage. When I first started my computer I entered BIOS and I STRONGLY RECOMMEND YOU TO IT: TURN MCE OFF IN BIOS. This is the most important thing you can do. Why? Main reason to do so is the MCE puts very high default voltage to the processor. Then increase power limits: Long Duration Package Limit is 190W Package power time window is 2sec Short duration power limit is 220W. Current CPU capability is 170% CPU SVID support Enabled VRM Spread Spectrum Disabled SVID Behaviour Typical Scenario IA AC and IA DC load lines to 0.01 CPU Load Line Level 5 (not sure this parameter works at all due to set previous ones to 0.01) VT-D enabled (ignore if you don't use virtual machines like VmWare or Virtualbox) VMX enabled (ignore if you don't use virtual machines like VmWare or Virtualbox) Now, I played a lot with core multipliers and voltages and came to these results: Core mutlipliers for 2 first cores: 50 Core mutlipliers for another 6 cores: 49 Cache multiplier 43 AVX offset: 3 (I strongly recommend to put this offset) Voltage: Adaptive (I know, many reviewers and commenters do not like adaptive voltage. I like it.) Adaptive Additional Turbo voltage 1.25 Adaptive Offset : +0.015 For memory I set XMP I profile (3200Ghz 16-18-18-36 2T) For your system these voltages may not be appropriate, all depends on your die's quality. Also I played a lot with offset for the Adaptive voltage (see below why). Now the system is ready to go. My ambient temperature in room is 22 C Tests I used: 1/ Prime95 Small FFT non-AVX version. 30 minutes with 4900 on all cores. CPU package temp (hottest core as usual): 75 C Total power to processor according to hwInfo utility: 177W (max) 2/ Prime 95 Small FFT AVX version 30 minutes with 4600 on all cores CPU package temp (hottest core as usual): 76 C Total power to processor according to hwInfo utility: 179W (max, though I notices some peaks to 181W rarely) Where I played the most was the Prime95 with AVX enabled. The issue was that some cores stopped intermittenly (one or two cores) during full load (in 5 minutes or even in 15 minutes). The community recommend to increase VCore a bit in that case. In the continuous process of playing with all this I came the above voltages. I suppose I could put 50 to all cores and 3 AVX offset and get 80 C temperatures but I did not do it as I don't like so high temps. Of course, with regular apps and even other stress testing apps like Cinebench, Realbench, Aida or Asus Exteme Tuning Utility you do not get those temps at all. I double you can actually load the processor that hard (16 threads with 100% load) with any regular app. Let alone for so continuous time... Also I tuned my fan curves so they spin at 90% when CPU temp goes upper than 65 C. So at high load even so super silent case like Fractal Design R4 is loud like a rocket. This all makes me conclude that all those talks about loose VRMs on these boards are no more than just talks. Of course I don't know for how long the processor + MB will last in my scenarios but it works nice so far (3 weeks) with regular loads: compilation, photo editing, virtual machines etc. From this point I can compare my old computer (Asus X99-E + 5820k overclocked to 4200Ghz) to this new one. Forgot to mention, by the way, I use NVME Samsung 960 EVO 500Gb drive in my system. On older one I used Samsung 860 EVO 500Gb. Everything runs faster, and works blaze faster on newer PC. The system with 5820k even OCed at 4200 was somewhat meditative at moments (maybe old Win7 OS with bunch of trash slowed it down or what). I will make additions to the review when I will have something to add.

### ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ Keep your expectations in check!
*by T***8 on January 24, 2019*

First, I'd like to start off by saying gaming isn't my primary focus. I use my builds for work first, gaming second (a very close second). I've gone through 3 different CPU's in the past year. Started off with a I7-3960x, then to an I7-8700k, then to a I9-7900x, and then finally landed on the I9-9900k. Seeing as how Xeon's are out of the question both in price and practicality; higher end consumer chips are a good bargain for people like me. I work primarily with Autodesk Maya and use Arnold or V-Ray as my renderer of choice. So core count and freq are important to me. Since I focus on viewport performance, single threaded performance is paramount for me as it's key for great gaming as well. The 9900k does this beautifully. Logic would have dictated that the 8700k would have worked just fine....and it did but, those 6 cores really showed it's weakness when V-Ray rendered out particle simulations such as smoke. Thats when I figured I'd get the 7900x as it's got 10 cores and it should shred through renders; and it did but, I lost out on single threaded performance in viewport and while animating. So, intel released this bad boy; it seemed to good to be true and required me to lose pcie lanes and switch back to z series chipset. For me it was a worthwhile expenditure. Cinebench scores for me were the deciding factor. My 7900x ran a 2243 @ 4.5ghz on all cores (custom loop). The 8700k ran a 1400 -1500 on a dark rock pro 4 @ 4.7ghz on all cores. My 9900k @ 5ghz on all cores on a dark rock pro 4 ran a 2086. That was impressive to me; sure the temps were a bit uncomfortable for me as anything over 65c to me is close to tjunc (I know I'm dramatic) but, when I leave a render on for hours or even days I want the assurance knowing my build isn't going to fry. So backing down the 5ghz OC on the 9900k to 4.7ghz all core, I'm at a comfy 65-70c on AIR. The performance gain while working in viewport in maya is NOTICEABLE and worth the expenses. Most who purchase this CPU aren't doing my line of work and want it for gaming; at least from my research and for gaming. This CPU crushes anything I've thrown at it. I have this cpu paired with a EVGA 2080 Ti FTW3 in a Fractal Meshify C Mini and neither of my components have hit over 70c while gaming on my X34P on any game I've played at Max! Subnautica 144 hz Avg HIGH Preset/Filmic Filter GR Wildlands 100hz AVG Very High OW 160Hz Avg Epic/100% Scale BO4 140 hz Avg Very High MHW 90 hz Avg High Preset (also MHW doesn't support 21:9 if anyone knows how to get it to please let me know) In closing: Pros - -Exceptional single threaded performance for workstation and gaming loads -16 Core turbo 4.7ghz on air stable AF render performance in Arnold is Amazing! Cons - -16 Pcie lanes -Gets a bit hot for my comfort Final thoughts: Unfortunately technology isn't where we'd all like it to be right now. We want 24 Cores @ 7ghz no OC running at 30c on a hyper 212. So for now, keep your expectations in check understand what you're purchasing and you won't be disappointed. I know I'm not.

## Frequently Bought Together

- Intel Core i9-9900K Desktop Processor 8 Cores up to 5.0 GHz Turbo Unlocked LGA1151 300 Series 95W
- ARCTIC MX-4 (4 g) - Premium Performance Thermal Paste for All Processors (CPU, GPU - PC), Very high Thermal Conductivity, Long Durability, Safe Application, Non-Conductive
- GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS PRO Wi-Fi (Intel LGA1151/Z390/ATX/2xM.2 Thermal Guard/Onboard AC Wi-Fi/RGB Fusion/Gaming Motherboard)

---

## Why Shop on Desertcart?

- 🛒 **Trusted by 1.3+ Million Shoppers** — Serving international shoppers since 2016
- 🌍 **Shop Globally** — Access 737+ million products across 21 categories
- 💰 **No Hidden Fees** — All customs, duties, and taxes included in the price
- 🔄 **15-Day Free Returns** — Hassle-free returns (30 days for PRO members)
- 🔒 **Secure Payments** — Trusted payment options with buyer protection
- ⭐ **TrustPilot Rated 4.5/5** — Based on 8,000+ happy customer reviews

**Shop now:** [https://www.desertcart.co.uk/products/82233783-intel-core-i9-9900k-desktop-processor-8-cores-up-to](https://www.desertcart.co.uk/products/82233783-intel-core-i9-9900k-desktop-processor-8-cores-up-to)

---

*Product available on Desertcart United Kingdom*
*Store origin: GB*
*Last updated: 2026-05-21*