The PC Builders Thread ("I Need a New PC") v2
- Thread starter Soda
- Start date
- Status
OP
OP
As far as gaming goes, at 1440p and higher, there doesn't appear to be any reason to go beyond the 8700K right now. Except for a bad chip lottery and potentially lower overclocking capability due to not having solder. The 8700K is within 1-3 frames of the 9900K at those two resolutions. The price difference is not insignificant either. I would have considered a 2700x if there were actually any reliably good mATX boards right now, but there don't seem to be.
Looking into upgrading my PC. Here's what I'm running now:
mobo: ASUS P7P55D PRO
CPU: i5 750 2.66g
GPU: MSI GEForce GTX 750TI
RAM: 16GB DDR3, think it's all G.SKILL
HD: SSD, Samsung SATA3 256GB. Don't recall the brand right now, can look it up. Also have a 500+gb HDD and an "off" 64GB SSD that I could clean up also.
PCI wifi card, but not attached to it
I'm thinking the CPU or the RAM speed is probably my current bottleneck (I don't play much graphically challenging, this system handled Fallout 4 fine for my purposes). Mostly play either CPU-heavy (most, I think, single-core locked) Paradox games or CRPGs that aren't going push any limits graphically. Would especially like to get load times down (and the games/OS are installed on the SSD, although the steam install itself is on the HDD).
How much I would benefit from an upgrade to, say, I7 8700? Back when I followed things more closely, there were vast differences between "middle ground 8 years ago" and "almost top notch now", but benchmarks I've found imply my i5 750 is still above average.
If I upgrade CPU, that means upgrading the mobo, and that means upgrading the RAM. I assume that would also have an impact at least on load times and general system snappiness... is that correct? Anything in particular I should look out for in a motherboard (other than fitting all my existing components)?
Also notable: current motherboard supports only SATA II, not SATA III, so my SSD is running half the speed it could be based on that. Seems like I would at least benefit from a mobo upgrade based on that.
mobo: ASUS P7P55D PRO
CPU: i5 750 2.66g
GPU: MSI GEForce GTX 750TI
RAM: 16GB DDR3, think it's all G.SKILL
HD: SSD, Samsung SATA3 256GB. Don't recall the brand right now, can look it up. Also have a 500+gb HDD and an "off" 64GB SSD that I could clean up also.
PCI wifi card, but not attached to it
I'm thinking the CPU or the RAM speed is probably my current bottleneck (I don't play much graphically challenging, this system handled Fallout 4 fine for my purposes). Mostly play either CPU-heavy (most, I think, single-core locked) Paradox games or CRPGs that aren't going push any limits graphically. Would especially like to get load times down (and the games/OS are installed on the SSD, although the steam install itself is on the HDD).
How much I would benefit from an upgrade to, say, I7 8700? Back when I followed things more closely, there were vast differences between "middle ground 8 years ago" and "almost top notch now", but benchmarks I've found imply my i5 750 is still above average.
If I upgrade CPU, that means upgrading the mobo, and that means upgrading the RAM. I assume that would also have an impact at least on load times and general system snappiness... is that correct? Anything in particular I should look out for in a motherboard (other than fitting all my existing components)?
Also notable: current motherboard supports only SATA II, not SATA III, so my SSD is running half the speed it could be based on that. Seems like I would at least benefit from a mobo upgrade based on that.
I think you'd be set with a B series board (B360) and a 8700. Then just get like 16GBs of RAM. Don't go over DDR4-2666 as B series boards can only run that speed.
https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Description=b360 motherboard&Submit=ENE
ASUS and MSI both make some nice, cheap B-series gaming motherboards that have a little flare.
Not sure how you play anything with a 750Ti though. That seems like a different universe to me lol.
The 9900k seems to run hot! Didn't expect that tbh.
Even on stock (4.7GHz) it's running hot with 63°C delta T over ambient with an H100i. 5.0 GHz is 78°C delta T over ambient and 5.1GHz... that's rather impossible becasue of thermal limitations..
You seem to need a 360mm radiator for 5.1 GHz and even then it's able to come close to 76°C delta T over ambient. Let's say your room is at 25°C, that would be ~100°C on the CPU. I wouldn't consider that acceptable tbh.
RAM prices are supposed to go down by another ~5% this December and so could SSDs. The thing is: SSD prices are so good atm, even another 5% doesn't change much. A 860 Evo 500GB goes for 80€. Another 5% off would make them 76€... It's getting rather irrelevant imo.
I'm sad to see the new processors debut at prices higher than what I was expecting at Microcenter this morning. The i7-9700K was $409.99 and the i5-9600K is $279.99. They had a few of the former which sold out already and the 9600K have not sold yet, which rather telling, for a launch day. People have seen the multiple articles which suggest they should go for ~$374-$385 and $262-263ish respectively. This is more than I wanted to pay in general and will probably wait for a sale.
I can't believe that the 8700K was on sale for $289.99 during many weeks this summer and now it is $359.99. As far as value goes, now is not even the time to buy anything Intel.
I can't believe that the 8700K was on sale for $289.99 during many weeks this summer and now it is $359.99. As far as value goes, now is not even the time to buy anything Intel.
