• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Core 9000 series

Soldato
Joined
2 Jan 2012
Posts
11,925
Location
UK.
Just seen the pricing of these. Hahaha Intel must be tripping. An extra £150 for the 8700K tier replacement. Not as bad as Nvidia (Almost double pricing) but still awful.

Bad times in the PC space, thank god for AMD.

'Looks lovingly at 2700X for £280 and Strix VEGA 64 for £360 setup'
 
Associate
Joined
13 Mar 2009
Posts
704
What are the drawbacks of asking someone in the US to buy it for you and then ship it over as a present?

As a "gift" it's only liable for NOT paying import taxes on it if it's under 36 dollars. Regardless paying a UK retailer for this processor or any processor is pointless when you can just get them shipped over from the USA for 20% less with all taxes paid.

You can get a 8700k for 388 all in getting it from the USA. Personally I'm just going to wait.
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
1 Dec 2015
Posts
18,514
As a "gift" it's only liable for NOT paying import taxes on it if it's under 36 dollars.

stick it in an older intel box wrapped up in birthday wrap :D

Hmmmm delidded binned 8700k @ 5.1g for a 9900k? Shall I....

if needs must . either way, both cores should last as long as first gen i7s which seems now have bitten the bullet with AC:O not supporting the oldest cores
 
Associate
Joined
12 Feb 2007
Posts
372
Location
Bishops Waltham
Ok for anyone who is interested - obviously I have no clue what the retailers actually buy for - but through my work contacts and suppliers of retailers I have access to, they said they would sell it to a retailer for £441 ex. So that's still higher than the US cost once you add VAT - I've also been told that the 600 pre-order price in most cases is a best guess for them not to lose any money on the pre-order due to intel having production issues which they are just throwing money at to try and solve.

Edit: this is for i9 9900k pricing.
 
Soldato
Joined
19 Feb 2011
Posts
5,849
Are you saying it's not going to be generally faster? Just based off of the 8700k it is going to be and it seems as though it could clock higher more reliably.

Oh its going to be faster, but not the 30-50% that Intel would have you believe, watch that Hardware Unboxed video, explains it all perfectly. On average the 8700K is 9% faster than a 2700X @ 1080p with a 1080ti on Ultra settings, that fps lead diminishes as you go up resolutions...

So your telling me suddenly intel pulled another 20-40% performance out of the bag with just 2 more cores and HT? lolz...

The whole testing was extremely biased and flawed, that video is so damning, i now expect the 9900k to be no more than 10-12% faster than a 2700X with a 1080ti @ 1080p Ultra settings, yes still faster, but only marginally faster than an existing 8700k. But you get to pay a ridiculous price for that 12% perf, double if buying in the UK against a 2700X lol.

These are great times to be alive folks! £600 CPU's offering 2-4% performance uplift over previous gen, £1300 GPU's etc... and people wonder why consoles are getting so many new buyers.
 
Soldato
Joined
4 Dec 2015
Posts
3,221
Location
London
Ok for anyone who is interested - obviously I have no clue what the retailers actually buy for - but through my work contacts and suppliers of retailers I have access to, they said they would sell it to a retailer for £441 ex. So that's still higher than the US cost once you add VAT - I've also been told that the 600 pre-order price in most cases is a best guess for them not to lose any money on the pre-order due to intel having production issues which they are just throwing money at to try and solve.

Edit: this is for i9 9900k pricing.

Sorry but these guys for example buy it all in $ and import it.

Best estimate is buying for slightly under the quoted retail $, $480 maybe, unlike the American sites adding what looks like a $30-50 margin they have added that then additional £100. If I can buy one CPU for £100 less with all duty and taxes then you can be relatively sure they are able to buy thousands for quite a sum less...
 
Associate
Joined
12 Mar 2008
Posts
1,901
Oh its going to be faster, but not the 30-50% that Intel would have you believe, watch that Hardware Unboxed video, explains it all perfectly. On average the 8700K is 9% faster than a 2700X @ 1080p with a 1080ti on Ultra settings, that fps lead diminishes as you go up resolutions...

So your telling me suddenly intel pulled another 20-40% performance out of the bag with just 2 more cores and HT? lolz...

The whole testing was extremely biased and flawed, that video is so damning, i now expect the 9900k to be no more than 10-12% faster than a 2700X with a 1080ti @ 1080p Ultra settings, yes still faster, but only marginally faster than an existing 8700k. But you get to pay a ridiculous price for that 12% perf, double if buying in the UK against a 2700X lol.

These are great times to be alive folks! £600 CPU's offering 2-4% performance uplift over previous gen, £1300 GPU's etc... and people wonder why consoles are getting so many new buyers.

Are they saying it's going to be 30-50% on average faster? An 8700k being 9% faster on average doesn't really tell you much other than there will be some games that may be 20% or more faster and others that won't.
 
Soldato
Joined
4 Dec 2015
Posts
3,221
Location
London
Do these cpu's even have any hardware vulnerability fixes? Some sites say they do and others say they don't.

There was an ASUS tech guy on a stream yesterday, from what he said no unless you count no hyperthreading for 9700k being a fix. He said basically they have the same security fixes as the current gen built in, so nothing hardware but software/microcode.

That’s what I understood anyway!
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Oct 2008
Posts
11,493
Location
Lisburn, Northern Ireland
That simply isn't true though. The difference between 2933MHz with default timings versus 3200MHz with tightened timings can be gigantic in some cases. Hell, the difference between two 3200MHz kits can be significant.

5qUB2ST.png

https://www.gamersnexus.net/news-pc/3283-ryzen-2-pre-test-x470-vs-x370-scaling-memory-r7-2700x

Both of those are 3200MHz kits (the Geil being CL16 versus a CL14 Corsair). Even discounting the 20% gap in Ashes of the Benchmark, you're still seeing 5-10% in real games. Just from a few tweaked timings, let alone touching clock speed or properly tweaking timings manually.


Careful now, you'll upset GavIntel with that positive AMD post.
 
Soldato
Joined
15 Jun 2005
Posts
2,751
Location
Edinburgh
Do these cpu's even have any hardware vulnerability fixes? Some sites say they do and others say they don't.
There was an ASUS tech guy on a stream yesterday, from what he said no unless you count no hyperthreading for 9700k being a fix. He said basically they have the same security fixes as the current gen built in, so nothing hardware but software/microcode.

That’s what I understood anyway!
ASUS tech guy needs to do some homework.
Hardware fixes for Meltdown and L1TF. Meltdown is arguable the worst (from a security PoV) and L1TF impacts Hyperthreading.
https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/posts/32180864
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom