Originally Posted by aayman_farzand
I would hold off on statements such as marginal gaming differences between 3900X and 10900K. Its clear that a lot of the gaming benches are getting GPU bottlenecked so the maximum performance still remains to be seen. Over time the gap should widen and that time isn't really that far off.
Please post your results. I was looking to do the same but didn't pull the trigger. I'm already stable at 5.1 but the temps seem to high so I just keep it running at 5.0. no AVX offset.
What do you mean no upgrade path? I thought Gen 11 is supposed to work on Z490 as well. If that's the case then the upgrade path is the same as the 3900x, one additional generation.
Dude, you are contemplating delidding? Are you kidding? Delidding with liquid metal is easily worth 25C. Here's Prime95 small FFT whilst also mining crypto on Nicehash (1080 Ti @ 250W as seen in Hwinfo64) back when the delid was new with 300W less radiator surface area and single D5 only at 70% RPM (60-65C):
Originally Posted by MrTOOSHORT
There is stock of 10900Ks at newegg.ca, just got one!
Edit: all gone, must have had only a few in stock. I just happen to check my bookmark, and I had time to snag one.
Congrats I guess, my pre-order for Valve Index and Half Life Alyx finally popped up, about $1080 after tax, or the equivalent of a 10900k, motherboard and ram. To me picking up VR is a much more worthwhile way to spend $1k but I guess if your form of entertainment is having the best CPU score on 3DMark, more power to you. 10900k presents marginal gains outside of 3DMark for anyone with a 14nm Intel CPU from Coffee Lake forward (I nearly want to say Kaby Lake and Sky Lake but the going from 4 to 6 cores presented a rather substantial increase in multi-threaded performance, whereas there are basically marginal gains going from 8700k to 10900k as evidenced by Gamers Nexus 10600k review in my previous post here).
Originally Posted by maltamonk
No it's not. It's only marginally better. Considering that it lacks in every other aspect by a much larger margin...ya...definitely not convincing. That said the 10700k isn't a good buy either. Maybe the i5 might be at 1080p, but neither the i7 nor the i9 are worth buying unless they drop the price massively (like $100) imo.
As far as faulting ppl buying the overpriced chips...ya I can see a reason to. They are supporting Intel putting out marginal products at bad prices. They sustain stagnation.
Bingo, someone else gets it, this is exactly what I said elsewhere here recently. Intel knows they can keep drip feeding us iterative garbage because they know that those those short on smarts and flush with cash will buy anything they offer, not understanding that it's this very demand that continues to perpetuate the iterative refresh cycle. If we didn't buy 9th series CPU's because they offered no real meaningful performance above 8th gen then Intel would have been forced to release Rocket Lake early. All of this nonsense about how Intel is having problems dropping the node to 10nm is just hogwash. If there was no longer any demand for 14++++++++++++++++++++++ they would have released 10nm node real fast.