-
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.
9700k vs 9900k Gaming
- Thread starter beany_bot
- Start date
Anyone know if the 9700K runs much cooler than the 9900K? If so it could be a great gaming chip.
Anandtech did a comparison which showed a really big difference but it is flawed because their 9900K was overvolting on a Z370. At stock and up to around 4.9 GHz, the 9700K runs cooler than the 8700K. At around 5GHz and above it starts to run hotter that the 8700K due to the extra cores. The 9700K will do around 5.3Ghz at the same temperature/voltage that the 9900K will do 5.0Ghz.
That (if true) is hugely significant.
Here is the Anandtech comparison. Just ignore the stock/auto result. Generally 10 degrees cooler.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/13400/intel-9th-gen-core-i9-9900k-i7-9700k-i5-9600k-review/22
Last edited:
9600k will probably oc higher than either, and games don't care about HT. 6 cores is enough for any game out there.
But is it even necessary to oc these 5ghz chips? This is the first CPU i've ever had that I havent bothered to OC, i just run stock. +100mhz is 1.9%, not noticeable in benchmarks let alone games. my cpu is much cooler at stock than 5.3, and its only 5.6% slower.
if you game, get a 9600k or if you must, a 9700k. 9900k hell no
But is it even necessary to oc these 5ghz chips? This is the first CPU i've ever had that I havent bothered to OC, i just run stock. +100mhz is 1.9%, not noticeable in benchmarks let alone games. my cpu is much cooler at stock than 5.3, and its only 5.6% slower.
if you game, get a 9600k or if you must, a 9700k. 9900k hell no
Last edited:
I heard DDR5 is going very well and will be out sooner then people think.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 29,450
Xbox One X already uses it
The 9600K is a failed 8-core with two disabled cores. I can’t see it being the best silicon.
Soldato
Caporegime
Blanket statements like that are incredibly idiotic and irresponsible, gaming on a 2070 or even a 2080 Intel or AMD it makes no difference to performance and the latter is far less expensive.
These people are a bunch of idiots clueless about the real world haven't bought their own hardware for a decade and throw about advice from that perspective.
We need more real reviewers, people who buy their own hardware.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 29,450
That's GDDR5 silly billy.
It's shared between the GPU and the system though...
Soldato
GDDR5 is high bandwidth, reasonably high latency, where as normal DDR5 will be low latency, and obviously bandwidth will depend on the speeds when released, but 4200-4800MHz is looking like the 'normal' equivalent to 2133MHz on DDR4.
Indeed, i5-8600K might actually be better overall than the i5-9600K, especially as it'd presumably be cheaper due to it being "older tech". i7-8700K has no equivalent in 9th generation either so will retain value.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,456
What exactly is the difference in the i5-8600K and the i5-9600K?
Did the core even get a bump?
Did the core even get a bump?
Associate
- Joined
- 30 Aug 2018
- Posts
- 2,483
8600k is 3.6 / 4.3 vs 9600k 3.7 / 4.5
The 9 series has hardware fixes for 2 of the vulnerabilities that were discovered during the whole spectre meltdown thing.
does 5.2 easy, for the price, it's best bang for the buck CPU out there for gaming.
nah. 8600k cant catch a 9600k, even my cpu is slower in benchmarks clock for clock. id wait for prices to settle first. I mean, ive seen a 9600k for £265 imported.
Associate
Interesting, didn't see an IPC bump of note in 9xxx to 8xxx cpu's. Which would indicate an 8600K and 9600K would be the same performance with the only difference being power consumption per MHz...
