• 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.

Intel Core i9-11900KF 3.5GHz (Rocket Lake) Socket LGA1200 Processor - Retail

Status
Not open for further replies.
Journey said:
I've not seen any leaked benchmarks for the 11900K(F), all I've seen are Intel's own slides which are about as trustworthy as D. Trump. I don't see the point in pre-ordering something when there will be no stock shortage, you are just going to pay the highest amount and the least amount of verifiable information. It's your cash though, feel free to burn it how you like, and what ever you have left I am sure the CPU will burn the rest. :D
Click to expand...

See for instance: Intel Core i9-11900K CPU-Z Benchmark Score Leaks | TechPowerUp

Who says there won't be a shortage? Took a while to get a Comet Lake i9. I still have consumer rights to return it for a period or cancel my pre-order if new information comes to light.
 
richto said:
I would guess that they were not certain which motherboard Nvme slots were CPU driven and which were chipset driven. As a board with say 4 slots will commonly have 2 from CPU and 2 from Z590.

If both are CPU direct I cant see why a GPU riser would give any gain as Nvme gen 4 cards are limited to 4 lanes anyway?
Click to expand...

Are you seriously suggesting that Intel didn't know which slots on their own MB are connected directly to the cpu ? Don't take us for tech idiots on here please, some of us have been around on this site longer than others on here popped out of mum. Off course they knew and it was typical Shrout misinformation, as indeed is "The best gaming cpu" rubbish being spouted.
 
Journey said:
That's a CPU-Z leak from the 1st Jan, not a game, and not representative of how it will perform in a game. If you are basing your purchase on that sort of data, then you might as well ask a 4 year old what they think it will be like.
Click to expand...

Single threaded performance is largely representative of that though for fps. Fewer faster cores in general > more slower cores as very few games scale linearly across many threads and there is an overhead of context switching. This isn't exactly new news.
 
richto said:
Single threaded performance is largely representative of that though for fps. Fewer faster cores in general > more slower cores as very few games scale linearly across many threads and there is an overhead of context switching. This isn't exactly new news.
Click to expand...

Zen 3 gets you faster cores and more cores so you needn't worry about it, you can have both!

Plus it doesn't use the power of a small African state whilst using it.
 
Minstadave said:
Zen 3 gets you faster cores and more cores so you needn't worry about it, you can have both!

Plus it doesn't use the power of a small African state whilst using it.
Click to expand...

I'm not worried about the power bill. And unless we are being lied to including leaked benchmarks then this beats anything from AMD in single core performance.
 
richto said:
Single threaded performance is largely representative of that though for fps. Fewer faster cores in general > more slower cores as very few games scale linearly across many threads and there is an overhead of context switching. This isn't exactly new news.
Click to expand...

Wants fastest gaming CPU, posts a CPU-Z bench. 200IQ.
 
Last edited:
richto said:
I'm not worried about the power bill. And unless we are being lied to including leaked benchmarks then this beats anything from AMD in single core performance.
Click to expand...

The 11700K reviews would suggest otherwise. Intel are well known for leaking dubious benchmarks.

Power is very relevant because once things warm up in the real world those headline boost speeds drop off quickly. Make for pretty benchmark numbers though.
 
richto said:
Single threaded performance is largely representative of that though for fps. Fewer faster cores in general > more slower cores as very few games scale linearly across many threads and there is an overhead of context switching. This isn't exactly new news.
Click to expand...

This is only true if you are playing something like a Racing SIM, or much older games where they use one core much more heavily than others. This isn't the case any more if you are playing modern titles, why don't you go an look at some reviews for the 10900K or even the 10600K then add 3-5% on average to that and you'll be able to extrapolate the 11900K performance at best, if cooled well and if you can get the RAM latency down to the same as the 10900K.
 
kitfit1 said:
Are you seriously suggesting that Intel didn't know which slots on their own MB are connected directly to the cpu ? Don't take us for tech idiots on here please, some of us have been around on this site longer than others on here popped out of mum. Off course they knew and it was typical Shrout misinformation, as indeed is "The best gaming cpu" rubbish being spouted.
Click to expand...

It was an Asus Rog Xtreme XIII unreleased motherboard not an Intel one, so yes it's quite conceivable that they were not sure.
 
Minstadave said:
The 11700K reviews would suggest otherwise. Intel are well known for leaking dubious benchmarks.

Power is very relevant because once things warm up in the real world those headline boost speeds drop off quickly. Make for pretty benchmark numbers though.
Click to expand...

I am using an AIO watercooler for the CPU so really not an issue for me.
 
Journey said:
This is only true if you are playing something like a Racing SIM, or much older games where they use one core much more heavily than others. This isn't the case any more if you are playing modern titles, why don't you go an look at some reviews for the 10900K or even the 10600K then add 3-5% on average to that and you'll be able to extrapolate the 11900K performance at best, if cooled well and if you can get the RAM latency down to the same as the 10900K.
Click to expand...

We shall see in about 2 weeks. I can see there are a lot of butthurt AMD owners here worried they might not have the fastest gaming hardware anymore, and having to resort to claims that Intel are lying and benchmarks are fake to be able to back that up.
 
richto said:
We shall see in about 2 weeks. I can see there are a lot of butthurt AMD owners here worried they might not have the fastest gaming hardware anymore.
Click to expand...

Not sure why anyone would be butthurt as you put it, but it seems like you would like that for some reason. The current best advice I give is FPS/£ not paying the most for 1-5% gains in 1-2 games, and at low resolutions etc. So many people are happy to waste money, and leave other parts of their system wanting its a shame really. Having an artificially segmented product like the 11900K vs the 11700K and £140 that is literally given away for virtually noting is pretty sad state of affairs to be in, unless its e-peen or something similar.
 
Journey said:
Not sure why anyone would be butthurt as you put it, but it seems like you would like that for some reason. The current best advice I give is FPS/£ not paying the most for 1-5% gains in 1-2 games, and at low resolutions etc. So many people are happy to waste money, and leave other parts of their system wanting its a shame really. Having an artificially segmented product like the 11900K vs the 11700K and £140 that is literally given away for virtually noting is pretty sad state of affairs to be in, unless its e-peen or something similar.
Click to expand...

If I cared that much about cost / performance I would get another Xbox Series X. Economy isn't the aim here. I will no doubt eventually eBay it to upgrade again it just like my current setup so will get a chunk back too.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom