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

[cucker tarlson]

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.

I do.paid a little more for the cpu than you did but this thing just went into my z97 and ddr3 system.
that said,I don't get all the berating.
this is a pretty dope system,one I thought about buillding for myself at some point.

6 core i5 at 5ghz,with fast ram,this is gonna bulldoze through games when overclocked.if you don't need HT specifically it's what you get,especially with 9600kf being quite affordable at this point.
970 pro - expensive,but doesn't get better than this,stellar performance no matter how much you're writing to it at a time,and as far as longevity it's a drive he'll likely pass on to his great grandchildren.

single threaded performance and latency is,was and will be what games run on,unless you know specifically that a game that op is gonna play requires more than 6 fast cores I suggest you move on.yes,just about every modern game out there now can easily use 12-16 threads if available,but that does not mean there's equivalence between single core performance and number of threads.
for the ryzen screaming crowd,look what 3900x and 3700x are doing in games.maxing out best binned cores while half of them and smt don't do jack

Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order тест GPU/CPU 2019 | Action / FPS / TPS | Тест GPU

В «Звёздные Войны Джедаи: Павший Орден», боевике с видом от третьего лица от Respawn Entertainment, вас ждут приключени

gamegpu.com

 

[moproblems99]

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.

Your analogy sucks

• How do we know the big block has more HP? Block size/displacement != More horsepower.

And that most people only use 2-3 cores for general use?

Elderly people browsing emails or the average person arguing builds on TPU. Because you are wrong about the latter.

You do realize that the CPU runs stock at 3.7ghz, right?

And? I am going to combine with the next.

What does this tell you about the comparative speed?

Absolutely nothing. Are you implying that a 9700k is faster than a 9900k because it has a faster base clock? Please no. Additionally, how much time are the cpus sitting at base clock and not boosting. Also, aren't 9700ks just rebinned from 9900ks that didn't quite make the snuff?

 

[oxrufiioxo]

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.

I think the confusion comes from the fact that the 3600 is 18% cheaper while being 13% faster at CPU task as tested here.

You do lose 4% in gaming performance but you also need a 2080 ti to get those gains...... which really you should be pairing with an 8700k or faster anyway unless all you care about is averages and not what really matters 1% lows.

So you've put yourself in a scenario where you lose all the MT benefit while gaining zero of gaming benefit with your 580

This really comes down to how long will it take you to get 2080 ti like gpu performance to benefit from your cpu choice.
You also lose out on the ability to upgrade to up to 16 cores in the future if necessary because you chose a dead platform.


Again though at the end of the day its your money do some research and pick whats best for you..... The 9600 is fine cpu nothing wrong with it just because I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot stick doesn't mean it won't serve you well for years to come.

 

[cucker tarlson]

you also need a 2080 ti to get those gain

This really comes down to how long will it take you to get 2080 ti like gpu performance to benefit from your cpu choice.

not really how it works.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

not really how it works.

Really? Care to elaborate.

 

[cucker tarlson]

Really? Care to elaborate.

you're taking the average result from tpu running gpu benchmarks at 720p and applying it to specific scenarios when he's playing at higher resolution but in cpu bound sequences of a game.

example - my 4790k choked the hell out of gtx 1080 at 1440p while driving on the high street in watch dogs 2,though on average it would not be more than a couple of percent slower than a 8700k the way tpu are testing.

the average result is not a consistent result.you're not getting 4% less consistently.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

you're taking the average result from tpu running gpu benchmarks at 720p and applying it to specific scenarios when he's playing at higher resolution but in cpu bound sequences of a game.

example - my 4790k choked the hell out of gtx 1080 at 1440p while driving on the high street in watch dogs 2,though on average it would not be more than a couple of percent slower than a 8700k the way tpu are testing.

the average result is not a consistent result.you're not getting 4% less consistently.

That's why I mention 1% lows something a 9900k destroys a 9600k at in most modern games where even a 3600 does better in a lot of modern game engines.


This is all sorta off topic at this point and technically could be debated till the end of time..... The OP @storm-chaser is pretty dead set on a 9600 and its his money nothing wrong with that I hope it serves him well for years to come.

 

[phill]

Whilst this has been somewhat of an interesting read... In some ways, do you have any of the hardware in place and working so we can see things rather than just have arguments over who and what is faster??

