9700K or 3700X

[Uaon]

The video features comparisons against both OC'd 9700k and stock 9700k CPUs, where, the only conclussion I extract is that OCing the 9700k only gives you 5 to 7 extra fps... the differences in bechmarks between the 3700x and the non oc'd 9700k is still considerable.

EDIT: I'm going for the 9700k finally. Thanks guys

Not at 1440p it isnt

 

[orbitalwalsh]

The video features comparisons against both OC'd 9700k and stock 9700k CPUs, where, the only conclussion I extract is that OCing the 9700k only gives you 5 to 7 extra fps... the differences in bechmarks between the 3700x and the non oc'd 9700k is still considerable.

EDIT: I'm going for the 9700k finally. Thanks guys

I always keep eye out for Min rate rates , one that really hurts when your gaming along with average

Not at 1440p it isnt

Depends on game and GPU .
With 2080ti there is but percentage of people that have a 2080ti is low , most would run 2080 at that pricing .
Next gen Nvidia **80 will equal or beat 2080ti and then gen after that

 

[Trojan Horse]

If your just gonna game a 3600 is gonna give you comparable performance, especially at 1440p+.

 

[Ian Jones]

im sat on this bench at the moment, 3700x or the i7 9700k.

I mainly just play games and surf the web. games like pubg, have ordered cyberpunk 2077

once the cpu has been chosen, then there's the motherboard, ram

 

[Uaon]

im sat on this bench at the moment, 3700x or the i7 9700k.

I mainly just play games and surf the web. games like pubg, have ordered cyberpunk 2077

once the cpu has been chosen, then there's the motherboard, ram

Get whichever comes cheapest thats what Im doing

 

[orbitalwalsh]

im sat on this bench at the moment, 3700x or the i7 9700k.

I mainly just play games and surf the web. games like pubg, have ordered cyberpunk 2077

once the cpu has been chosen, then there's the motherboard, ram

It's funny. We LL complained when lack of competition in the CPU market, slow progress and high prices. Now we have choice and so many more cores then 80% of games on steam platform uses, we are stuck and complain about being stuck hehe.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Both cores are good ! Intel still for gaming, ryzen CPU for value and supporting the underdog and fueling the competition

 

[R3dNano]

I finally went with the 9700k, Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Pro and Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro Black 32GB (2x16GB) 3200Mhz (PC4-25600) CL16.
Couldn't be happier. Well, if we're asking, I feel my temps are a bit high, since I use a cryorig air cooler and playing battlefield 1, getting the cpu @100% usage, I get high 60s, low-mid 70s on the current heat wave we're suffering these days.
Now, I just have to wait for the 2070 super to arrive and my build will be complete.

 

[EdwardTeach]

I finally went with the 9700k, Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Pro and Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro Black 32GB (2x16GB) 3200Mhz (PC4-25600) CL16.
Couldn't be happier. Well, if we're asking, I feel my temps are a bit high, since I use a cryorig air cooler and playing battlefield 1, getting the cpu @100% usage, I get high 60s, low-mid 70s on the current heat wave we're suffering these days.
Now, I just have to wait for the 2070 super to arrive and my build will be complete.

Have you been able to make any direct comparisons with your old system? (I presume you are still using the same gpu for now?) I am wondering if it has made any difference to fps?

 

[R3dNano]

Have you been able to make any direct comparisons with your old system? (I presume you are still using the same gpu for now?) I am wondering if it has made any difference to fps?

It definitely did: My old cpu was a 4770k and once I made the jump from 1080p to 2k, my fps, specially on battlefield games, went out the window.
2k, for some reason, puts extra load on CPU and yesterday, after seeing constant stable 2k 144-ish fps on high settings, I shed a tear

BTW: Before having the 4770k, I had a gen 5 i5 (can't remember the exact model) and I had the same experience when I changed to the 4770k: 1080p 60 fps was barely achievable on battlefield 1 with a 970 on an ultrawide screen (more resolution=more load) until i made the change

 

[orbitalwalsh]

I finally went with the 9700k, Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Pro and Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro Black 32GB (2x16GB) 3200Mhz (PC4-25600) CL16.
Couldn't be happier. Well, if we're asking, I feel my temps are a bit high, since I use a cryorig air cooler and playing battlefield 1, getting the cpu @100% usage, I get high 60s, low-mid 70s on the current heat wave we're suffering these days.
Now, I just have to wait for the 2070 super to arrive and my build will be complete.

Temp wise in this heat that's fine, a not thing would be fan speed of cooler being louder then it could be etc .

BV1 is a game well done for multicore but most of it is netcode ! Get into a firefight with 40 people on screen and boom! CPU activity spikes

 

[Trojan Horse]

It definitely did: My old cpu was a 4770k and once I made the jump from 1080p to 2k, my fps, specially on battlefield games, went out the window.
2k, for some reason, puts extra load on CPU and yesterday, after seeing constant stable 2k 144-ish fps on high settings, I shed a tear

BTW: Before having the 4770k, I had a gen 5 i5 (can't remember the exact model) and I had the same experience when I changed to the 4770k: 1080p 60 fps was barely achievable on battlefield 1 with a 970 on an ultrawide screen (more resolution=more load) until i made the change

How was your i5 unable to handle 1080p?

my 4670K does 1440p UW well in most titles other than BF5.

