Question I9-9900k vs I9-9900ks no bios update available

[Imacflier]

Hi, Guys,

I am upgrading the cpu in an HP Elitedesk 800 G5. It currently has an I5-9500 and I want to install an I9-9900ks. The latest HP bios supports the I9-9900k and there is no update to support the I9-9900ks. So, what will happen if I install the I9-9900ks anyway? I can imagine several alternatives: It simply will not work, It will work as if I had installed the I9-9900k ignoring the ability of the I9-9900ks to turbo boost all 8 cores, or it will do something odd with the BIOS commands.

Have any of you any recommendations or speculations or some experience using a CPU which needs a BIOS update but does not receive it?

Please advise,

TIA,

Larry

 

[MrN1ce9uy]

In most cases it simply will not work.

 

[geofelt]

If the motherboard supports the I9-9900K, then I speculate that it would operate ok with the 9900KS.
Sometimes, bios support is merely documentation.
What is your plan B if the 9900ks utterly fails?
I do not think that the performance difference between K and KS is really all that important compared to the upgrade from i5-9500

 

[Imacflier]

Geofelt,

Thanks for the reply. HP Tech Support could not seem to understand that 'K' is not equal to 'KS', so it may be supported inspite of the lack of matching documentation.

My plan B is to use an I9-9900k. I have one of each.

Thanks again,


Larry

 

[Imacflier]

In most cases it simply will not work.

MrN1ce9uy​

Is your opinion based on experience or conjecture?

In either case, thanks for the response,

Larry

 

[geofelt]

Geofelt,

Thanks for the reply. HP Tech Support could not seem to understand that 'K' is not equal to 'KS', so it may be supported inspite of the lack of matching documentation.

My plan B is to use an I9-9900k. I have one of each.

Thanks again,


Larry

It is good that you can try them both out.
HP may have a proprietary motherboard and not have any ability to control what the processor does.
I might also warn you to plan your testing carefully and limit the number of cpu insertions to the socket.
I think the socket is good for only 15 insertions.

 

[MrN1ce9uy]

MrN1ce9uy​

Is your opinion based on experience or conjecture?

In either case, thanks for the response,

Larry

It is based on experience such as this most recent one:

Brand new parts..

MSI H510I PRO WIFI Mini ITX LGA1200
+
Intel® Celeron G-5900 Desktop Processor 2 Cores 3.4 GHz LGA1200
=
Did not boot.

Replaced with Pentium G6400 and it worked just fine.

Reason was because the G5900 was not on the CPU support list for the motherboard. It is a 400 series chipset compatible CPU (which should work fine [at least one would think] with the 500 series chipset motherboard that has backwards compatibility with 400 series CPUs. However, it is simply one CPU that is not on the list of supported CPUs.

On the other hand, I have seen Intel CPUs work on motherboards that did not mention them specifically. I've also seen Intel motherboards quit working after using unsupported CPUs for only a few days leaving the motherboard dead. That was back in the days of the Core 2 Quad CPUs and motherboards that only supported Core 2 Duos.

The i9-9900K is a 95W CPU and the 9900KS is a 127W CPU. There may be a reason your HP proprietary motherboard only supports the 9900K and not the 9900KS. Using a more powerful CPU in a motherboard that only supports less powerful CPUs sounds like a bad scenario to me.

Best to stick with the compatibility list.

 

[Imacflier]

MrN1ce9uy​

Your point about the 95 wt vs 127 wt is quite valid and concerned me greatly. To deal with that I am using an HP powerbrick from an HP laptop which provides 350 wts. To deal with tlhe cooling issue I have upgraded the heatsink to the 95 wt version used with the I9-9900k. The only fan used with the heatsink is a tiny little cpu fan that looks like it was repurposed from a lap top. I am uncomfortable with that and am adding a 140mm high static pressure fan as a case fan blowing directly on the heatsink. It is slaved to the cpu fan for speed control. I am still concerned about the VRMs although they are cooled by the heatsink through thermal pads.

