• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Intel Core i9-10900 10-core CPU Pictured

ARF

Joined
Jan 28, 2020
Messages
35 (1.75/day)
i don't think they're stupid to add 2 cores with overall lower clocks as they'll gain nothing...
More threads is always better. In gaming + streaming, 8 cores at super high clocks might be not enough and the additional 2 cores / 4 threads could come very handy to offload the other threads and relieve the framerate.

It all comes to the price, though. There is no bad product, there is bad pricing.
 

hat

Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
20,822 (4.30/day)
Location
Ohio
System Name Starlifter :: Dragonfly
Processor i7 2600k 4.4GHz :: Athlon II x4 630 3.5GHz
Motherboard ASUS P8P67 Pro :: GIgabyte GA-770T-USB3
Cooling Corsair H70 :: Thermaltake Big Typhoon
Memory 2x4GB DDR3 1866 :: 2x1GB DDR3 1333
Video Card(s) 2x PNY GTX1070 :: none
Storage Plextor M5s 128GB, WDC Black 500GB :: Mushkin Enhanced 60GB SSD, WD RE3 1TB
Display(s) Acer P216HL HDMI :: None
Case Antec SOHO 1030B :: Old White Full Tower
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty Pro - iLive IT153B Soundbar (optical) :: None
Power Supply FSP Hydro GE 550w :: something
Software Windows 10 Pro - Plex Server on Dragonfly
Benchmark Scores >9000
Why would it be different? These CPUs are sold to the same clients (maybe putting gamers aside).
It's the same boost-idle-boost-idle cycle.

Actually it's the other way round (Intel vs AMD in expectations). AMD looks great in Cinebench or batch encoding. People buy them, run a few benchmarks, post results on forums - great. And one day they notice that their office laptop boots quicker, opens websites faster and actually is perfectly fine for everything they need. So why did they buy this huge desktop? And how to use 12 cores?

LOL on crunching workloads. How many people here actually do some heavy computing on their uber fast PCs? And I mean concious useful activity, not running benchmarks and distributed computing projects.

Also, you would have to manually limit the CPU to force it to run at those 2.8GHz (which will happen in SFF OEM machines). Leave it alone, provide decent airflow - it'll boost all day long if needed.
Ugh, this again. It's okay if an expensive, high performance 10 core chip runs slow all the time because nobody does anything with their computers except open web pages and word documents, and now distributed computing projects aren't useful... :(
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2019
Messages
247 (2.40/day)
Location
Nuremberg
Processor Core i7 8700K@5 GHz
Motherboard MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon
Cooling 2xEKWB Rads, EKWB Reservoir 250, Aqua Computer Kryos Next CPU Cooler, Phanteks Glacier GPU Cooler
Memory 16 GB DDR4 GSkill Trident Z 3200
Video Card(s) Asus ROG STRIX RTX 2080 O8G (GPU@2115 MHz/VRAM@7800MHz)
Storage 1x Samsung Evo 840 SSD 256, 1x WD Blue 1 TB HDD
Display(s) Asus ROG Swift PG248 1080p Display/144Hz/G-Sync
Case Fractal Design R6 with Window
Audio Device(s) Realtek onboard
Power Supply be quiet 650W Straight Power
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Cherry KB
Software Win 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores FireStrike: 25953/Extreme: 13141/Ultra: 7099/TimeSpy: 11426/Superposition: 7667/CinebenchR20: 3916
I think if they came out with a 9700K version of this series - a 10 core with no HT for a reasonable price it would be a winner.
Why without HT? Rumours are that they offer an i7 10700K, 8 cores with HT, and pricepoint below 400. That is the pricepoint of a Ryzen 3800X and would be better in gaming than 3900X/3950X.
 
Joined
Dec 6, 2016
Messages
66 (0.06/day)
10c/20t ringbus @ 5GHz all-core (K version). Hm.. it's definitely going to be a beast.

