• 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.
Alex h said:
But you had one
Click to expand...

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.

Journey said:
Why change your board at all, the XII supports PCI-E 4.0 with the latest BIOS.
Click to expand...

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:
It's good that Intel always know the right amount of cores that are needed. I always thought 10 was too many, 8 is still quite a lot, I reckon 6 would be better for gaming. I might pick one up as nobody else has sold 14nm for years, hopefully there will be some rarity value.
 
LePhuronn said:
Already proven not to be the case. Enjoy your overpriced space heater!
Click to expand...

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...
 
Yes. Intel are lying. This has been proven to be the case by numerous reviews already released. Also, 2 additional points:

1: The 11% increase is also subject to a 15% margin for error.
2: An 11% improvement over Comet Lake does still not match Zen 3.
 
richto said:
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.
Click to expand...

Weird that you want PCI-E 4.0 NVMe when it makes no difference in current games, and when Direct(I/O)Storage becomes a thing, it will be on all modern games that make use of lots of cores, which the 11900K won't do as well as the 10900K, so you lose with one hand and win with the other, it's like playing poker with yourself, you can only lose.
 
Journey said:
Weird that you want PCI-E 4.0 NVMe when it makes no difference in current games, and when Direct(I/O)Storage becomes a thing, it will be on all modern games that make use of lots of cores, which the 11900K won't do as well as the 10900K, so you lose with one hand and win with the other, it's like playing poker with yourself, you can only lose.
Click to expand...

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:
richto said:
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.
Click to expand...

It makes no difference to the gaming performance, that is all you care about. You should read some none leaked benchmarks showing that it literally offers nothing over 3.0 drives.
 
Any drive that is faster will load most games faster but less benefit from an SSD to NVME than HDD to SSD but it make ZERO difference to gameplay or FPS.

You really do not have much a clue about anything you have said in this thread and I am an Intel fan (was AMD diehard back in early 2000's till Intel C2D).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom