Intel X6 i5-9600KF based system (5.00Ghz project)

[moproblems99]

No offense intended but if you wanted 5ghz and played old games with tangible performance not really mattering....why not just build an FX8350 system? Pretty sure you can hit 5ghz on that.

Additionally, you will save a ton of money on parts.

So what's the takeaway here?

The takeaway here with this entire build is NO REAL WORLD DIFFERENCE!
I could spend $3500 and boot to windows in 10 seconds
Or I could spend $850 and boot to windows in 11 seconds.

I'm sorry but I almost spit out the water I wasn't drinking when I read this. This thread has been brutal to read but wtf does system boot time have to do with anything?

 

[Mats]

Even if I wouldn't choose the same CPU as the OP did, get this: HE HAS ALREADY BOUGHT IT.
No point in telling him to get something else..

Cheers

 

[EarthDog]

Even if I wouldn't choose the same parts as the OP did, get this: HE HAS ALREADY BOUGHT THEM.
No point in telling him to get something else..

Cheers

Knowledge is power.

 

[dont whant to set it"']

Intel trew your way an under achiever with regards to oc because of Prof |pic. 2 and a square half ! Factored as a vector such as it is .. cents.

 

[storm-chaser]

Anything CL14 (14-14-14-34) is B Die. 3000/3200CL14 is an easy way to find it. Its harder to distinguish B Die kits from the others on most of the 3000-4000 kits because the Hynix and Micron/Crucial have improved quite a bit but they generally have worse timings. Generally though, the really really high frequency kits are also b-die.

Contemplating my next step here. I've also heard the Gskill trident z overclocks pretty good as well? Will I be able to run tighter timings on the Teamgroup memory (vs the G.skill)?
Someone earlier in the thread said there is a performance variation with some b-die memory modules?

No offense intended but if you wanted 5ghz and played old games with tangible performance not really mattering....why not just build an FX8350 system? Pretty sure you can hit 5ghz on that.
Additionally, you will save a ton of money on parts.

I'm laughing because I already have an FX system that hits 5.0Ghz

I'm also laughing because my new system is going to be just as fast as yours for about 1/3 the price.

I'm sorry but I almost spit out the water I wasn't drinking when I read this. This thread has been brutal to read but wtf does system boot time have to do with anything?

You are reading too far into this. I only brought up the boot time comparison to highlight the point that both systems will be identical in terms of real-world performance. Up to 4 cores, the 9900K and the 9600KF are basically the same speed and due to the lower TDP of the 9600KF, I may have more of a thermal margin which could help when it comes to overclocking

 

[Mats]

Knowledge is power.

Exactly, too many in this thread obviously felt tl;dr about the OP and missed the small part that he already had ordered everything he needed, hence the following outburst about what he should have bought.

Yes, EarthDog, I'm choosing to make your quote about something else.

 

[Vario]

Contemplating my next step here. I've also heard the Gskill trident z overclocks pretty good as well? Will I be able to run tighter timings on the Teamgroup memory (vs the G.skill)?

Probably doesn't matter which one you buy. Buy the cheaper.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Contemplating my next step here. I've also heard the Gskill trident z overclocks pretty good as well? Will I be able to run tighter timings on the Teamgroup memory (vs the G.skill)?
Someone earlier in the thread said there is a performance variation with some b-die memory modules?

Both kits should do 4000 with decent timings beyond that its going to be silicon lottery/imc/motherboard traces holding you back.


Maybe its just me but overclocking memory on intel system is a pita.... So if you don't have a ton of experience doing it find someone who does.

 

[storm-chaser]

I think really what's really happening here is that people are simply getting caught up in the core count hysteria. lol
AMD and Intel have you right where they want you

Another example:
I could spend $3500 to run Battlefield 4 on ultra settings for like 120-130 FPS

OR







*spoiler*









I could spend $850 and run Battlefield 4 on high settings for 120-130FPS

And as I said before, not a single one of you guys has an intel system that can compete with this in terms of cost/performance ratio.

 

[EarthDog]

Exactly, too many in this thread obviously felt tl;dr about the OP and missed the small part that he already had ordered everything he needed, hence the following outburst about what he should have bought.

Yes, EarthDog, I'm choosing to make your quote about something else.

In fairness, he hasn't bought the memory and the board changed from the OP...it is tough to follow a bit what was actually purchased. But knowing what to base what on is valuable information moving forward. I'd hate to be an enthusiast and use userbenchmark as a barometer for overclocking potential... as one example. Or having an unrealistic 24/7 goal of DDR 4500 memory (for almost literally zero reason - latency my bawls, lol).

Anyway, you enjoy SC!!! T-minus 9 months until this all goes away anyway!!!

EDIT:

I think really what's really happening here is that people are simply getting caught up in the core count hysteria. lol
AMD and Intel have you right where they want you

lulz. The irony is, I don't and one of the most vocal when it comes to not buying too much! I despise AMD for going wide like this when software hasn't caught up. What AMD has done to the mainstream is, IMO, kind of fucked up dropping in 16c/32t processors on mainstream...Much over 8c/16t will suffice for years for most users. I'm of the mind to buy once, I guess.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

I'm laughing because I already have an FX system that hits 5.0Ghz

I'm also laughing because my new system is going to be just as fast as yours for about 1/3 the price.