Remain gaming king and add MT performance. If only I could use my current Z390 mobo.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
1,015 (0.25/day)
Location
I live in Norway, in the province Buskerud.
System Name 3 sys spec seperated by "|"
Processor R9 3900| R7 1700 @3.75 | Xeon 2680v2
Motherboard Asrock X570M | AB350M Pro 4 | HP Z620
Cooling Air | Air | air
Memory 64gb G.skill SniperX @3600 CL16 | 64gb | 128 gb
Video Card(s) EK-FC - RX Vega 64 | server | GTX970
Storage MP510 2TB, 660P 2TB, 2x860 evo 1tb | 960 500gb Intel 660P 1tb PM871 4x256gb ++| various intel ssd's.
Display(s) AOC 28" 4K something + 1440p 144hz something.
Case Phanteks EvolvX M-Atx
Power Supply Corsair RM850
Mouse G402
Keyboard TT Meka G1
Skylake's 6700K was a 4GHz all core part, 4.2GHz singlecore. It was faster in games than anything that came before it with any number of cores.

Intel's IPC hasn't changed at all since that time, so we can directly compare the clockspeeds.

As long as the new chips aren't throttling below 4GHz on 4 core workloads, or 4.2GHz single core, then they'll still be as fast or faster than the hardware that was top of the line when those games came out. I really don't think anyone needs to worry about their 6700K outperforming their 10900K as a result of lost clockspeeds - there's just no way a 4 core load is going to be so impossible to cool that it'll need to run at 3.9GHz across each core.
well said, it's all improvement if we look at intel in an isolated case but.. amd exists in the market today.
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
4,850 (0.87/day)
Location
Formosa
System Name Overlord Mk MXVI
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 3800X
Motherboard Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro
Memory 32GB Viper Steel 3600 DDR4 @ 3800MHz 16-19-16-19-36
Video Card(s) Gigabyte RTX 2080 Gaming OC 8G
Storage 1TB WD Black NVMe (2018), 2TB Viper VPN100, 1TB WD Blue 3D NAND
Display(s) Asus PG27AQ
Case Corsair Carbide 275Q
Audio Device(s) Corsair Virtuoso SE
Power Supply Corsair RM750
Mouse Logitech G500s
Keyboard Wooting Two
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores https://valid.x86.fr/ztiub6
2.5 Ghz base for a desktop part? Wtf... I remember them coming with 3.4 base. Intel is just moving goal posts for higher boost figures, and they don't seem to know when to stop.

LOL. Soon you're better off sticking a laptop CPU in there instead.
No worries, Intel has sampled much faster parts to the board makers. I've seen parts that have a base clock well over 3GHz, but unfortunately I can't share more than that.
 

MikeZTM

New Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
12 (0.10/day)
ring or mesh ?
if this is a 5ghz ring 10 core,however inefficient in cinemark,it's gonna kick butts and take names in gaming.
The reason Intel designed mesh is because ring latency will go up when you add more cores.
This will not kick butts in gaming as 9900k O.C. is already slower than 8086k O.C. in gaming.
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
16,601 (4.49/day)
65W and 10 cores with Skylake 5.0 architecture and 14nm++++++++ means probably that it uses its turbo clocks for a blink of an eye so HWInfo and similar software shows that it had peaked at those turbo clocks..
doubtful... :)

.. but better than not reaching it and causing a stink?

No worries, Intel has sampled much faster parts to the board makers. I've seen parts that have a base clock well over 3GHz, but unfortunately I can't share more than that.
this. Its early.. and people will post and believe anything.

Why without HT? Rumours are that they offer an i7 10700K, 8 cores with HT, and pricepoint below 400. That is the pricepoint of a Ryzen 3800X and would be better in gaming than 3900X/3950X.
because now, few people need that many cores and is still 'improvement'over 9700k.
 
Last edited:

MikeZTM

New Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
12 (0.10/day)
well said, it's all improvement if we look at intel in an isolated case but.. amd exists in the market today.
If you throw out gaming then yes.
For pure gaming performance we already see regression from 8086k now.

doubtful... :)

.. but better than not reaching it and causing a stink?

this. Its early.. and people will post and believe anything.
Intel brought Thermal Velocity Boost to desktop. On laptop TVB means the rated maximum boost will only work if temperature is lower than 50 degrees Celsius.
So yes it is a much shorter than a blink of an eye.

10c/20t ringbus @ 5GHz all-core (K version). Hm.. it's definitely going to be a beast.

Remain gaming king and add MT performance. If only I could use my current Z390 mobo.
First you can not use z390 as the socket is different (LGA1200).
Second 9900k is 50% slower than 8086k in PUBG when both overclocked to 5GHz and run 4000MHz DDR4. More core means higher ring bus latency and less RAM performance.

My friend already got this CPU last year and told me to ignore this gen as they performed badly in games.
 
