• 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.

Dissuade me from buying 9900K

Jacky60

Jacky60

Jacky60

Associate
Joined
16 Jan 2010
Posts
1,494
Location
Earth
I have an upgrade itch I have to scratch. Been rocking a 5960X (4.5Ghz, 4250Ghz cache) 32GB 2750mhz DDR4 for five years and it's still going strong but in the game I play the most (Arma 3 -6000hours) I'm typically getting 40-70 fps and one of my mates with a 9900K at 4.9Ghz/4000mhz 32GB DDR4 is getting 120fps. He's on Ultrawide 3840/1200 I'm at 4K but still the FPS discrepancy is annoying and his in game performance seems to reflect his super high FPS (he's on 2080ti I'm on 1080ti SLI).

ALL of my other games are GPU limited and performance is good enough (tbh performance is good enough in ARMA 3) but for something I've devoted far too much time to I want more FPS. YouTube benchmarks show 3900X being smashed by a 7700K in Arma 3 and I can't see any of the new Ryzens being a good option. My 5960X seems about on par with a 2700X in Arma 3 or possibly/probably even quicker using the YAAB (yet another Arma benchmark) which is about the best benchmark for this game (available in Workshop) The only thing holding me back from buying a 9900K is lack of PCIe lanes for SLI/NVME and the vain hope that AMD
might finally be able to kick Intel's arse sometime soon in this game.
Can anyone with a 3600X/3700X/3800X/3900X please run the Arma 3 YAAB benchmark (hit S when starting for standardised settings) and give me some idea what they get as it only takes 2 mins.
If I get 9900K now it looks like I'll get a significant uplift but I'm loathe to reward Intel's laziness and meanness with PCIE lanes. I've considered the 9700K but that seems like an even more annoying compromise.
Please advise.
 
LePhuronn said:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cc074l/performance_report_9900k_vs_3700x_in_arma_3/

tl;dr

His $590 9900K system was 10% better than his $550 3700X system
Click to expand...
One important note when comparing performance per dollar is that often US and EU prices differ significantly. A given item can offer much better value for money in one region compared to another sometimes (e.g. Vega 56 was never really a good option in the US). In this case, the X570 motherboard is only £25 more than the Z390 version in the UK, compared to the $80 ($60 after bundle discount) difference that Reddit poster paid. Best to price up a whole build for both Intel and AMD and make a decision from there.
 
LePhuronn said:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cc074l/performance_report_9900k_vs_3700x_in_arma_3/

tl;dr

His $590 9900K system was 10% better than his $550 3700X system
Click to expand...

That is the most misleading post I have seen but then what do you expect from an opinion post on reddit.

AMD Ryzen R7 3700x $330

Gigabyte X570 Aorus Pro WiFi $270

-$50 CPU/Motherboard combo discount (bigger promo discount for AMD)

$550+tax


Intel Core i9 9900k $450

Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi $190

-$30 CPU/Motherboard combo discount

-$20 Motherboard pricematch (should have been $10 but w/e)

$590+tax


Lets look at the prices on overclockers, without the USA discounts and USA pricing. After all why post on overclockers if you have no intention of buying from the store.

AMD Ryzen R7 3700x £329.99
Gigabyte X570 Aorus Pro WiFi £226.99

Total: £556.98

Intel Core i9 9900k £499.99
Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro WiFi £194.99
Cooler Master MasterLiquid ML240R Addressable RGB CPU Cooler Bundle £99.95
Total: £794.84

So if you want to spend £100's more you will get an increase in performance. This is normal and expected. Also he has overclocked the 9900k to 5GHz which is why I added the cooler I did. In fact you could spend the difference between them on a 3800x/3900x. That would close the gap between the two builds massively.

Note: The 9900k has no cooler, both the 3700x and the 3800x come with a decent air cooler. Almost all of the 3800x's overclocking is with the RAM. With the 9900k you need a decent AIO to reach 5GHz.

I got a cheaper AIO for the 9900k, I would use a Cooler Master MasterLiquid ML360R Addressable RGB CPU Cooler - 360mm for £150 available from overclockers. When you think about it if you were building from scratch, the 9900k build is going to be close too £300 more.

A 3800x RAM and PBO overclock looks like this:

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/39830901? 11442 CPU in time spy.
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/39830465? 6922 CPU in time spy extreme.
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/39830577? 26036 physics in Fire Strike.

9900k in fire strike @ 5GHz https://img.purch.com/r/711x457/aHR...BL0IvODQ1MzYzL29yaWdpbmFsL2ltYWdlMDA0LnBuZw==

9900k in time spy @ 5GHz https://img.purch.com/r/711x457/aHR...BLzkvODQ1MzYxL29yaWdpbmFsL2ltYWdlMDAzLnBuZw==

CPU-z 3800x RAM + PBO (RAM is xmp 3600 but timings are tighter)


CPU-z 9900k 5GHz (this looks like it is before the performance destroying patches) (RAM is xmp 3600)


My RAM and PBO overclocked 3800x looks very close to a 9900k at 5GHz. At least in 3D Mark. You did want someone to, "Dissuade me from buying 9900K"

Default AMD power limits so I still have warranty.
 
Last edited:
Does Arma even utilise SLI ? since hes on a 2080ti and lower res I would be looking at that since if you are only using 1x1080ti then straight away he has about 30-35% more GPU power depending on clocks.

I would be tempted to wait for cascade lake and the new threadripper before making the plunge as I can see this as spending quite a bit of money for a disappointing upgrade imo.
 
I would say keep cpu for a while sell both your 1080ti’s and buy a 2080ti have a much stronger gpu will give you better frame rates in games then a new will (that don’t support sli) which a lot of newer games don’t these days.

both you and your friend at chosen Rez of your monitors/tv would get minimal difference between amd and intel though paying extra for small gains the 9900k would give u is not there for you.

I have a 3900x and 2080ti and I game at 1440p 144hz and sometimes at 4K on my tv and in most games the difference between me and my friends is negligible and in greedfall borderlands 3 and code vein in acctully faster then there 9900k and 2080ti systems

but I still say 2080ti and going single card would be your best upgrade
 
zx128k said:
That is the most misleading post I have seen
Click to expand...
Hardly. It clearly shows performance numbers from a guy who's owned both a Ryzen 3000 system and a 9900K system. I'm not Jacky60's dad and I'm sure he's a big enough pupper to work out the differences in prices and whatnot for himself.
zx128k said:
After all why post on overclockers if you have no intention of buying from the store.
Click to expand...
I buy very little from OcUK now because they're usually more expensive, but the community here is active and vibrant. That's the key word here: community.
zx128k said:
My RAM and PBO overclocked 3800x looks very close to a 9900k at 5GHz. At least in 3D Mark.
Click to expand...
Which has absolutely zero bearing on Arma 3's performance, which is the subject of this thread. I'd get the 3700X over Intel's overpriced bag of **** every day of the week, except if Arma 3 was the only game I'd play.

So calm dem tattas and grasp full context before replying in future.
 
Orange Nexus said:
Go for it! Wait for the KS.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/14837/intel-core-i99900ks-5-ghz-on-all-cores-launches-next-month
Click to expand...

Already listed at minimum $600 and goes all way to $899. The KS shouldn't be over £360 yet seems that £600-700 would be the price.
Especially since EU listings starting at €690.

opethdisciple said:
Think about this. When you upgrade to a 9900k you can enjoy spectre and meltdown at faster speeds!

Same pwnage... just faster!

:D
Click to expand...

:D
 
LePhuronn said:
Hardly. It clearly shows performance numbers from a guy who's owned both a Ryzen 3000 system and a 9900K system. I'm not Jacky60's dad and I'm sure he's a big enough pupper to work out the differences in prices and whatnot for himself.

I buy very little from OcUK now because they're usually more expensive, but the community here is active and vibrant. That's the key word here: community.

Which has absolutely zero bearing on Arma 3's performance, which is the subject of this thread. I'd get the 3700X over Intel's overpriced bag of **** every day of the week, except if Arma 3 was the only game I'd play.

So calm dem tattas and grasp full context before replying in future.
Click to expand...

Why do you think I went with 3800x, its cheap and as good as a 9900k. That guy got a 3700x and wondered why it did not match a £500 cpu. One word comes to mind, idiot.
 
If ARMA 3 is your thing and Intel are a decent chunk quicker then I would go 9900k but not yet. Wait for the KS to become available as the 9900k will drop. Guessing that the 9900k will be the same socket as your current CPU?

Otherwise I'd go AMD as the AM4 platform is compatible with the next series of Zen2 processors. You'll want a decent cooler to get 5Ghz out of a K and then that's if you have a chop capable. That's what the KS is, guaranteed 5Ghz all core 9900.
 
Jacky60 said:
Please advise.
Click to expand...

Depends on your timing.. I have to make a purchase by end of Oct. for tax purposes.

I have pained over the 3700X v the 9900K. The only thing I do that would push either processor is gaming.

I would love to wait until the New Year for the next round of Intel chips, and the B550 mobos from AMD. But I can't wait that long. :(

So, as I run a silent build (outside of gaming), and I just don't like the fans on X570 (or the actual boards, for those that now support turning the fan off) or the still flaky state of the BIOSes, it's 9900K (of some form) for me. The 9900K still has the edge in gaming (although not by much, and it varies per game - so check the main games you play), and just seems to be a little more mature at this point. NB. I already run a Noctua NH-U12A, so cooling a mildly overclocked 9900K won't be a problem.

Whatever decision you make, you'll be happy with either a 9900k or 3700x.
 
nomadd said:
Depends on your timing.. I have to make a purchase by end of Oct. for tax purposes.

I have pained over the 3700X v the 9900K. The only thing I do that would push either processor is gaming.

I would love to wait until the New Year for the next round of Intel chips, and the B550 mobos from AMD. But I can't wait that long. :(

So, as I run a silent build (outside of gaming), and I just don't like the fans on X570 (or the actual boards, for those that now support turning the fan off) or the still flaky state of the BIOSes, it's 9900K (of some form) for me. The 9900K still has the edge in gaming (although not by much, and it varies per game - so check the main games you play), and just seems to be a little more mature at this point. NB. I already run a Noctua NH-U12A, so cooling a mildly overclocked 9900K won't be a problem.

Whatever decision you make, you'll be happy with either a 9900k or 3700x.
Click to expand...

The latest BIOS for my motherboard is a lot less flaky. The last BIOS I had to keep rebooting my PC and keep retrying to enter BIOS. Average 2-3 reboots to get into BIOS. Latest version thank god that does not happen. ABBA boost to 4.5GHz is really good and no loss to MT performance.

3700x is a lot slower than a 3800x and a good 3800x will give a 9900k a run for its money. Just get a decent AIO and RAM with great timings. Then hope the silicon gods are with you. Remember not all 9900k's hit 5GHz all cores and the 9900k has lost a lot of performance because of the patches for security issues.

3800x is easier to overclock. Get 8-pack 3800 RAM and an AIO. Set IF to 1900 and RAM to 3800. Then tighten timings for the RAM and turn on PBO with the ABBA BIOS. That should get you 11k+ in time spy which is not bad for the price. Also you will get great ST performance. This is if the silicon gods are with you and they are more likely to smile on you with the better binned 3800x.

You don't need to push high voltages into the 3800x, you can get there with small bumps in voltages here and there. The main draw back is there is little overclocking head room. There is always the chance to push the 9900k a little further and get more performance. RAM overclocking with the 9900k for example can keep going well past 3800. Sometimes you get lucky and get a 9900k that can run AVX instructions at 5GHz all cores.

The 3800x is £379.99 currently on overclockers.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom