RTX 2080 Ti Gaming Benches - 2700X vs 8700K

[Legend]

at resolutions most people use in gaming. 1080 is the main resolution most people game at. look at the games people play in masses fps wise on pc. pubg , fortnite , battlefield. all favour high fps on intel cpus. so on a modern monitor and high fps its not overkill. you want a intel high clocked cpu and a nvidia card for the best experience. we not talking value we talking best experience on the pc components.

WHY are we not talking value? Why are you completely ignoring that aspect and why do you feel it's not relevant? Are you a millionaire? Or are you speaking to the subset of extremely wealthy gamers who choose to game at 1080p and therefore don't care about value? Of course, therein lies a contradiction because logic would dictate someone who had lots of money probably wouldn't be gaming at 1080p anymore, unless they were some sort of SERIOUS competitive gamer. Shroud runs a 7700K... I guess his days are numbered though when all these 1080p gamers start rocking up with their 9900Ks lol!

 

[~>Dg<~]

its not so much about value its the fact that running very high fps on a modern monitor above 1080 is a challenge with no drops. 1440 and constant 144 fps for eg is very exspensive but 1080 isnt that bad. 4k forget it you cant even do it ! not in modern games.

 

[Legend]

its not so much about value its the fact that running very high fps on a modern monitor above 1080 is a challenge with no drops. 1440 and constant 144 fps for eg is very exspensive but 1080 isnt that bad. 4k forget it you cant even do it ! not in modern games.

First of all WHY is it "not so much about value"? I ask again, why are you dismissing that as though it shouldn't be a consideration? Second, even if value is ignored (which makes no sense for the vast majority of gamers), what evidence do you have that a 2700X cannot sustain sufficiently high FPS at 1080p without frame drops... and I don't mean evidence that the 9900K is faster, because that isn't up for debate, I mean performance inferior enough such that it would require a 9900K over a 2700X at 1080p.

 

[TNA]

First of all WHY is it "not so much about value"? I ask again, why are you dismissing that as though it shouldn't be a consideration? Second, even if value is ignored (which makes no sense for the vast majority of gamers), what evidence do you have that a 2700X cannot sustain sufficiently high FPS at 1080p without frame drops... and I don't mean evidence that the 9900K is faster, because that isn't up for debate, I mean performance inferior enough such that it would require a 9900K over a 2700X at 1080p.

Give up mate. Intel is the best, who cares about value? Anything else won’t fit his narrative so you won’t get a response. Even if it cost 5K for the extra 12% performance in games, it would not matter to him

 

[Panos]

Gents, here is another video comparing 8700K & 2700X with RTX2080Ti at 1080p

 

[~>Dg<~]

Give up mate. Intel is the best, who cares about value? Anything else won’t fit his narrative so you won’t get a response. Even if it cost 5K for the extra 12% performance in games, it would not matter to him

actual difference is 17 percent over a 2700x ingames . now that might not seem much but work it out and if you want high fps for high hz monitors. its exactly what you want.also remember in these benchmarks and being round up often they use games that dont really show the difference. so in games like pubg battlefield and fortnite csgo it can be differences of 30-50 fps. when you on a monitor sat at 100fps and the intel is giving you 144 fps constant.you are having the better experience. you may pay a price for it but we are enthusiasts. if amd bring out a chip/s that are better than intel i will buy them makes no difference brand wise whos better to me. just the performance. amd just cant provide what i need. that simple.

2700x cant even beat modern i5s so hows it beating new i7s not even out yet ? its just the same people going on year in year out. its been this way for 15 years since amd had a competitive amd cpu. will continue until amd can topple intel which i really dont see happening ever.

 

[TNA]

actual difference is 17 percent over a 2700x ingames .

Yes, at 1080p though

 

[Legend]

actual difference is 17 percent over a 2700x ingames . now that might not seem much but work it out and if you want high fps for high hz monitors. its exactly what you want.also remember in these benchmarks and being round up often they use games that dont really show the difference. so in games like pubg battlefield and fortnite csgo it can be differences of 30-50 fps. when you on a monitor sat at 100fps and the intel is giving you 144 fps constant.you are having the better experience. you may pay a price for it but we are enthusiasts. if amd bring out a chip/s that are better than intel i will buy them makes no difference brand wise whos better to me. just the performance. amd just cant provide what i need. that simple.

