Asus Rog Strix Z570-E for now. Am flogging my Maximus XII.
And a Gigabyte 3080 Xtreme.
Last edited:
-
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
- Thread starter richto
- Start date
- Status
Asus Rog Strix Z570-E for now. Am flogging my Maximus XII.
And a Gigabyte 3080 Xtreme.
I doubt it's base. Would be default settings so single core max turbo freq. (Which many OCers will switch to all cores).
Strix. Corrected above.
Never wanted one of those. No DLSS and sucky ray tracing. Waiting to see 3080 Ti before I decide what's next there.
Last edited by a moderator:
Never used it. Sold it to someone else as I had an Xtreme coming and managed to get an interim Gigabyte 3080 from Europe. Still have a Rog Strix 3080 OC on backorder elsewhere too. About 30th in the queue now.
Because the Maximus XII shares PCI-E Nvme bandwidth with the GPU slots. And also I released I don't need 10Gbit so flogging it while it's still worth something.
Last edited by a moderator:
I only bought it because I could and I had nothing modern at the time. That same week I nabbed a 3080 low end card as a gap fill.
Unless intel are lying saying it's on average 11% faster in gaming than the 10900K then it should be a few percent faster than any AMD chip on average. As per the single threaded performance lead which tends to be key to gaming fps. We will see in about 11 days...
Such as? All the reviews of the leaked benchmarks seem to support what they are claiming. ~ 19% IPC performance increase for instance.
Of course it makes a difference. PCI-E 3.0 is bandwidth capped at circa 3.5 GB / Sec. Both my Nvme drives can do way over that on PCI-E 4.0. And RTX IO is coming soonish.
Fewer faster cores is better all other things being equal as you get better performance per thread and less context switching. Scaling across multiple cores for a game process is rarely linear.
Last edited:
Plenty of game loading benchmarks that show that it does: Storage Game Loading Test: PCIe 4.0 SSD vs. PCIe 3.0 vs. SATA vs. HDD | TechSpot
Read all of it. Pretty much every game Nvme 4 is fastest.
Yes it will - level transitions and loads within games will be faster just like the initial game loading times are quicker. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
Still faster though isn't it. A few seconds off game loads and level launches many times a day is worth it to me. And as mentioned above Direct IO and RTX IO is coming which may give even larger benefits.
Good idea - will do that across 2 drives when I reinstall as anything I care about is backed up on NAS anyway. Every little helps. Faster disks make a measurable difference as per the above even if right now its not a vast percentage difference for game loading. It will be more noticeable for copying and installing though.
Last edited:
Every CPU is effectively end of life in a year or so. That's only £80 more than a 5800X and if it's faster than seems reasonable. And let's see in ~ 10 days.
Well then I will eBay it in 6 months. I did consider a 5800X or better but as I'm currently on 10900KF the transition path to Rocket Lake is easier, so I held off despite there being something faster for the last few months.
Received it today but have raised a return as I realised from external inspection that an ATX board hasn't got adequate spacing for my needs and have ordered the E-ATX Z590 Asus ROG Maximus XIII Hero from OC instead.
That's the 11700K. And at irrelevant resolutions where you are probably maxing out the Intel CPU across all cores. If you look at FPS with sensible values of 1080P and above then allow for 11900K its going to be fastest:
https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph16535/121977.png
]https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph16535/121985.png
**No Hotlinking**
Last edited by a moderator:
I picked the two FPS I knew at 1080P. Cherry picking is posting 720p and 360p results, lol.
I guess Borderlands and GTA5 are FPS too, but again those are going to be a 11900K win when you allow for the few percent faster over the 11700K:
I don't care about non FPS benchmarks for my use case.
https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph16535/121961.png
https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph16535/121993.png
**No Hotlinking**
Last edited by a moderator:
No it's testing the total compute power of the CPU. If I cared about that I would get a 5950X. I care about performance at resolutions I might actually use.
Keep moving those goalposts, and hotlinking.
That's interesting because Gears Tactics is not an FPS but you guess Borderlands is an FPS? Come on Dave, this is low brow even for you.
Oh my bad I was thinking it was Gears. Mental block. Still doesn't change that FPS seem to be faster on the 11900K though at resolutions anyone might actually use. And that's with pre-release microcode that was improved by several percent just during the testing period so will likely be further optimised.
Last edited:
Nothing wrong with that if that's what you care about, but suggesting that proves it's faster for gaming is somewhat disingenuous in that case.
- Status