Which it is GPU limited for pretty much any modern game at 2K+ resolution when you want max fps. The 11900K is commonly the best gaming fps option right now bar 240+fps @ 1080p esports type stuff.
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 i9-11900KFs finally shipping from OC
- Thread starter richto
- Start date
Which it is GPU limited for pretty much any modern game at 2K+ resolution when you want max fps. The 11900K is commonly the best gaming fps option right now bar 240+fps @ 1080p esports type stuff.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,457
So do some cd23 runs please, I'd quite like to see the results.
Single threaded 1590
Multi threaded 14877 (Don't care too much about this for GPU limited fps)
(Rog AI Optimisation turned on)
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,457
Thanks
Get the screenies posted on the thread, it'll give Intel some proper representation.
Doesn't seem to allow image uploads. Do I have to reach a certain number of posts or something?
Also that's without adaptive boost and not maxed out at this point. Will update above figures later once I have run full optimisation.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 32,584
- Location
- Rutland
Just not born out in the real world though is it?
4k it's beaten more often than not by its predecessor:
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-core-i9-11900k/19.html
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2021-intel-core-i9-11900k-i5-11600k-review?page=4
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,457
Usually I post them to imgur, and then copy in the bbforum link.
I reckon you can do better single core from that chip, as you say the multiple isn't of as much concern.
Someone else suggested they got mid-1600s with tuning.
Might be worth a poke about for 8% perf.
I reckon you can do better single core from that chip, as you say the multiple isn't of as much concern.
Someone else suggested they got mid-1600s with tuning.
Might be worth a poke about for 8% perf.
Yes, enabling ABT, turning off all core limits and disabling PCI power saving gives:
Single Core 1688
Multicore 16144
Sometimes, but not generally by anything from AMD in this case. Also that was prerelease or at least early microcode so some further improvements are likely.
Anyway I can cope with sometimes loosing 0.5 fps to get twice the storage performance.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 32,584
- Location
- Rutland
Both you amd Dave2150 seem to be suddenly craving storage performance (with marginal real world benefits) after seeking the "ultimate gaming" CPU so hard and not finding it, you guys....
https://nlpnotes.com/2014/03/23/post-purchase-rationalization/
Last edited:
There's a reasonable case to be made for 11900K being a chart topper at 1440p (whether by a meaningful margin to outweigh the times it fails due to lack of cores, is a debatable matter). Consider both the average fps and 99th percentile for 1440p in these charts:
https://www.tomshardware.com/uk/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html
Where the 11900K does win. And for a site called overclockers, we shouldn't ignore the many records that chip has set on hwbot.
Taken outside the bubble of market niche: it's still a good chip, especially if you can get the latency down with the right RAM.
Would I take it over a 5950X? Probably not but that doesn't mean it has no use-case at all. I'd take a 10980xe or 3175X and a chiller over either of them, though.
https://www.tomshardware.com/uk/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html
Where the 11900K does win. And for a site called overclockers, we shouldn't ignore the many records that chip has set on hwbot.
Taken outside the bubble of market niche: it's still a good chip, especially if you can get the latency down with the right RAM.
Would I take it over a 5950X? Probably not but that doesn't mean it has no use-case at all. I'd take a 10980xe or 3175X and a chiller over either of them, though.
out of interest why do you mention the 5950x ? and not the 5900x or the 5800x ? Both are cheaper and you can say nothing much in it for gaming performance , but 5900x has 12 cores and wipes it in multi core workloads while using less power
Last edited:
Yes, those are great chips too.
The reason I mention 5950X and 10980xe is that once we're into the realm of going from 10900KF to 11900KF like this guy is, we're out of price-performance and into the realm of enthusiast games of getting x for being the best at y. There are plenty of things a 10900KF will beat a 11900KF at, so it's not even absolute performance, it's hitting a niche. And depending on the titles played, I can see a niche of 1440p 99percentile performance for 11900K. But I agree, 5900X and 5800X can be chart toppers too and are generally excellent chips (and value); it's just about what he's trying to min/max.
While we're on the subject of min/max though, there is talk in this thread about doubling storage performance by having pcie 4.0 (rather than 3.0 on a 10 series).
Well... since we're talking about games, not really.
If you want the fastest loading levels, a pcie 4.0 980 can't touch an Intel Optane 905p, which pcie 3.0.
Sure, it'll cost you £1000+, but if we're min-maxing, PCiE 4.0 storage for gaming has nothing on Optane load times.
So the argument could be made that if that's a factor, 10900KF + 905p > 11900K + 980Pro.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 5,154
- Location
- South Wales
Have yet to try my 905p yet, got one while they were being sold off cheaper, 960GB drive for £420. They're now discontinued though.
Heard they are a bit more snappy in Windows etc and they have much higher 4k read iops than other ssd drives, be really interested to see what difference if any directstorage will make to load times and stuff.
£420 is a great deal for that drive.
It still dominates drives like the SK P31 or the 980Pro in benchmarks like Final Fantasy loading time (used a lot by Tom's). And in Star Citizen, where the streaming of assets can be a bottleneck, I'd say it does make a tangible difference in gameplay over the high-end M2 drives. I can't think of any other game where that's the case, aside from loading time of levels. Probably something the SC developers realised themselves, since they did partner with Intel to give a free ship with one of the Optane drives.
It's a great piece of kit.