I was just hoping for some pics and some stats on what was what with the rig

 

[EarthDog]

Whilst this has been somewhat of an interesting read... In some ways, do you have any of the hardware in place and working so we can see things rather than just have arguments over who and what is faster??

I was just hoping for some pics and some stats on what was what with the rig

Parts come in friday according to the last line I the op

 

[phill]

Parts come in friday according to the last line I the op

Thanks I'll come back Friday and hope for some pics and test results

 

[moproblems99]

Thanks I'll come back Friday and hope for some pics and test results

We all have a good idea what it will perform like, I wanna see the cost comparison.

 

[storm-chaser]

Grab some popcorn - I'm really looking forward to this one - should be a very interesting experiment. I decided to stick with the G.Skill 4000Mhz RAM as it was already ordered and people are saying it overclocks well. Although, my main goal, as everyone knows, is 5.00ghz the CPU. One added benefit of the I5-9600KF is that Intel did switch to a solder-based thermal interface material between its die and heat spreader, enabling higher multi-core Turbo Boost frequencies, reducing heat and potentially raising our overclock ceiling a little bit.

What do you guys estimate I can get out of the NB? I was hoping to see 4.5Ghz... Does that sound feasible given the hardware we are working with here?

One day, if and when I ever get a chiller, I'd like to try for the trifecta.
5000mhz CPU clock
5000mhz Memory clock
5000mhz North Bridge

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Grab some popcorn - I'm really looking forward to this one - should be a very interesting experiment. I decided to stick with the G.Skill 4000Mhz RAM as it was already ordered and people are saying it overclocks well. Although, my main goal, as everyone knows, is 5.00ghz the CPU. One added benefit of the I5-9600KF is that Intel did switch to a solder-based thermal interface material between its die and heat spreader, enabling higher multi-core Turbo Boost frequencies, reducing heat and potentially raising our overclock ceiling a little bit.

What do you guys estimate I can get out of the NB? I was hoping to see 4.5Ghz... Does that sound feasible given the hardware we are working with here?

One day, if and when I ever get a chiller, I'd like to try for the trifecta.
5000mhz CPU clock
5000mhz Memory clock
5000mhz North Bridge

5.0 Core/4.8 NB/4400 mem should be doable but getting a kit that already does 4400CL19 would have been a plus there's no gurantee the imc will even like memory that high on a 9600 which typically gets the worse silicon of the three main intel chips. The Gskill kit @Vario was talking about was a 3200CL14 which is a better bin afaik.

Your cooling an case is most likely going to be the determining factor on your Core/NB and also if this is a daily overclock or something you just want to run short benchmarks with.

for daily 5.0 Core/4.7 NB/4000 mem is way more realistic with excellent cooling/airflow

For 5000 mem you'll likely need one of the motherboards @Xx Tek Tip xX listed otherwise around 4400-4600 will likely be a limit on very good 4 dimm daisy chain boards.
you'd also need to buy a bunch of CPU to test as well though or buy a used one that has been validated to do 5ghz on the mem.

 

[eidairaman1]

@storm-chaser how you been?

 

[Vario]

I do.paid a little more for the cpu than you did but this thing just went into my z97 and ddr3 system.
that said,I don't get all the berating.
this is a pretty dope system,one I thought about buillding for myself at some point.

6 core i5 at 5ghz,with fast ram,this is gonna bulldoze through games when overclocked.if you don't need HT specifically it's what you get,especially with 9600kf being quite affordable at this point.
970 pro - expensive,but doesn't get better than this,stellar performance no matter how much you're writing to it at a time,and as far as longevity it's a drive he'll likely pass on to his great grandchildren.

single threaded performance and latency is,was and will be what games run on,unless you know specifically that a game that op is gonna play requires more than 6 fast cores I suggest you move on.yes,just about every modern game out there now can easily use 12-16 threads if available,but that does not mean there's equivalence between single core performance and number of threads.
for the ryzen screaming crowd,look what 3900x and 3700x are doing in games.maxing out best binned cores while half of them and smt don't do jack

Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order тест GPU/CPU 2019 | Action / FPS / TPS | Тест GPU

В «Звёздные Войны Джедаи: Павший Орден», боевике с видом от третьего лица от Respawn Entertainment, вас ждут приключени

gamegpu.com

It is the system I have essentially and it is fine for games but I don't play much beyond FiveM, Mordhau, Space Engineers.