Last edited:

MikeZTM

New Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
12 (0.10/day)
This is confirmed or?????
I got this confirmed from multiple sources. And obviously I can not tell you my source... You will see if my state here is correct or not later.

BTW I do not know the TVB temperature for desktop. It might not be the same 50 degrees as laptop TVB now.

I hate this hyper train for Intel 14nm refresh when people already knows 9900k is slower than 8086k in multiple games. Adding 2 cores will only make it worse.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
16,601 (4.49/day)
I got this confirmed from multiple sources. And obviously I can not tell you my source... You will see if my state here is correct or not later.

BTW I do not know the TVB temperature for desktop. It might not be the same 50 degrees as laptop TVB now.

I hate this hyper train for Intel 14nm refresh when people already knows 9900k is slower than 8086k in multiple games. Adding 2 cores will only make it worse.
I'll wait and see. ;)
 
Joined
Dec 6, 2016
Messages
66 (0.06/day)
First you can not use z390 as the socket is different (LGA1200).
Second 9900k is 50% slower than 8086k in PUBG when both overclocked to 5GHz and run 4000MHz DDR4. More core means higher ring bus latency and less RAM performance.

My friend already got this CPU last year and told me to ignore this gen as they performed badly in games.
Reading comprehension problems? :laugh: Literally said wish my Z390 mobo would work with it. Obviously meaning it won't..
9900KS > everything else gaming. Yes even the 8086k. The 9900k/ks have higher clock ceilings. I'm running a 9900k myself at 5.2GHz all-core, 24/7.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: ppn
Joined
Nov 13, 2007
Messages
7,749 (1.73/day)
Location
Austin Texas
System Name _
Processor 8700K @ 5.1 Ghz
Motherboard MSI Z370-A PRO
Cooling 120mm Custom Liquid
Memory 32 GB 3600 Mhz DDR4 16-16-16-36-380 trfc - 2T
Video Card(s) Gigabyte GTX 2080 Ti Windforce (Undervolted OC 1905MHz)
Storage 3x1TB SSDs
Display(s) Alienware 34" 3440x1440 120hz, G-Sync
Case Jonsbo U4
Audio Device(s) Bose Solo
Power Supply Corsair SF750
Mouse silent click gaming mouse
Keyboard tenkeyless
Software Windows 10 64 Bit
Why without HT? Rumours are that they offer an i7 10700K, 8 cores with HT, and pricepoint below 400. That is the pricepoint of a Ryzen 3800X and would be better in gaming than 3900X/3950X.
Without HT would drastically drop the temperatures and power consumption, and allow much higher clocks. The 9700k's lack of HT allows users to run it at 5.2-5.3ghz at relative ease (compared to 9900k which CAN hit those clocks but it's much more difficult). Most people don't need 16 threads and SMT/HT even hurts in some situations. The 9700k lacks a bit of cache, but with 2 more cores, another 4-8mb of cache and a new process that allows it to hit 5.4-5.5 ghz with decent cooling without causing a small brown out would be really ideal for most gamers.

Turning HT off on the current gen of chips yields pretty dramatic temperature differences and allows for a 200-300mhz higher OC as a result.

1581719408030.png


It's pretty common to see a 9700K at 5.2 beating a 9900K at 5.0 in games/non-heavily threaded loads while consuming less power.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 16, 2012
Messages
4,080 (1.56/day)
Location
Jyväskylä, Finland
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 2600
Motherboard Asus TUF B450 Plus Gaming
Cooling Cryorig C7
Memory 16GB DDR4-2400
Video Card(s) GeForce GTX 980 Ti
Storage 2.2TB of SSDs & 2TB HDD
Display(s) 2x 1920x1080 w/ Arctic Z2 gen3 + Oculus Rift
Case Corsair Carbide Air 740
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster Z
Power Supply Seasonic Focus+ Gold 750W
Mouse Logitech G400s
Keyboard Logitech G410
Software Windows 10 Pro
Reminds me when people bought i7-2600Ks and turned the HT off.. :laugh:

Isn't the whole idea of buying a hyperthreaded CPU to have more threads? :rolleyes:
 
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
1,824 (1.79/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 1600X
Motherboard Biostar X370GTN
Cooling Custom CPU+GPU water loop
Memory 16GB G.Skill TridentZ DDR4-3200 C16
Video Card(s) AMD R9 Fury X
Storage 500GB 960 Evo (OS ++), 500GB 850 Evo (Games)
Display(s) Dell U2711
Case NZXT H200i
Power Supply EVGA Supernova G2 750W
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Lenovo Compact Keyboard with Trackpoint
Software Windows 10 Pro
Sure, but you said single threaded. Those extra cores don't matter. They're not under load, therefore they produce negligible heat.

