Originally Posted by Betroz
Heisann, ja det stemmer
I'm happy with my 10900K, more so than my 9900K cause I get 5.0-5.1 Ghz on all cores. That and a higher RAM speed since the IMC is better too. But the chip runs hot (at 5.1 Ghz and up), so I highly recommend getting an 280mm or 360mm AIO. Having said that, why not wait until Intel Rocket Lake comes out? That chip will have PCI-E 4.0 support. Or...go for AMD Ryzen 4000 at the end of the year.
Btw check out my thread on the Phanteks P500A case here : https://www.diskusjon.no/topic/18639...eclipse-p500a/
Not gonna go the closed water loop route again, so it'll have to make do with a high end air cooler. Haven't been that interested in OC anyway since the first gen i7 days, where I ran an i7 930 at 4.2 or 4.3GHz for years (2.8GHz stock). The gains have never been the same since that. PCI-E 4.0 won't net me anything at all, and since a 2080Ti BARELY pushes past PCI-E 3.0 x8 speeds, it won't be an issue for years and years to come. I'll be surprised if the new RTX 3090 is more than 30% faster than the 2080Ti (in non-RTX games, which is 99,99% of all games).
That case looks nice, but it's too small for my taste. Might have been interested if it was big tower sized.
Originally Posted by Princess Garnet
Right now, there's not a whole lot to be gained from going to an 8 core CPU for gaming. If you were on a quad core CPU that needed upgraded, and were asking about it, I'd say it's a worthwhile consideration if longevity was a concern. But since you're already on a good 6 core CPU, it's a different matter. That being said, you mentioned a game that taxes your current CPU; does this simply mean it is the CPU that is the limit and not the GPU, or that it actively uses the majority/all of the cores/threads you have? In the case of the latter, you MAY see benefit from more cores or threads. In general, 6 core/12 thread CPUs are fine, and above that is where diminishing returns are (in most of gaming at least) for now.
That being said, you mentioned you had disposable income, so if you're asking because you have an upgrade tempt to scratch, that is up to you. Just be aware and temper your expectations accordingly; you're basically gaining cores and threads but raw/gaming performance won't go up in the majority of titles yet.
I really don't see the point in spending four figures for a motherboard though either way, not unless you fall into a spot where you KNOW you need it for something it offers. I can't speak much for which particular motherboard is good or not for Intel, but it mostly comes down to making sure it has the features you need, and performs well (has the VRMs and such to support what you're after). You probably don't need a $350 motherboard, let alone a $1,000 motherboard to get this. But, again, if the income is disposable and you just WANT to do something, I guess that is reason enough. Just, again, be aware you're probably spending the extra for nothing when you could get the same from a board way less than a third of the price, so I'd put the money towards a new graphics card, monitor, storage, anything, or just save it. Spending an extra couple hundred dollars on a really small difference on the CPU, even if it's a far worse value, I still sort of get if the income is disposable, but I really don't see the point of motherboards at such a price point. Maybe I'm just not the target audience though.
You can try to manually adjust the timings to match what they would be at 4000 MHz at the current 3200 MHz you're running it at and it SHOULD be capable of it (at least, the RAM itself certainly is).
The games I was talking about either max the CPU completely (100% on all threads as is the case of Star Citizen - which is an unoptimized buggy mess, to be frank), or maxes out however many threads the lazy devs saw fit to program in. I know that the 10900K won't be good enough either to remedy all this. Nothing is. Been the same with graphics cards for many years, for me. Nothing is good enough. But that also means I want the best, always (within reason - considered the RTX Titan, but it's just stupid expensive for the incremental gaming upgrade over the 2080Ti).
The CPU may not do a whole lot for me now, but I'm fairly certain that it could net me some modest gains (in certain games) when I upgrade to an RTX 3090. Since the 3000 series is set to launch in September this year, I might as well start upgrading now. I really wanted to get an enthusiast level Intel CPU this time around (Extreme edition), but they simply aren't as good for gaming, which is kind of frustrating. So I guess I'll have to go mainstream once again.
I see your points regarding the motherboards. I'm not going to buy a $1000 motherboard. I'll likely just get the $400 or whatever one. Had an Asus Maximus Hero before, and was very happy with it. More so than my current MSI one. Just hope to whatever deity is up there that it actually supports my damn RAM chips. According to the Asus web site, it supports almost the exact same chips (but the supported ones are CL18, not CL19 like mine). Another website lists them as compatible with that particular motherboard (but not the one I have now, which is correct). Guess I'll see. Probably gonna order everything tonight. Been going back and forth a few times now, over the past couple of months.