Grab some popcorn - I'm really looking forward to this one - should be a very interesting experiment. I decided to stick with the G.Skill 4000Mhz RAM as it was already ordered and people are saying it overclocks well. Although, my main goal, as everyone knows, is 5.00ghz the CPU. One added benefit of the I5-9600KF is that Intel did switch to a solder-based thermal interface material between its die and heat spreader, enabling higher multi-core Turbo Boost frequencies, reducing heat and potentially raising our overclock ceiling a little bit.

What do you guys estimate I can get out of the NB? I was hoping to see 4.5Ghz... Does that sound feasible given the hardware we are working with here?

One day, if and when I ever get a chiller, I'd like to try for the trifecta.
5000mhz CPU clock
5000mhz Memory clock
5000mhz North Bridge

As far as solder vs paste TIM, the temperatures end up being about the same. You can delid the pasted ones though which is a bonus for some, delidded temps are better than soldered.
NB should easily do 4.5. Mine would do it but for some glitch in my bios. I can set it about as higher if I use XTU in Windows but the bios multiplier setting for NB doesn't retain above 4.3 for some reason. I have booted as high as 5.2 core on my machine and also set CPU NB to 4.8 before using XTU, I don't see much benefit running that much clock so I just run it as high as my stock voltage of ~1.15-1.16V takes me which is about 4.6GHz. Latency wise I had noticed a difference overclocking uncore/northbridge particularly in games like GTAIV.

 

[storm-chaser]

How do we know the big block has more HP? Block size/displacement != More horsepower.

Dynamometer. Like a benchmark test for your car. Another analogy would be a six cylinder engine vs an eight cylinder engine. Just because the V8 has two more cylinders does not necessarily mean it's the way to go. If you run out of road before getting into the engine's top end powerband, where the serious horsepower is developed, you might as well fold up shop and stick with the V6. What I am getting at is the fact that if you measure your CPU by PER CORE standards, both processors have nearly identical performance characteristics (9900k vs 9600KF). EDIT: In automotive speak this is usually measured as horsepower per liter or horsepower per cubic inch.

Sure, the 9900k has more torque. But the question remains, if you never access it than what is the point? It's like buying a 10,000 square foot home for you and your dog. It's nice and pretty but it's expensive and many of the rooms sit empty for years on end. And again, this is all relative to my particular usage case. Core monsters - you know who you are.

Elderly people browsing emails or the average person arguing builds on TPU. Because you are wrong about the latter.

Heck, you might even be one of those guys who uses at least six cores 99% of the time. lol

Absolutely nothing. Are you implying that a 9700k is faster than a 9900k because it has a faster base clock? Please no. Additionally, how much time are the cpus sitting at base clock and not boosting. Also, aren't 9700ks just rebinned from 9900ks that didn't quite make the snuff?

Im not saying its faster, only that the two CPUs are, for all intensive purposes, are basically equal in performance for any workload under six cores.

And I'm talking real world, seat of the pants performance, not theoretical benchmarking here.

 

[storm-chaser]

@storm-chaser how you been?

Pretty good my friend. Im happy to finally be working with my computers again. I haven't had a lot of time in past few months to set aside for my computer hobby... but now it's off the back burner!

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

Sincerely, I challenge you to find another current gen Intel chip on the market today with a better cost / performance ratio than the X6 9600kf

 

[dgianstefani]

Noone is arguing with you about cost/performance. It's a defunct response. The point is 6c/6t is obsolete already in 2019. Moving forward in 2020 you're screwed in the long run. 9700k should have been your minimum.

 

[cucker tarlson]

Noone is arguing with you about cost/performance. It's a defunct response. The point is 6c/6t is obsolete already in 2019. Moving forward in 2020 you're screwed in the long run. 9700k should have been your minimum.

No it really isn't.