At the end of the day, these are still 14nm parts. A single 10900K core can be considered "pretty much" the same as a single 6700K core. They have the same architecture and IPC. At 4GHz, both parts will perform identically.

That means that with one core, you're dealing with "pretty much" the same amount of heat, over the same amount of area, at the same clockspeeds and voltages. Add a core, you double it, add a core, you triple it, add a core, you quadruple it. You've now built a 6700K. Now add 6 more of those cores, you've built a 10900K.

Now granted, a 10900K core is going to do this at lower voltage and with less heat, because of the refinements of the manufacturing process, but that only works in the favour of the later chip.

If you load 4 of those more efficient, later production 10900K cores, you'll get a reasonable amount less than 6700K heat. If you load all 10 cores you get 10900K heat. If you load one single core then you'll get substantially less heat than either of those circumstances, which means cooling a single threaded workload is simply not an issue - if you're only pursuing the same clocks, anyway. Intel always tries to use as much of the available headroom as possible, which is why the single core boost always goes up, from 6700K to 7700K, 8700K, 9900K, and now 10900K. They're not really producing more heat when in single threaded workloads. They're just producing lots more in multi-threaded workloads.

Single core boost will always go up as long as manufacturing keeps improving. The battle is in maintaining high all-core boost clocks as you add more and more cores into the same space.
You're kind of right, though not necessarily about efficiency - the refinements to the 14nm process have mainly focused on clock scaling, not efficiency. Some of the optimizations needed to make higher clocks run stable end up consuming (slightly) more power, partly by designing for running at higher voltages to stabilize higher clocks. Remember, getting a 6700K to 5GHz was pretty much impossible. Then of course there's the frequency and power consideration missing from your illustration of scaling: the 10900K doesn't just add 6 cores to a 6700K, it also adds a full gigahertz to the boost clock, with all the added power draw that brings. Of course all core boost is much lower, but that's how thermal and power limitations work. I would expect 4-core boost for this to (far) exceed the 6700K, just like on the 9900K.
7700K was 4.2GHz base and 6700K was 4GHz base.

8700K started the trend of reducing base clocks, with 3.7GHz. 9900K continued it. This continues it further.
Which makes complete sense seeing how the first two had 4 cores in their ~95W thermal envelopes while the following ones added two per round. More cores at the same power = lower clocks. Or, in this case, more cores with even more power = still lower clocks. Intel has squeezed an astounding amount out of their 14nm process, but it truly is time to put it out to pasture.
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2019
Messages
247 (2.40/day)
Location
Nuremberg
Processor Core i7 8700K@5 GHz
Motherboard MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon
Cooling 2xEKWB Rads, EKWB Reservoir 250, Aqua Computer Kryos Next CPU Cooler, Phanteks Glacier GPU Cooler
Memory 16 GB DDR4 GSkill Trident Z 3200
Video Card(s) Asus ROG STRIX RTX 2080 O8G (GPU@2115 MHz/VRAM@7800MHz)
Storage 1x Samsung Evo 840 SSD 256, 1x WD Blue 1 TB HDD
Display(s) Asus ROG Swift PG248 1080p Display/144Hz/G-Sync
Case Fractal Design R6 with Window
Audio Device(s) Realtek onboard
Power Supply be quiet 650W Straight Power
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Cherry KB
Software Win 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores FireStrike: 25953/Extreme: 13141/Ultra: 7099/TimeSpy: 11426/Superposition: 7667/CinebenchR20: 3916
I hate this hyper train for Intel 14nm refresh when people already knows 9900k is slower than 8086k in multiple games. Adding 2 cores will only make it worse.
Depends of the game as there are games out there which perform better on 9900k. 8086 is only 6 Core


It's pretty common to see a 9700K at 5.2 beating a 9900K at 5.0 in games
I also say that depends of the game and for future use 8 cores with HT will be better than without HT in my opinion.
 