2700x cant even beat modern i5s so hows it beating new i7s not even out yet ? its just the same people going on year in year out. its been this way for 15 years since amd had a competitive amd cpu. will continue until amd can topple intel which i really dont see happening ever.

What are you talking about? With a 1080Ti, you aren't at 100FPS @ 1080p on any of the games you mention! Not even close!!

Honestly, if it weren't for your account being so old, I'd swear you were 12 years old... unless you're using your dad's account and he's buying you a 9900K. That's about the only thing that makes sense at this point because you're talking absolute drivel poo and clearly have a child's concept of money and value.

You also seem to be completely ignoring the 6700K/7700K which you'd have a far easier time arguing a case for. In fact, why not do exactly that, and explain why you think the 9900K is worth 66% more than the 7700K?

 

[~>Dg<~]

why are you being derogatory ? you are stating your response and i mine yet you are being rude about it. my finance has nothing to do with it.

so even though i have numerous systems with numerous cards in benching these games i have no idea ?

we are talking about different cpus. the modern i7s. not what you are mentioning.

 

[Legend]

why are you being derogatory ? you are stating your response and i mine yet you are being rude about it. my finance has nothing to do with it.

so even though i have numerous systems with numerous cards in benching these games i have no idea ?

we are talking about different cpus. the modern i7s. not what you are mentioning.

I am taking your words and extrapolating the only thing that makes sense.

We are talking about performance, aren't we? That seems to be ALL that matters to you, damn everything else, especially value. Forgetting a 2700X for a second, a 7700K offers amazing performance (better than 2700X if we're talking gaming at 1080p) for 66% less money than the 9900K... but it's no good to you? Why?

 

[~>Dg<~]

because it cant outperform new i7s. or new i9s. cant get why thats hard to understand.

 

[Legend]

because it cant outperform new i7s. or new i9s. cant get why thats hard to understand.

So basically the ONE singular thing that matters to you is performance... regardless of how much that performance costs or whether that performance is even noticeable to you? Is that correct?

 

[~>Dg<~]

surely thats been understandable ? please dont say well why dont you buy this or that at many thousands or whatever.

 

[Legend]

surely thats been understandable ? please dont say well why dont you buy this or that at many thousands or whatever.

But I hope you understand that this is an incredibly blinkered view and not one that 99% of people living in the real world share. There is no doubt it's faster, but that comes at absurdly awful value... a word that obviously isn't one you need to consider the meaning of for reasons that I assume are explained by your apparently very fortunate financial situation. Well that's great for you, and while it's wonderful you can afford to throw money around without a care in the world, the vast majority of people cannot. I would go so far as to say an even greater majority of those gaming at 1080p absolutey can't afford to do so, as most will be gaming at that resolution for budgetary reasons and 1440p and beyond becoming increasingly and restrictively expensive.

Furthermore, and this is the most ridiculous thing, you won't even notice the performance difference that you're gaining. Not at 1080p. At some point WAYYYY in the future, as games become more demanding... maybe... but come that time there will be an even faster CPU available anyway, so someone like you who doesn't care about value will just buy that and give the 9900K to your dog as a chew toy.

 

[~>Dg<~]

i stated the intel was better performance in games. it is. nothing to do with value. doesnt matter how many buy one to play at 1080 res. it is better performance as said. i do notice the performance difference. you may not i know. i can feel it. i see it . you may not i do as im used to high fps on high hz monitors. if you play on low hz monitors. total waste of time. the time frame you talking about the intel cpu will be ahead of anything amd. until the next intel one.so if you buy the new intel chip it will be top until the next one. so couple of years to 3 years. still ahead of anything amd. i just buy then put it in another system then move on to next. we are on a enthusiast forums many do the same. dont be surprised by this. i know many who will run 1080tis in sli and 5ghz chips at 1080 for eg. 144hz to 240hz monitors .to some totally insane to others its just getting great performance and keeping it there. 1440 200 fps on a modern game go try that. tell me how you go on and how many cards you need. if you can achieve it.then you will see why people do it at 1080. we dont need to go through this anymore its boring.