Have you other concerns I might have missed?

Thanks for your input!

Larry

 

[MrN1ce9uy]

MrN1ce9uy​

Your point about the 95 wt vs 127 wt is quite valid and concerned me greatly. To deal with that I am using an HP powerbrick from an HP laptop which provides 350 wts. To deal with tlhe cooling issue I have upgraded the heatsink to the 95 wt version used with the I9-9900k. The only fan used with the heatsink is a tiny little cpu fan that looks like it was repurposed from a lap top. I am uncomfortable with that and am adding a 140mm high static pressure fan as a case fan blowing directly on the heatsink. It is slaved to the cpu fan for speed control. I am still concerned about the VRMs although they are cooled by the heatsink through thermal pads.

Have you other concerns I might have missed?

Thanks for your input!

Larry

Is this the Small Form Factor case? I would like to see the cooler that comes in there for the 9900K. I struggled to cool an i9-9900K with a Noctua NH-U14S in a Phanteks Enthoo Pro M case because it would reach above 90C under heavy loads and stress testing.

 

[geofelt]

Can you supply a photo of the proposed cooler?
The cooling capacity is somewhat related to the fin volume of the cooler.
You will likely not be able to let either processor ramp up to the maximum power consumption.
Since the KS is a better binned processor, I might guess at at any given level of power, it would be a bit more efficient.
If your usage is for multithreaded apps that can fill all threads, there may well be throttling and some voltage reductions will be required.
But, if it is for normal desktop work, only a few cores will be active and heat may not be an issue.

 

[Imacflier]

Is this the Small Form Factor case? I would like to see the cooler that comes in there for the 9900K. I struggled to cool an i9-9900K with a Noctua NH-U14S in a Phanteks Enthoo Pro M case because it would reach above 90C under heavy loads and stress testing.

This is a link to the best pic of the heat sink I can find quickly: https://h30434.www3.hp.com/t5/Deskt...ons/upgrade-elitedesk-800-g5-cpu/td-p/8208422 At least it is all copper!

This is the EliteDesk 800 G5 mini, not the SFF. It is only about 7"x7"x1-1/2". That 140mm fan requires cutting an opening nearly the full size of the top!

 

[rickypicky5]

MrN1ce9uy​

Your point about the 95 wt vs 127 wt is quite valid and concerned me greatly. To deal with that I am using an HP powerbrick from an HP laptop which provides 350 wts. To deal with tlhe cooling issue I have upgraded the heatsink to the 95 wt version used with the I9-9900k. The only fan used with the heatsink is a tiny little cpu fan that looks like it was repurposed from a lap top. I am uncomfortable with that and am adding a 140mm high static pressure fan as a case fan blowing directly on the heatsink. It is slaved to the cpu fan for speed control. I am still concerned about the VRMs although they are cooled by the heatsink through thermal pads.

Have you other concerns I might have missed?

Thanks for your input!

Larry

Where are you buying the 'HP powerbrick from an HP laptop which provides 350 wts'? Just curious, I can't seem to locate that powerbrick via Google.

 

[geofelt]

OH MY!!
Be prepared to cut down on the number of cores and the voltage you will be using.
That cooler is tiny. The air intake area is so minimal that I really doubt that a 140mm fan intake is going to do any good.
Try what you have first before proceeding.

 

[MrN1ce9uy]

What exactly are you trying to achieve by doing this? What are you using the PC for that the i5 is not enough?

 

[Imacflier]

Primarily gaming using an externally mounted rtx3060 (I have dreams of an rtx3090), but also CAD and rendering. The multiple cores should prove particulaly useful on rendering. There is also the fact I do not expect to have time to ever build another system (I am now north of 80!)

The 19vdc powerbrick was purchased on Ebay. I will get you the data when I have time to dig out the brick.