I am considering upgrading from my 4670K to the 3600 / 9700K.

Did you keep your GPU the same? How much FPS did you gain from just CPU alone at 2k?

 

[R3dNano]

How was your i5 unable to handle 1080p?

my 4670K does 1440p UW well in most titles other than BF5.

I am considering upgrading from my 4670K to the 3600 / 9700K.

Did you keep your GPU the same? How much FPS did you gain from just CPU alone at 2k?

My i5 was able to handle 1080p on most games, the issue was with battlefield 1: I couldn't keep 60 fps. I don'tknow if this was due to the extra real state of my ultrawide, 1080p monitor at the time, but I definitely noticed a huge improvment when i plugged in the 4770k, while I was still using the GTX 970.

After barely an hour of playing battlefield1/battlefield V with the new processor, 1070ti, eyeballing it, i'd say:

4770k, 16Gb 1600Mhz ram, 1070ti: 90-130 fps i'd say 100 average with horrendous dips into the 40s region.
9700k, 32Gb 3200Mhz ram, 1070ti: 120-144 fps with bothe the cpu and the gpu pretty busy.

I just discovered CAM, and I'll try and take more precise and real data from my current setup. I don't really know the app, but I'll post here results.

Definitely a huge improvement, nonetheless.

 

[orbitalwalsh]

How was your i5 unable to handle 1080p?

my 4670K does 1440p UW well in most titles other than BF5.

I am considering upgrading from my 4670K to the 3600 / 9700K.

Did you keep your GPU the same? How much FPS did you gain from just CPU alone at 2k?

BFV/1 is a game well designed along with Assassin Creed. Loves cores ! And specially at 1080p with powerful GPU your CPU bound .

9th gen does include some IPC gains along side the extra cores and Speed for all cores which helps as well

 

[Trojan Horse]

BFV/1 is a game well designed along with Assassin Creed. Loves cores ! And specially at 1080p with powerful GPU your CPU bound .

9th gen does include some IPC gains along side the extra cores and Speed for all cores which helps as well

just to reiterate i am running 1440p UW so definitely MASSIVELY less cpu bound but yes bf5 loves cores

 

[Trojan Horse]

My i5 was able to handle 1080p on most games, the issue was with battlefield 1: I couldn't keep 60 fps. I don'tknow if this was due to the extra real state of my ultrawide, 1080p monitor at the time, but I definitely noticed a huge improvment when i plugged in the 4770k, while I was still using the GTX 970.

After barely an hour of playing battlefield1/battlefield V with the new processor, 1070ti, eyeballing it, i'd say:

4770k, 16Gb 1600Mhz ram, 1070ti: 90-130 fps i'd say 100 average with horrendous dips into the 40s region.
9700k, 32Gb 3200Mhz ram, 1070ti: 120-144 fps with bothe the cpu and the gpu pretty busy.

I just discovered CAM, and I'll try and take more precise and real data from my current setup. I don't really know the app, but I'll post here results.

Definitely a huge improvement, nonetheless.

i am guessing my vega 64 should be on par with your 1070ti / 1080? i will report back to see what fps i get on my i5

were these settings on ultra?

what is CAM should i also use that to monitor fps?

 

[orbitalwalsh]

just to reiterate i am running 1440p UW so definitely MASSIVELY less cpu bound but yes bf5 loves cores

true, easy swicth for yourself would be i7 second hand as they do really well with DX12 and get a nice increase in performance, i5 gets zero gains

 

[Trojan Horse]

true, easy swicth for yourself would be i7 second hand as they do really well with DX12 and get a nice increase in performance, i5 gets zero gains

i asked that in a thread before and everyone absolutely **** on me for trying to go i7 lol

which i7 do you recommend i love delidding and liquid metal anyway

can i go higher than i7 4770k on my board? if im getting 20fps + inc thats even better than getting a new gpu lol

 

[orbitalwalsh]

i asked that in a thread before and everyone absolutely **** on me for trying to go i7 lol

which i7 do you recommend i love delidding and liquid metal anyway

can i go higher than i7 4770k on my board? if im getting 20fps + inc thats even better than getting a new gpu lol

thing is, they'll be selling for dead cheap since everyone is going intel 8 cores or ryzen 8/12/16 cores. if you can pick one up cheaply for £100 the fair enough !

DX12 increase, you'll have to look at that by a game by game basis

 

[Trojan Horse]

thing is, they'll be selling for dead cheap since everyone is going intel 8 cores or ryzen 8/12/16 cores. if you can pick one up cheaply for £100 the fair enough !

DX12 increase, you'll have to look at that by a game by game basis

i thought you got more fps with dx11? isnt dx12 bit pointless for a 64 / XT

 

[orbitalwalsh]

i thought you got more fps with dx11? isnt dx12 bit pointless for a 64 / XT

depends on the game and core . running an old i7 860 and its a god send ! all these DX12 test are on nwer CPUs, put in older ones and the i7 8 threads gets a nice boost