OP
OP
9900k is an absolute unit, but it's also absolutely expensive. Great for high-end builds. Curious to see 9700k and 9600k reviews.
I was going to go with an i9 9900k build but said screw it and just went team red and grabbed a ryzen 2700x the price difference between cpus/mainboards and having to get an absurd cooler for it meant I had several hundred left to put towards a new rtx 2080 and for higher resolutions the gap basically disappeared between processors.
Feels weird my last amd chip was the amazing phenom II 965BE. Excited to get all the parts delivered.
Feels weird my last amd chip was the amazing phenom II 965BE. Excited to get all the parts delivered.
Not mine but off the top of my head:
9900k
Noctua NH-D15 or beQuiet! Quiet Dark Rock Pro 4 CPU cooler (or Corsair H series if you want liquid but performance will be same)
ASUS Maximus XI mobo (would go with Hero or Code depending on your budget)
Corsair RM750i power supply
DDR4-3200 memory, GPU and case of your choosing.
Why not a 390 board? Does that one have 2 m.2 slots?
I'll give you a itx one.
9900k
Asrock z390 phantom gaming itx/Asus z390-i Strix
16gb DDR4-3200
Samsung 970 1TB Evo M.2 NVMe x2
Corsair SF600 Platinum
RTX 2080ti
Ncase M1
Noctua NH-U9S
Noctua NF-A12x25 x2
If you are wondering, my computer is currently
6700k
Asus z270-i Strix
32gb DDR4-2400
Samsung 950 Pro 512gb
Samsung 960 Evo 1TB
mushkin 960gb SSD
Corsair SF600 Gold(Platinum is on it's way)
EVGA 2080ti XC
Ncase M1
Corsair H60 AIO Cooler
3x Noctua S12A
Noctua NF-A9
The XI series is 390.
The Code model has dual m.2 and I'm 99% certain Hero does as well but confirm on ASUS' site.
If you're going to do a 9900k, I would highly recommend:
If keeping it stock:
- Get a Noctua 15 or BeQuiet Dark Pro 4 < those are absolute minimum
- You need a high air flow case. Prioritize function over form or you'll regret it. It's not the just CPU that needs cooling. The mobo will need cooler air running over the top of it
Any overclock:
- You need the biggest AIO cooler you can fit. Do NOT use air or budget AIO coolers.
- Get a flagship board or the one right below it. Your VRM's will get killed on lower boards
The 9900k is not a friendly chip. It's being pushed to the absolute max in terms of power, thermals and the stress it'll put on your motherboard. Plan accordingly.
If keeping it stock:
- Get a Noctua 15 or BeQuiet Dark Pro 4 < those are absolute minimum
- You need a high air flow case. Prioritize function over form or you'll regret it. It's not the just CPU that needs cooling. The mobo will need cooler air running over the top of it
Any overclock:
- You need the biggest AIO cooler you can fit. Do NOT use air or budget AIO coolers.
- Get a flagship board or the one right below it. Your VRM's will get killed on lower boards
The 9900k is not a friendly chip. It's being pushed to the absolute max in terms of power, thermals and the stress it'll put on your motherboard. Plan accordingly.
Is there a website that lets you compare motherboards easily? Every maker seems to have 15models now and they're all vaguely the same just with less USB ports or more SATA ports and honestly I don't need half of the shit they offer so I'm looking to save money but I also kinda don't want to lose good stuff in the process which is a pain.
So, looking at Hardware Unboxed's numbers, is there any reason for the 9700k to exist? Seems like the 8700k is equivalent or better.
Granted I had it on in the background at work so I likely missed some charts.
Granted I had it on in the background at work so I likely missed some charts.
I've heard/read a lot of things about Nvidia slowing cards with drivers, but I've seen videos that are like 1-2 fps difference which is blah.
Has ANYBODY here had real issues with their pascal or previous cards with new updates?
Has ANYBODY here had real issues with their pascal or previous cards with new updates?
9700k has 2 more real cores but less threads. Some workloads will likely prefer one over the other, but it's not necessarily an across-the-board upgrade.
Not that I know of. nVidia's MO on drivers is to optimize just for their new hotness and let the older architectures stagnate, if there was serious cutting of older gens' performance we'd hear a lot more about it.
AMD has been on variations of the GCN architecture for a long time, so performance uplifts from new drivers tend to help older cards as well, but I doubt they actually put a ton of effort into validation for old hardware unless they happen across something that causes issues. The joke/meme for AMD is Fine Wine Technology. lol
Curious if anyone had their 9900k ship yet? Seems like low or no stock at both Amazon sand Newegg. Plus I read this.
https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/9plzic/9900k_newegg_preorders_eta_november_21st/
Low stock could explain why amazon raised the price to 579. You can literally now get a 2700x for half price of the 9900k using the included stock cooler. Insane.
https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/9plzic/9900k_newegg_preorders_eta_november_21st/
Low stock could explain why amazon raised the price to 579. You can literally now get a 2700x for half price of the 9900k using the included stock cooler. Insane.
Last edited:
I know. Ftom what I saw, I don't recall any of the tests where the 9700k scored appreciably better, or better period. Especially not for the price.
