The peak TDP is another controversial point. Interesting page from the Anandtech review: https://www.anandtech.com/show/13400/intel-9th-gen-core-i9-9900k-i7-97

The peak TDP is another controversial point. Interesting page from the Anandtech review: https://www.anandtech.com/show/13400/intel-9th-gen-core-i9-9900k-i7-9700k-i5-9600k-review/21 https://www.anandtech.com/show/13400/intel-9th-gen-core-i9-9... Fully loading an i9-9900K will consume 170W. Note that this is POV-Ray, a ray tracer, which can be reasonably defined as real-world application. When stress tests are performed, like the following: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/stress-test-cpu-pc-guide,5461-2.html https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/stress-test-cpu-pc-guid... the peak is 205W, which is extremely high (when compared to the touted 95W TDP). AMD is actually transparent on the ThreadRipper power requirements - the reported TDP is 180W, and stress tests confirm that value for several models. In this respect, Intel is arguably cheating. I wonder if AMD could get an advantage (marketing and benchmark-wise), by declaring a low TDP of 95W, while having an effective 200+ one.