Joined
Aug 6, 2017
Messages
5,887 (6.36/day)
Location
Poland
System Name skurwiel szatan
Processor i7 5775c @4.3GHz/1.385v/EDRAM @2GHz
Motherboard Z97X Gaming 5
Cooling Noctua D15S
Memory Crucial Ballistix Tactical LP 1600 CL8 @2133 9-9-9-27 1T
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super Gaming X Trio (waiting for RX 5950XT)
Storage SU900 128 (OS)/850 PRO 256+256+ 512,860 EVO 500,XPG SX950U 480,M9Pe(Y) 512 (games)/4TB HDDs (3+1)
Display(s) Acer XB241YU+Dell S2716DG dual monitor setup
Case Full tower
Audio Device(s) W830BT headphones
Power Supply Superflower Leadex Gold 850W
Mouse G903 lightspeed+powerplay,G403 wireless + Steelseries DeX + Roccat rest
Keyboard HyperX Alloy SilverSpeed (w.HyperX wrist rest),Razer Deathstalker
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores A LOT
Without HT would drastically drop the temperatures and power consumption, and allow much higher clocks. The 9700k's lack of HT allows users to run it at 5.2-5.3ghz at relative ease (compared to 9900k which CAN hit those clocks but it's much more difficult). Most people don't need 16 threads and SMT/HT even hurts in some situations. The 9700k lacks a bit of cache, but with 2 more cores, another 4-8mb of cache and a new process that allows it to hit 5.4-5.5 ghz with decent cooling without causing a small brown out would be really ideal for most gamers.

Turning HT off on the current gen of chips yields pretty dramatic temperature differences and allows for a 200-300mhz higher OC as a result.

View attachment 144846

It's pretty common to see a 9700K at 5.2 beating a 9900K at 5.0 in games/non-heavily threaded loads while consuming less power.
hitman 1 is very much latency and single thread dependent,pretty much a rarity in modern games.
 
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
4,988 (1.15/day)
Location
Australia
System Name Night Rider | Mini LAN PC | Workhorse
Processor AMD R7 2700X | Ryzen 1600X | i7 970
Motherboard MSi AM4 Pro Carbon | GA- | Gigabyte EX58-UD5
Cooling AMD Wraith cooler| Stock Cooler, Copper Core)| Big shairkan B
Memory 2x8GB DDR4 G.Skill Ripjaws 3600MHz| 2x8GB Corsair 3000 | 6x2GB DDR3 1300 Corsair
Video Card(s) ASUS GTX 970 OC in Sli | Inno3d GTX 1050 TI | MSI RX 580 8GB
Storage 250GB Plextor SSD Por 5 /1TB WD Black | 500GB SSD WD, 2x1TB, 1x750 | WD 320/Seagate 320
Display(s) LG 27" 1440P| Samsung 20" S20C300L/DELL 15" | 22" DELL/19"DELL
Case LIAN LI PC-18 | Mini ATX Case (custom) | Atrix C4 9001
Audio Device(s) Onboard | Onbaord | Onboard
Power Supply Silverstone 750 | Silverstone Mini 450W | Corsair CX-750
Mouse Coolermaster Pro | Rapoo V900 | Gigabyte 6850X
Keyboard MAX Keyboard Nighthawk X8 | Creative Fatal1ty eluminx | Some POS Logitech
Software Windows 7 Pro 64 | Windows 7 Pro 64 | Windows 7 Pro 64/Windows 10 Home
So what is this CPU going to achieve? like really? a bit better Multi core threaded performance? the 18Core from Intel struggles against AMD's 16 core so.......what are these 10core CPUs going to do? Gaming performance is so close these days that it doesnt really matter, 4% faster over 30+ games (9900K/3950X) isnt anything to write home about.......
 
Joined
Dec 16, 2012
Messages
4,080 (1.56/day)
Location
Jyväskylä, Finland
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 2600
Motherboard Asus TUF B450 Plus Gaming
Cooling Cryorig C7
Memory 16GB DDR4-2400
Video Card(s) GeForce GTX 980 Ti
Storage 2.2TB of SSDs & 2TB HDD
Display(s) 2x 1920x1080 w/ Arctic Z2 gen3 + Oculus Rift
Case Corsair Carbide Air 740
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster Z
Power Supply Seasonic Focus+ Gold 750W
Mouse Logitech G400s
Keyboard Logitech G410
Software Windows 10 Pro
So what is this CPU going to achieve? like really? a bit better Multi core threaded performance? the 18Core from Intel struggles against AMD's 16 core so.......what are these 10core CPUs going to do? Gaming performance is so close these days that it doesnt really matter, 4% faster over 30+ games (9900K/3950X) isnt anything to write home about.......
More cores is better in the view of marketing. There's still so much people who doesn't understand that much about computers, so more is better, of course! :D

