• 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

Simon Belmont said:
With these prices I'll be heading to console this time me thinks. I don't care who makes the game PC or Consoles. I'll buy what I can afford and it thanks to high prices PC is pushing me to consoles.
Click to expand...

I was joking as you were aware. And I agree with you also. The pricing for pc parts is getting out of hand.

I can see the day in which I stop using and building PC's and just use a console only. If this trend keeps moving forward in the PC components market.
 
andy_mk3 said:
Personally I'd say it's impossible to say until we see how it compares to the 8700k.
Click to expand...
Ageed.

All anyone can say for sure right now, is that intel pricing isn't consumer friendly. So none of their offerings are decent value for money compared to the competition.

In a vacuum the 9700k might be great, but I expect that whatever its performance is, price will ultimately mean it is a tough sell vs 8 series and especially ryzen.
 
robin66 said:
I was joking as you were aware. And I agree with you also. The pricing for pc parts is getting out of hand.

I can see the day in which I stop using and building PC's and just use a console only. If this trend keeps moving forward in the PC components market.
Click to expand...

I paid over £900 in 1990 for a 80286-12.5MHz system with 1MB of Ram, 40MB of hard disk storage, note MB not GB or TB. Parts are cheaper 28 years later, but I will admit the i9-9900k does seem a tad overpriced in the market.
 
nkata said:
I paid over £900 in 1990 for a 80286-12.5MHz system with 1MB of Ram, 40MB of hard disk storage, note MB not GB or TB. Parts are cheaper 28 years later, but I will admit the i9-9900k does seem a tad overpriced in the market.
Click to expand...

I remember those times. And prices were high back then.
 
nkata said:
I paid over £900 in 1990 for a 80286-12.5MHz system with 1MB of Ram, 40MB of hard disk storage
Click to expand...

I still have (I think) some of the parts from a 286 system my dad had for work around the end of the 1980s - the base system was £3000 - 286, 2MB RAM, 20MB HDD IIRC but... another £3000 for a 2MB video card (as it was used with a high end digital microscope).

http://www.aten-hosted.com/images/DSC00078S.jpg

There's the HDD with the ISA interface - even has Winchester support :D

Can't remember the exact dates now but the monitor IIRC was dated 86 or 87 - which was full colour 800x600 which was a bit expensive as well.

EDIT: So Titan V money for a 2MB video card LOL.
 
CPU tech has been the most boring to follow in recent years...

Q6600 was a great cpu...then drip fed from there...

2018 nearly 11 years on in real terms have we moved on that much really ?
 
easyrider said:
CPU tech has been the most boring to follow in recent years...

Q6600 was a great cpu...then drip fed from there...

2018 nearly 11 years on in real terms have we moved on that much really ?
Click to expand...

definitely yes.

Even sandy bridge was a good boost from Q6600, since then we have had 8 gens of core series chips with 3-10% IPC boost on every tick, cache speed improvements, new cpu instructions, and clock speed improvements, not to mention transition from DDR3 to DDR4, as the chipset is part of the package.

If you upgrading every single gen then yeah it seems bad, but its far better to at least wait 3-4 years between every upgrade, and then you will get decent performance improvements, I went from a 4670k to a 8600k and that was definitely noticeable, never mind from a Q6600 to a 9900k.

A Q6600 e.g. has no PCID, NVPCID, AES, AVX, no on board ram controller, and no onboard voltage circuitry. On a technical level its a long way behind the latest core chips. It also doesnt have HTT, which many are a fan off ;)
 
chrcoluk said:
definitely yes.

Even sandy bridge was a good boost from Q6600, since then we have had 8 gens of core series chips with 3-10% IPC boost on every tick, cache speed improvements, new cpu instructions, and clock speed improvements, not to mention transition from DDR3 to DDR4, as the chipset is part of the package.

If you upgrading every single gen then yeah it seems bad, but its far better to at least wait 3-4 years between every upgrade, and then you will get decent performance improvements, I went from a 4670k to a 8600k and that was definitely noticeable, never mind from a Q6600 to a 9900k.

A Q6600 e.g. has no PCID, NVPCID, AES, AVX, no on board ram controller, and no onboard voltage circuitry. On a technical level its a long way behind the latest core chips. It also doesnt have HTT, which many are a fan off ;)
Click to expand...

Q6600 still great CPUs though - I only just moved my dad off one to a Ryzen 2600 a few weeks back. I still have a heavily overclocked Q9550 (Intel) in another rig and it handles a lot of stuff fine albeit anything newer than a 780ti/970/290 is lost on it gaming wise heh.

I really don't feel like things have moved on that fast - the 4820K was the first CPU - that tempted me off the Q9550 and nothing really feels slow, etc. on it yet.
 
Perfect_Chaos said:
93c on a high end air cooler = RIP on an AIO in that case as well then since they might only be a bit cooler and louder as well.
Click to expand...

Nope modern AIO coolers like Corsair AIO Hydro H110i PRO, H115i PRO and H150i PRO's redesigned pumps from ground up are completely silent and you cant hear it, the fans are not louder, it the same as on air coolers plus H110i PRO, H115i PRO and H150i PRO fans will turn off at up to 40C idle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom