-
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
- Thread starter orbitalwalsh
- Start date
Soldato
You are crying flying the Intel flag for days now..... I point the obvious which you do not like
Caporegime
Fixed that for you ^^^^^ its easy to gurgitate a number and say anything that doesn't conform to that is fake, and don't talk about fanboys, least of all, on this whole forum: you. you ware blue face paint.
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Nov 2017
- Posts
- 116
Who buys a 9900k and a gtx 2080 then plays at 1080p resolution.
At 1440p the 9900k loses the tiny extra performance it has at an extortionate cost
At 1440p the 9900k loses the tiny extra performance it has at an extortionate cost
i have both amd and intel systemsbrands me nothing to me. i just buy which is best for gaming and my use.
Most people buy the best for gaming if they game...but they also buy the best for their budget.
i9 9900k is a joke cpu at current pricing compared to 2700x and I fit one would never thought I’d be saying that
2700x is a great bargin cpu at the moment. its probably the best value cpu highend of choice gaming wise. just if you want the best though you would pick intel for gaming.
thats the problem one person will debate value. one will debate the best. value wise short term you can argue with amd. long term id argue intel is the better option and the fastest. why is the intel better long term ? well for the 3 years average most people keep their cpus. the intel will be quicker in games. so 2700x for eg = £300 no gouged i7 9900k is 490 in uk. so 190 quid difference for 3 years. which to have a faster better pc is not that much. 65 per year extra a year to have a faster gaming pc for 3 years. pretty good value tbh. you could also get the cheaper i9 and do the same with no much difference save even more and still be just as fast.
thats the problem one person will debate value. one will debate the best. value wise short term you can argue with amd. long term id argue intel is the better option and the fastest. why is the intel better long term ? well for the 3 years average most people keep their cpus. the intel will be quicker in games. so 2700x for eg = £300 no gouged i7 9900k is 490 in uk. so 190 quid difference for 3 years. which to have a faster better pc is not that much. 65 per year extra a year to have a faster gaming pc for 3 years. pretty good value tbh. you could also get the cheaper i9 and do the same with no much difference save even more and still be just as fast.
Not a 2080 (or equivalent) but I used to do it in the past when playing online FPS semi-competitively - higher end CPU and SLI GPUs but playing at 1680x1050@120Hz with a "lowpro" visual config when most had moved onto 1920x1080.
There will be people doing like 9900K + 2080ti + 1080p@240Hz or something silly like that.
exactly cause you need that fastest cpu and gpu combo for high hz monitors. people keep leaving modern gaming monitors out of the equation. 1080 144+ on a very modern game even 2080ti in many titles cant hit that high fps. yet people say no one plays with that set up at 1080.
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Nov 2017
- Posts
- 116
You could argue AMD offers more upgrade options cpu wise long term. The current 9th series mobo chipset will soon be obsolete offering potentially no upgrade path after this chip.
Putting all of your eggs in one basket with a 9900
Soldato
My basket at Overclockers UK:2080Ti to Vega64, £1200-£450 so 37% of the cost of a 2010Ti the Vega64 looks a good deal now doesn't it
- 1 x Sapphire Radeon RX VEGA Nitro+ 64 8GB HBM2 PCI-Express Graphics Card= £499.99
- 1 x Asus MG279Q ROG 27" 2560x1440 IPS FREESYNC 144Hz Gaming Widescreen LED Slim Bezel Monitor= £449.99
Total: £962.28 (includes shipping: £12.30)
You'll be hard pressed to see the difference between this setup and a 2080Ti and gsync, yet you'll save about £1,000
Eh? You’ve just made up i9 9900k pricing
you haven’t factored anything else in either...Nonsense...How can you be expected to be taken seriously ?
Last edited:
Caporegime
If you want the best the 9900K is your only choice, thats fine for people who are not on a budget or just keep getting other credit cards to pay off the last pile of plastic.
The problem Intel have is increasingly less people are willing to spend more and more on their hardware, like £600 for a CPU, they would rather spend half that and if in 2 years they want to upgrade they do that then, this instead of spending it all in one go and keeping it longer.
Yes there are those who blow £500 / £600 on a CPU once a year, but they are small in number.
I spent £160 on my CPU, in another year i might get replacement for £200, a £350 7700K at the time would not have been the CPU to keep for a few years, its already showing its inadequacies.
Don’t care....it’s a moot point...as they don’t exist at that price...you're spouting nonsense...
My basket at Overclockers UK:
- 1 x Sapphire Radeon RX VEGA Nitro+ 64 8GB HBM2 PCI-Express Graphics Card= £499.99
- 1 x Asus MG279Q ROG 27" 2560x1440 IPS FREESYNC 144Hz Gaming Widescreen LED Slim Bezel Monitor= £449.99
Total: £962.28 (includes shipping: £12.30)
You'll be hard pressed to see the difference between this setup and a 2080Ti and gsync, yet you'll save about £1,000
why this looks like a great idea. good luck with getting the high fps. that many of us want. that card isnt doing it not even a 2080ti.
Haha lol
Soldato
Freesync negates the need for high fps. You get butter smooth gameplay.