Not sure what you're going on about here...... His system is faster in gaming (vega 56 vs Rx 580) his will obliterate yours in MT task so not sure what your point was.

 

[storm-chaser]

Both kits should do 4000 with decent timings beyond that its going to be silicon lottery/imc/motherboard traces holding you back.

Maybe its just me but overclocking memory on intel system is a pita.... So if you don't have a ton of experience doing it find someone who does.

Then I might as well stick with the G.skill for now. If I'm not happy with their performance I can always upgrade later.

In fairness, he hasn't bought the memory and the board changed from the OP...it is tough to follow a bit what was actually purchased. But knowing what to base what on is valuable information moving forward. I'd hate to be an enthusiast and use userbenchmark as a barometer for overclocking potential... as one example. Or having an unrealistic 24/7 goal of DDR 4500 memory (for almost literally zero reason - latency my bawls, lol).

Anyway, you enjoy SC!!! T-minus 7 months until this all goes away anyway!!!

Yeah, I don't mind the criticism most of these guys are only looking out for the best system for me. But, they are on the outside looking in for my specific usage scenario. So I will take advice from anyone willing to respond here so long as they stop referring to the 9600KF as a weak processor.

I will see you over at overclockers.com in about a month earthdog

Hope you've been well.

Not sure what you're going on about here...... His system is faster in gaming (vega 56 vs Rx 580) his will obliterate yours in MT task so not sure what your point was.

For my usage scenario, both PCs would perform identically. I'm only loading up 3-4 cores for the most part. Meaning, why would I spend over $1000 for a CPU when I can get the same (relative) performance from something like the 9600KF for $200???

 

[EarthDog]

lolol, your head is so far in the sand man... get help.

 

[moproblems99]

I'm also laughing because my new system is going to be just as fast as yours for about 1/3 the price.

Well, now, no need to be snarky. You said yourself you were really only going for 5ghz. That was your main goal. Additionally, how do define fast? A single core? 2 cores? 6 cores? 12 cores? Oh....wait.

Let's have a race and run 6 vms. Oh, that isn't your use case? Well, it is mine. I am glad that you built a system that YOU want. I am hope that you get a ton of enjoyment out of it. However, you could have built a waaaaaay more balanced system that would have likely been faster and cheaper had you been willing to listen to some of the (albeit harsh) criticism.

This was never a pissing match. You could buy an 8700k that would perform about the same single threaded and have the multithreaded boost and still have the same upgrade path, as one example.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

lolol, your head is so far in the sand man... get help.

Wait!!!!!.... I'm confused. Did this just turn into WccfTech!?

 

[storm-chaser]

I am glad that you built a system that YOU want. I am hope that you get a ton of enjoyment out of it.

Thank you. Now that wasn't so hard to say now was it? And for the record, I do appreciate the feedback, I am listening, I already swapped to a better motherboard.

 

[moproblems99]

Now that wasn't so hard to say now was it?

I'm not sure what you mean? I am always happy when people spend their money on fun stuff.

I just shake my head when someone buys a Corolla thinking it's a Supra when they just could have bought a Supra.

I am listening, I already swapped to a better motherboard.

I don't think anyone here outside of you knows what parts have been bought and what haven't.

 

[moproblems99]

And as I said before, not a single one of you guys has an intel system that can compete with this in terms of cost/performance ratio.

Also, have you actually done a cost/performance comparison? As I would generally, sincerely even, be interested in seeing how it played out.

 

[EarthDog]

Not the place... so I'll acknowledge once and move on..

Anyone with half a clue knew this wasnt going to happen. I couldn't have cared less about the whole process. So, no, not remotely butthurt.



I'm out! See ya in a month.

 

[Mats]

In fairness, he hasn't bought the memory and the board changed from the OP...it is tough to follow a bit what was actually purchased.

True, but it was the CPU that caused most of the noise. I did edit my post shortly after, but you quoted me just before.

 

[storm-chaser]

I just shake my head when someone buys a Corolla thinking it's a Supra when they just could have bought a Supra.

Under my usage scenario:

You do realize that the CPU runs stock at 3.7ghz, right?
And it has essentially the same cores as a 3.6Ghz 9900k, right?
And that most people only use 2-3 cores for general use?

What does this tell you about the comparative speed?

People seem to be forgetting I built this rig with a principle focus on single-threaded or per-core performance.

I guess I could equate it to building engines. For example, one guy has a 615 cubic inch big block chevy but it's sitting in a car that weighs a bit more than his competitor in the far lane. His opponent has a 408 cubic inch small block chevy that is also built for speed. All other things being equal, sure, the big block smokes him in the 1/4 due to more HP, but the small block chevy gets off the line quicker and takes the win in the 1/8th mile. Believe it or not, cubic inch displacement is not the be-all of engine building. Just like core count is not the be-all of processor performance.

 

[Mats]

Nice try, killing your own thread with politics. Based on other locked threads it isn't that hard to do..

 

[storm-chaser]

Nice try, killing your own thread with politics. Based on other locked threads it isn't that hard to do..

That would be funny if it were true. But it was earthdog who brought up politics in the first place.

 

[HammerON]

Leave politics out of this thread please. Reply bans will be imposed if we cannot stay on topic.
Carry on!

 

[storm-chaser]

Leave politics out of this thread please. Reply bans will be imposed if we cannot stay on topic.
Carry on!

Okay will do.