Microcenter had the i5 9600s but not the 9900s and as mentioned above none of the latter have shipped anywhere. Hopefully it's not a huge delay.
Personally, I would go with 9900K since it's 8 vs 6 core. I would assume next gen console would be 8 core and that would make a difference in future games.
My i7 9700K shipped, probably will get it monday or tuesday.
Power consumption, seeing some conflicting reviews, some put it rather high, others not so much, but still, I think I may just lower its turbo clocks a bit. <-<;
(I would have gone with a 9700 non-K, but the non-K version is likely several months away and I want to replace my sister's Phenom II with my current i5 asap).
Power consumption, seeing some conflicting reviews, some put it rather high, others not so much, but still, I think I may just lower its turbo clocks a bit. <-<;
(I would have gone with a 9700 non-K, but the non-K version is likely several months away and I want to replace my sister's Phenom II with my current i5 asap).
While I don't have any of the recent AC games, just did a quick 15 mins or so session of Monster Hunter World, my current i5 8400 reached around 46~51ºC with a less than 30€ cooler (Zalman CNPS10X Optima).
I called Newegg about my day 1 preorder (albeit like an hour after they started b/c I was on a walk when they opened) and they gave me jack shit for information. He acted like they didn't have any idea when stock might arrive but it could be "any day".
I also have a preorder at B&H but I have little faith in them to be quick.
The performance difference for the cost delta really doesn't seem to make a case for the 9700k.
The only thing, I think, that would push me towards a 9900k would be high refresh gaming while streaming.
So, I'm planning to build a PC for 4k gaming and was waiting for the 9900k reviews to decide which cpu to get (to pair with a 2080 TI).
At this point, it seems like the most reasonable option is the 2700x since at 4k the performance is almost the same.
Also, it's crazy how the price in the UK is essentially 50% the price of the 9900k (less than £300 vs £599).
At this point, it seems like the most reasonable option is the 2700x since at 4k the performance is almost the same.
Also, it's crazy how the price in the UK is essentially 50% the price of the 9900k (less than £300 vs £599).
Last edited:
Saving some money on the CPU and investing more of your budget on the GPU is a reasonable choice for 4k/60 imo.A 2080Ti is not cheap but a good 4k/60 choice after all.
An interesting, and not much talked about AMD feature is the AM4 "future" CPU compatibility btw. This opens up a good, future upgrade-path for you. Not happy with 2700x performance in a year or two? Update the bios and put in the 3700x or even 4700x.
It's a reasonable choice, but I need to look around for reviews of the 9900k that show minimum framerates. Do those compare favorably for the 2700x?
I mean I already have the Intel Z370 so it's mostly just curiosity for me.
I cancelled my 9900k pre-ordered based on the reviews. 2700X is half the price, runs much cooler (I'm in a small room that turns into a sauna when tv, sonos and computer are on), and delivers negligible differences at 4K.
If you're only ever shooting for 60hz, you can do 4K on most recent processors, even a Skylake or something. Dump all your coin into the GPU.
Damn.Asus z390 boards warn you to use watercooling when activating a XMP profile.
Selecting XMP will also turn on the Asus MultiCore Enhancement which makes every core run at 4.7GHz. Apparently Asus thinks that cooling a 9900k @4.7GHz is no easy task.
Man, that seems like quite a hassle. I guess one way or another, I'll have to deal with additional cables. Hopefully in the next year or so, there will be simpler (and cheaper) options to get Thunderbolt 3 / USB-C Alt Mode added to a desktop PC.
Hard to say, not enough data so far. Most reviewers test at 1080p or 720p. Average FPS at low resolutions show the most obvious differences and testing for "even" frametimes is still neglected in most cases.
Hardware unboxed had some 4k tests though (just 5 games or so) and the results were as one would expect: The 9900k has slightly better 1% lows (which still don't tell the full story), but it's not a mind-blowing difference (in those 4-5 games)
I was hoping there were bigger improvements to 1440p for the games that can't hold 60fps minimum on 4K ultra. My hierarchy for graphics are 60fps, visual effects, resolution. I don't have a dedicated space to have a desk and monitor so I play on my tv.
I like how Gamers Nexus does it, but they didn't do 4K. :-(
Also makes little sense for me to look at this since I have a 1080Ti in the rig that'll have the 9900K (3440x1440) and an underclocked 8700K in my rig with 2080 Ti (4K).
I plan to swap cases in January so I can push more CPU TDP on the 4K rig.
That's something I'm considering as well. I'd like to build the PC before the end of the year and I don't think I want to wait several more months for the 7nm cpus.
And even if only a year from now I decide to upgrade, the total cost of buying the 2700x now + the cost of the new cpu next year is not gonna be much different from what the 9900k costs right now.
I was about to preorder the 9900k, but with how busy I'm a the moment I decided to wait and build the PC in a month or so. I think the 2700x is definitely the right choice.
Also, having a 4k/60 monitor I don't really need to push the framerate.
What games are CPU bound at 4K 60hz? I think almost everything that struggles with 4K 60hz on say a 2080ti is because of the GPU still, not the CPU.
- Status