One of the interesting developments of Intel’s 9th Generation Core processors for desktops, known as the S-series, was that the company decided to release versions of the hardware with the graphics disabled in order to use every chip from the wafer. At the time Intel was criticised on its pricing: it was offering the same processor minus graphics for the same bulk unit cost, with no discount. Today Intel is adjusting its strategy, and pricing these F and KF processors lower than before.

Nearly every 9th Generation Core processor for the desktop has a corresponding graphics-free option: the Core i9-9900K has its Core i9-9900KF, the Core i5-9500 has a Core i5-9500F. The difference between these two parts is just a matter of disabled graphics, which means the user can’t take advantage of Intel’s QuickSync or a display, however most of these processors end up in systems with discrete graphics cards anyway. At the time of launch, Intel priced them identically to the parts that did have graphics, but ultimately retail outlets were selling the K and KF processors at a small discount. Intel’s announcement today makes that price difference official.

Intel 9th Gen Core CPUs
AnandTech Cores Base
Freq
Turbo
Freq
IGP IGP
Freq
DDR4 TDP Old
Price
(1ku)
New
Price
(1ku)
i9-9900K 8 / 16 3.6 GHz 5.0 GHz UHD 630 1200 2666 95 W $488 $488
i9-9900KF 8 / 16 3.6 GHz 5.0 GHz - - 2666 95 W $488 $463
i7-9700K 8 / 8 3.6 GHz 4.9 GHz UHD 630 1200 2666 95 W $374 $374
i7-9700KF 8 / 8 3.6 GHz 4.9 GHz - - 2666 95 W $374 $349
i7-9700F 8 / 8 3.6 GHz 4.9 GHz - - 2666 65 W $335 $298
i5-9600K 6 / 6 3.7 GHz 4.6 GHz UHD 630 1150 2666 95 W $262 $262
i5-9600KF 6 / 6 3.7 GHz 4.6 GHz - - 2666 95 W $262 $237
i5-9500 6 / 6 3.0 GHz 4.4 GHz UHD 630 1100 2666 65 W $192 $192
i5-9500F 6 / 6 3.0 GHz 4.4 GHz - - 2666 65 W $192 $167
i5-9400 6 / 6 2.9 GHz 4.1 GHz UHD 630 1050 2666 65 W $182 $182
i5-9400F 6 / 6 2.9 GHz 4.1 GHz - - 2666 65 W $182 $157
i3-9350KF 4 / 4 4.0 GHz 4.6 GHz - - 2400 91 W $169 $148
i3-9100 4 / 4 3.6 GHz 4.2 GHz UHD 630 1000 2400 65 W $122 $122
i3-9100F 4 / 4 3.6 GHz 4.2 GHz - - 2400 65 W $122 $97

As mentioned when the F and KF processors were first announced, if users were to put a price tag on Intel’s integrated graphics, what would it be? A cynic might suggest that Intel put that value at $0, and is now increasing it to around $25 depending on the part. Depending on how Intel implements its Gen11 graphics (or Gen12) into future desktop processors is going to be interesting, in case we see more F and KF variants in the future.

Intel states that this price change is in effect as of today. As this price change effects its OEM bulk pricing (prices given for 1000 units), it may take some time to filter down to the end-user based on stock levels at retailers and OEMs, for those that don’t already have a price difference.

Related Reading

 

POST A COMMENT

48 Comments

View All Comments

  • Zoolook13 - Tuesday, October 8, 2019 - link

    Sorry for the long sentence, blame the nonexisting editing possibilities. Reply
  • regsEx - Monday, October 7, 2019 - link

    APUs are far more popular. And not only because of business and average home users. It's useful for gamers and overclockers as well, as you don't have to connect huge graphics card, when not needed or when it's broken, which happens quite often. And when devs will finally deprecate DX11, there is useful multi GPU feature of DX12. Reply
  • Death666Angel - Monday, October 7, 2019 - link

    "which happens quite often" uh, huh? I've had zero GPUs get broken by me and I'm in the business of PC gaming since the TNT2 M64. Overclockers generally don't want to use iGPUs (unless they want a WR for iGPU OC) since that will skew the results of any CPU OC and most overclockers are also interested in combined OC. Most gamers that are not on a budget want that huge GPU to be able to play all titles at acceptable visual levels without low FPS hindering their enjoyment. And if even AMD and Nvidia aren't investing any resources into multi GPU setups these days (when they can directly benefit fincancially from it) I doubt just going with DX12 will suddenly make asynchronus multi GPU setups between iGPU and dGPUs viable. Reply
  • Death666Angel - Monday, October 7, 2019 - link

    No TDP gets wasted on inactive iGPUs. Reply
  • Edkiefer - Monday, October 7, 2019 - link

    The biggest issue I have with there lineup has nothing to do with F pricing but the lack of lower than 9900 with HT. Right now you can get an 8 thread CPU, but need to go to 9900, 16 thread part, there should be a 12 thread (6/12 CPU) one. Reply
  • drexnx - Monday, October 7, 2019 - link

    their segmentation doesn't allow it - where would it fit? the i5? there would be cases where a 6/12 i5 might beat the 8/8 i7; can't have that! Reply
  • Edkiefer - Monday, October 7, 2019 - link

    It depends on the application, right now there a huge gap in thread #, 8 to next is 16 and only in top CPU. Sure I know why they do it, just saying it's not good IMO :) Reply
  • shabby - Monday, October 7, 2019 - link

    It's funny how only their top of the line cpu had ht, pathetic. Reply
  • Great_Scott - Monday, October 7, 2019 - link

    It looked like Intel was depreciaing HT, I assumed it was for memory security reasons, but then they still have it for the 9900-series.

    So I have no idea what they're thinking. Maybe no-HT allows for higher clocks?
    Reply
  • Korguz - Monday, October 7, 2019 - link

    or, you want HT ?? you will need to buy this cpu instead, and intel will gladly take your money, too :-) Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now