Originally Posted by keikei
I hadn't seen that one, but I saw a different one which was a bit more positive for the 10900K. I do appreciate the fact that the current GPU gen doesn't really bottleneck on the 8700K though. But I'm thinking this might change when the RTX 3090 gets released. Perhaps I should just wait and see - should hopefully come out around September.
Originally Posted by cstkl1
Since i have both @5.1 daily.. both rig with 2080ti..
Fps wise for just gaming the 8700k about da same
But when i run other stuff like recording [email protected]
:4:4 1440p.. 10900k better
2080ti literally wont fly until u hit 5.1 on 8700k..
if you dont have a good ocer 8700k
If you runalot of background stuff
Go for 10900k
I had a [email protected]
as well. To be honest the jump from 10700k to 10900k was marginal. But to advise somebody to get a 10700k that can overclock to 5.1.. not so easy. All 10900k does 5.1 easy . Tested 6 with 2 of then one of the worst binned sp rating of 57. No problem with AIO running prime95 small fft avx disable
Temps wise 10900k is cooler because its better binned by intel.
I haven't overclocked mine at all (sacrilege, I know, considering which forum this is). I did clock it to 5GHz on all cores just after I got it, but I wasn't very lucky with the lottery on mine. I can only get a stable 4,8GHz on all cores without it melting down (running a very good air cooler, Noctua NH-D14, and a case with very good cooling all around with a good intake / exhaust fan setup). It's been a minor source of annoyment since I got it.
Doesn't help that Star Citizen (the unending alpha) absolutely tanks my CPU, maxing it completely at times.
Originally Posted by chessmyantidrug
I don't think it's worth it. The i7-8700K performs similarly to the i5-10600K, which performs very closely to the i9-10900K. It would only be worth it if you want to take the time to optimize your RAM as much as possible. Comet Lake seems to have much better memory controllers. Still, at 1440p, I don't think there's enough of a performance boost to justify the cost. A new video card later this year makes much more sense.
Well, I'm running the most expensive RAM I could find at the time I got it. But of course, my motherboard doesn't support the 4000MHz config, so I have to run them at around 3400. Timings are probably worse too than on the XMP profile. Another minor reason I want to get a new motherboard. I'm definitely getting the RTX 3090 right after it comes out. If I didn't run VR, I wouldn't bother just yet, but my current VR setup is so demanding that nothing is ever good enough, on some games.
Originally Posted by Betroz
Get the new Phanteks P500A case. If you need a ton of 3.5 inch harddrives, then maybe not.
I only have 4 drives in my gaming desktop. Have a media server in my living room with a 10TB raid, so I don't need that much space on my desktop (still have 9TB though, but I have a ****load of Steam games). I see the case you are talking about is a midi tower though. That's far too cramped to work in for my liking. I currently have a Thermaltake Level 10 GT, and even that is on the border of what I am comfortable with, size wise. Plus, I like the look of the 1000D. Haven't made up my mind though, so I'm still looking.
Edit: I see you are a fellow Norwegian, and also that you have a 10900K. Happy with it?
Originally Posted by 0451
A 10900k is not worthwhile but a 10700k is. Cheaper and better all-core clock speed than 10900k.
Price difference isn't that great, and I would lose 2C/4T and some single thread performance, which I really care about. Have a few games that are very CPU taxing and which only supports 1 core (X3: Terran Conflict, for one). X4 isn't too hot on multicores either. I'm basically looking for the very best single core performer, which seems to be the 10900K, right now.