 

[Legend]

i stated the intel was better performance in games. it is. nothing to do with value. doesnt matter how many buy one to play at 1080 res. it is better performance as said. i do notice the performance difference. you may not i know. i can feel it. i see it . you may not i do as im used to high fps on high hz monitors. if you play on low hz monitors. total waste of time. the time frame you talking about the intel cpu will be ahead of anything amd. until the next intel one.so if you buy the new intel chip it will be top until the next one. so couple of years to 3 years. still ahead of anything amd. i just buy then put it in another system then move on to next. we are on a enthusiast forums many do the same. dont be surprised by this. i know many who will run 1080tis in sli and 5ghz chips at 1080 for eg. 144hz to 240hz monitors .to some totally insane to others its just getting great performance and keeping it there. 1440 200 fps on a modern game go try that. tell me how you go on and how many cards you need. if you can achieve it.then you will see why people do it at 1080. we dont need to go through this anymore its boring.

You're stating the bleeding obvious that it's faster. Every man, woman and dog knows this! To ignore the value is just ridiculous and makes absolutely no sense. Just because value doesn't matter to you, doesn't mean that it doesn't to anyone else... on the contrary in fact. You clearly aren't of this world and refuse to even acknowledge that fact. Why not just own your self entitled wealthy priviledge? You only come across as entirely foolish and misguided otherwise.

Ah you can FEEL it, right, gotcha!

To be clear, I fully accept and acknowledge there will always be people like you... companies like Intel prey on your type, you're their life blood! One could even argue you're necessary, so I'm not even discouraging you from doing what you're doing. Insane is the right word for it as you say.

 

[Troezar]

You're stating the bleeding obvious that it's faster. Every man, woman and dog knows this! To ignore the value is just ridiculous and makes absolutely no sense. Just because value doesn't matter to you, doesn't mean that it doesn't to anyone else... on the contrary in fact. You clearly aren't of this world and refuse to even acknowledge that fact. Why not just own your self entitled wealthy priviledge? You only come across as entirely foolish and misguided otherwise.

Ah you can FEEL it, right, gotcha!

To be clear, I fully accept and acknowledge there will always be people like you... companies like Intel prey on your type, you're their life blood! One could even argue you're necessary, so I'm not even discouraging you from doing what you're doing. Insane is the right word for it as you say.

The writing style should tell you everything you need to know. I've ignored a lot of people on here, every now and again I have to remind myself why

 

[TheRealDeal]

I went with Ryzen 2700x over the 8700k. One of the big reasons why is come Zen 2 and possibly 3 i should be able to upgrade the 2700x without swapping anything else out. I also game at 4k so with the 2700x being equal to an 8700k there and better at pretty much everything else it was a no brainer to me. Was cheaper as well so just made sense to me.

 

[~>Dg<~]

You're stating the bleeding obvious that it's faster. Every man, woman and dog knows this! To ignore the value is just ridiculous and makes absolutely no sense. Just because value doesn't matter to you, doesn't mean that it doesn't to anyone else... on the contrary in fact. You clearly aren't of this world and refuse to even acknowledge that fact. Why not just own your self entitled wealthy priviledge? You only come across as entirely foolish and misguided otherwise.

Ah you can FEEL it, right, gotcha!

To be clear, I fully accept and acknowledge there will always be people like you... companies like Intel prey on your type, you're their life blood! One could even argue you're necessary, so I'm not even discouraging you from doing what you're doing. Insane is the right word for it as you say.

because the value is in the performance for me. you drive a skoda i drive a ferrari what does it matter ? people will buy fast gear and use it how they want. i dont get what the issue is ? cause you deem it not to be good value ? makes no sense you cant see enthusiasts do this. i have no problem with anyone using their gear how they want or buying what they want. yet cause i want the fastest gaming cpu im crazy or misguided when its clear to see the intel gaming cpu is the fastest cpu for gaming .

intel doesnt prey on me. i choose what is the fastest gaming cpu. which isnt amd which is why i dont buy it for that purpose. your trying to take value and make it YOUR priority when MY priority is performance. not value.

 

[TNA]

I went with Ryzen 2700x over the 8700k. One of the big reasons why is come Zen 2 and possibly 3 i should be able to upgrade the 2700x without swapping anything else out. I also game at 4k so with the 2700x being equal to an 8700k there and better at pretty much everything else it was a no brainer to me. Was cheaper as well so just made sense to me.

This guy knows that 4K is the real deal

I am actually shocked that on a enthusiast forum like this people are even talking about 1080p which is a resolution from like a decade ago? Hell I have even had 4K for 4 years now...

Dg mate, do yourself a favour and chuck that 1080p monitor out the window and order yourself a 4K monitor and a Ryzen 2700X

By the way I am kidding. Each to their own