Brings me back to the days when more VRAM was better and Pentium 4 was better than Athlon XP/64 because of the higher clock speed.. :laugh:
 
Joined
Nov 4, 2005
Messages
10,496 (2.01/day)
System Name MoFo 2
Processor AMD PhenomII 1100T @ 4.2Ghz
Motherboard Asus Crosshair IV
Cooling Swiftec 655 pump, Apogee GT,, MCR360mm Rad, 1/2 loop.
Memory 8GB DDR3-2133 @ 1900 8.9.9.24 1T
Video Card(s) HD7970 1250/1750
Storage Agility 3 SSD 6TB RAID 0 on RAID Card
Display(s) 46" 1080P Toshiba LCD
Case Rosewill R6A34-BK modded (thanks to MKmods)
Audio Device(s) ATI HDMI
Power Supply 750W PC Power & Cooling modded (thanks to MKmods)
Software A lot.
Benchmark Scores Its fast. Enough.
700Mhz base clock, but 7Ghz for half a second with one core boost!!!
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2007
Messages
7,749 (1.73/day)
Location
Austin Texas
System Name _
Processor 8700K @ 5.1 Ghz
Motherboard MSI Z370-A PRO
Cooling 120mm Custom Liquid
Memory 32 GB 3600 Mhz DDR4 16-16-16-36-380 trfc - 2T
Video Card(s) Gigabyte GTX 2080 Ti Windforce (Undervolted OC 1905MHz)
Storage 3x1TB SSDs
Display(s) Alienware 34" 3440x1440 120hz, G-Sync
Case Jonsbo U4
Audio Device(s) Bose Solo
Power Supply Corsair SF750
Mouse silent click gaming mouse
Keyboard tenkeyless
Software Windows 10 64 Bit
I also say that depends of the game and for future use 8 cores with HT will be better than without HT in my opinion.
The futureproofing thing almost never works out IMO -- sometimes - but very rare. - the only time it was REALLY spot on is when we first went dual core and the game got it's own core, but since then, it's been taking forever for games to use more threads and clocks/cache/memory have reigned supreme.

We said it about the Q6600 (oh get that quad in the future games will use more cores) - but dual cores were still the best for gaming, then the 1060T Phenom then 2600K, r7 1700, etc. etc. - basically 4 c / 4t thread CPUs really only started to show real limits in 2015, with the i5 4t still being the optimal gaming choice. Right now 6t is starting to show it's age, but I think it will be another few years before 8t/10t/12t starts to really limit anything, by then you're on to more cores and completely different tech anyways.

You may be right though - the 9700K is a little weird with it's frame pacing and sometimes has issues in some games due to the high performing core/ low thread count combo (red dead, GTA 4, farcry 5).
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 16, 2014
Messages
3,521 (1.72/day)
Location
SE Michigan
System Name Dumbass
Processor AMD-9370BE @4.6
Motherboard ASUS SABERTOOTH 990FX R2.0 +SB950
Cooling CM Nepton 280L
Memory G.Skill Sniper 16gb DDR3 2400
Video Card(s) GreenTeam 1080 Gaming X 8GB
Storage C:\SSD (240GB), D:\Seagate (2TB), E:\Western Digital (1TB)
Display(s) 1x Nixeus NX_EDG27, 2x Dell S2440L (16:9)
Case Phanteks Enthoo Primo w/8 140mm SP Fans
Audio Device(s) onboard (realtek?) SPKRS:Logitech Z623 200w 2.1
Power Supply Corsair HX1000i
Mouse Logitech G700s
Keyboard Logitech G910 Orion Spark
Software windows 10
Benchmark Scores https://i.imgur.com/aoz3vWY.jpg?2
2.5 Ghz base for a desktop part? Wtf... I remember them coming with 3.4 base. Intel is just moving goal posts for higher boost figures, and they don't seem to know when to stop.

LOL. Soon you're better off sticking a laptop CPU in there instead.
what makes you think they havent?
 
Top