 

[cucker tarlson]

That's why I mention 1% lows something a 9900k destroys a 9600k at in most modern games where even a 3600 does better in a lot of modern game engines

Your own post disproves that 3600 is better

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

Long overdue for a new system, and the time has finally come! After losing a good lead on a cheap 8086K, I've spent the afternoon comparing alternative CPUs to replace it. I've decided to go with the fastest 9th gen core I5 CPU instead... I know, I know, it's not top tier, but I am still...

www.techpowerup.com

Biggest difference is 96 vs 93 on favor of 3600 OC in sotr at 1080p medium

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Your own post disproves that 3600 is better

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

Long overdue for a new system, and the time has finally come! After losing a good lead on a cheap 8086K, I've spent the afternoon comparing alternative CPUs to replace it. I've decided to go with the fastest 9th gen core I5 CPU instead... I know, I know, it's not top tier, but I am still...

www.techpowerup.com

Biggest difference is 96 vs 93 on favor of 3600 OC in sotr at 1080p medium

Not overly difficult to find results where the 3600 does better 22% in BFV is pretty large also not difficult to find where the 9600 does well so that's why I've repeatedly said do your research
Keep in mind its 18% cheaper currently on amazon.


I think I mentioned this already you lose a bit in gaming but you gain much more in MT task and in 2020 if you don't care about MT performance you should if not a 7600k at 4.8ghz which also has nearly the same IPC as a 9600k wouldn't be losing to a 1600 in a lot of modern games.

I don't think anyone could recommend in good faith a 9600K over a 3600 other than blind intel fanboys. Fanboys of anything are the worse and I hope intel can get down to 10nm or 7nm soon because all the Ryzen love is getting old I mean you have to scroll way down on amazon.com best selling cpu list to even find an i5.

Not to mention its a dead platform with a likely much better i5 that will probably be better than an 8700k coming out this year although with all the mitigation intel is having to pump out who knows.... I haven't notice any noticeable performance degradation with my 9900k since it launched so fingers crossed that isn't the case I'm willing to bet slower cpu with less resources will feel it first though and maybe that's why in SOTTR the 9600k at 5.2ghz is 60% slower than a stock 9900k in 1% lows albeit with unrealistic settings....

I love my 9900k based system its pretty amazing but even it I wouldn't recommend over a 3900X given the choice between the two.


Again we could argue this till the end of time so it's a bit pointless as the OP already decided he was going intel no matter what so its irrelevant.
I worry about the longevity of a 6 core 6 thread cpu but the OP has a 580 so with ultra settings he will struggle to even hit 60 in some games so its probably irrelevant for now.

I hope I was clear as to why I would recommend a 3600 or even a 2600 (the substantially better upgrade path while both of them being cheaper) really over a 9600k doesn't mean I'm right whoever is buying one of these cpu needs to research the games they actually plan on playing and the programs they actually plan on using.

coming from what the OP has just about any modern cpu will be a huge upgrade... I have a feeling he's going to love the 9600KF


I tried to help the OP as much as I could with the gaming/system building experience I have admittedly that's way less than a lot of people on this forum only 30 systems over the last 9 years...

Something @phill said got me thinking and really the best way to make a good decision would be to have both system in front of you doing the things you do unfortunately this is unrealistic for most people so all we can look at is a graph that doesn't always tell the whole story.

 

[Vario]

Well hes not spending your money, hes spending his money, so I would give up on the lost cause of trying to convince him to buy a 3600, and just let him build the system he wants to build.

Again we could argue this till the end of time so it's a bit pointless as the OP already decided he was going intel no matter what so its irrelevant.

Exactly, so don't bother.

 

[Durvelle27]

I didn't read through the whole thread as i just want to add 2 cents

I don't believe that cooler will be able to handle heat generated at 5GHz.

 

[EarthDog]

I don't believe that cooler will be able to handle heat generated at 5GHz.

That, and many other points have already been made... but the OP wanted an all MSI rig in that non-windowed old school chassis sooooo. It is what it is (a $120 cooler that performs as well as a $50 cooler).

 

[oxrufiioxo]

I didn't read through the whole thread as i just want to add 2 cents

I don't believe that cooler will be able to handle heat generated at 5GHz.

For AVX loads probably not.....

For gaming it should be fine, but it doesn't really seem like he's going to be doing much MT task with it seeing as how fixated on single threaded performance he's is I'm sure he's done his research into what he plans on using the system for so I'm sure he will be fine.