Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
Intel i7-9700K Review: Hyper-Threading's Value vs. 8700K
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 сер 2024
- We benchmarked Intel's i7-9700K vs. the 8700K, 9900K, 2700, and pretty much every other major processor, including the i7-2600K. Overclocking included. Support us via the store: store.gamersne... or Patreon: / gamersnexus
Article: www.gamersnexu...
Find the i7-9700K here: geni.us/SAKL
Find the R7 2700 here: geni.us/WzuACP
The Intel i7-9700K received ample criticism at unveil for its core/thread assignment, feeling like a departure from a decade's worth of hyperthreaded i7 CPUs. The oddest aspect of the change was not the 9700K itself, but its predecessor: Intel had just moved to 6C/12T on the 8700K, a fierce and competitive upgrade from the 7700K's 4C/8T configuration, but has now regressed to an 8C/8T part. It's a mid-step. With two more physical cores and a boost in frequency, the part will undoubtedly do well in gaming -- the question is just whether the value is there, especially with a price-hike to over $400 on the new i7, up from the $350 range on the 8700K. Further still, the 9700K drops four threads, which have proved advantageous in some workloads.
** Please like, comment, and subscribe for more! **
Follow us in these locations for more gaming and hardware updates:
t: / gamersnexus
f: / gamersnexus
w: www.gamersnexus...
Editorial, Test Lead: Steve Burke
Testing: Patrick Lathan
Video: Keegan Gallick, Andrew Coleman
Links to Amazon and Newegg are typically monetized on our channel (affiliate links) and may return a commission of sales to us from the retailer. This is unrelated to the product manufacturer. Any advertisements or sponsorships are disclosed within the video ("this video is brought to you by") and above the fold in the description. We do not ever produce paid content or "sponsored content" (meaning that the content is our idea and is not funded externally aside from whatever ad placement is in the beginning) and we do not ever charge manufacturers for coverage.
Article: www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3421-intel-i7-9700k-review-benchmark-vs-8700k-and-more
Find our i7-2600K 2018 revisit over here: ua-cam.com/video/dn9EMlxdCrM/v-deo.html
whether or not its a side,up, or down grade depends on what you are doing. mostly its the same. for vm's its a downgrade but this aint the cpu for that. for gaming its a slight upgrade mostly. but in general its a slightly improved 8700k, slightly. i have the 8700k and i wouldnt even upgrade if you offered me to trade and i only had to pay 50 bux extra. but that new 9900KF with no igpu looks good if its cheaper. if its the same price then ill just take the 9900k or whatever comes next thank you.
soemthing that often isnt taken into account is that with smt, 2 threads can communicate basically instantanously without having to go through a bus or fabric. which can helps sometimes (maybe far cry 5)
I could see the writing in the specs, 8700k to 9900k with no place for the 9700k. I do hope all the others that wanted confirmation of how pointless the 9700k is are happy now, lol. That dip in the 1% and 0.1% lows is very interesting, to say the least, however, I doubt it's that much of a concern given the 7740x like pointlessness of the 9700k's existence. Compared to the 8700k, you are being charged more for a gimped 9900k, the 9700k should not exist, lol.
Great vid Steve and crew. B)
@@Zarcondeegrissom 9700k had better 1% lows in all tests except one. If 9700k and 8700k are close in price, then there's no place for the 8700k anymore, even if the 9700k feels like a limited 9900k
Why are you using 2x 8GB 3200MHz Corsair Vengeance LPX 16-18-18-36 DDR4 RAM with the AMD systems? Its a known fact, and has been for the past 2 years. that AMD benefits from fater ram/tighter timings. This is a useless comparison. (EDIT: Im not saying intel wouldnt benefit aswell, but you are comparing a 250 usd vs 400 usd cpu with 120 usd ram. )
So in short it is a great CPU like 9900k is too and is good upgrade choice for gamers. It still does not change the fact that to my eyes both i7-9700k and i9-9900k are just new i5 and new i7 in more expensive clothing. Great CPUs but also something every sensible consumer should be voting with valet and say definitive no to. As long time Intel user and one that needs new upgrade i am waiting zen2 chips and see if those finally fully close the gap and hopefully in dream scenario even goes further past Intels expensive offerings. And if you consumer want to rather take intel offering be sensible and say no to 9000 series and get 8000 series instead.
Thanks for getting around to the 9700k! I was starting to wonder if anyone was going to take a closer look at it.
We had to buy this one right in the middle of a bunch of other product launches, so it took us some time to get around to it. Thanks for being patient with us!
@@GamersNexus thank you Steve for this review!
@Phoenix2019 I want whatever you're having.
Finally, I need to find an excuse to justify my purchase :D I got the 9700K since it was actually 200 Euros cheaper and was in stock compared to the 9900K. 8700Ks are still not in stock at this time and even more expensive, on top of the extra cost for a delid. Also I was finally upgrading from Sandybridge and don't need HT (hoping for lower temps/power draw at 5 GHz) for a purely gaming rig, so it was a major upgrade /performance increase on my end. I put the 200 Euros I "saved" towards a new case instead.
9700k , buy a ryzen aye!
Can i recommend something? Looking at the charts and trying to figure out which CPU counterparts are OCd is kinda hard, wouldn't it be easier for viewers to put the OCd CPU in another color maybe? I would greatly appreciate it. Cheers
That's a good idea
Agree good idea, but every non OC has ‘stock’ on the chart not to hard to differentiate at a glance, unless you mean you want each individual cpu coloured
Better, but I think color changes would stand out easier than having to read.
@@TrueMegaManiac I second this! Need a different colour, at least!
what are you a moron?
The way it should be:
i3 - 4C/8T
i5 - 6C/12T
i7 - 8C/16T
i9 - 10C/20T
Yep
That would make too much sense... so Intel will never do it.
next year
Maybe if AMD would be competitive in gaming.
@Calamity competitive in the midrange maybe. The top of the line amd chip falls short of even the i7-9700K. And it costs more. Amd needs to keep pushing forward, cause right now, they still aint much.
the 9700k should have been the what the 9900k is, the i9-9900k should not even exist
we need a 9660k with HT!
I was confused AF when they released the specs, i7 8700K with HT, i7 9700K without HT...this confused me and should confuse people that don't know that much. Should have scrapped the 9700K and made the 9600k 8c/8t.
They probably couldn't keep up with demand due to low successful yields.
Maybe in a future gen. Intel is making small steps toward tier segmentation within their own product lines
agree. the 9900k should be called an i7 and cost like $430. Then the 9700k should be a i5, and cost like $275. I know id be more temped to buy one then, but at current prices ill just wait and see what new amd chips have to offer.
I've been looking for this comparison. GN always delivers.
As u can see by the views in a short time, we were all waiting like crazy for your review of the 9700k. You guys know how important your opinion is to the tech community. Thx for the absolutely amazing work.
I upgraded from an i5-4690K to an i7-9700K and holy hell what a needed difference xD
In 2023, 9700k is still relevant and easily keeps up with newer cpu's at 4k, even with an rtx 4090
The 9700k should have hyperthreading and the 9900k shouldn't be a thing
They didn't have SMT on 9700k so they can have something called 9900k
The 9700k should have hyperthreading and the 9900k shouldn't be a thing
They didn't have SMT on 9700k so they can have something called 9900k
The 9700k should have hyperthreading and the 9900k shouldn’t be a thing
The 9700k should have hyperthreading and the 9900k shouldn‘t be a thing
I’m still rocking my i7 8700K and 1080 ti for gaming in 2020.
@joey b! I paid $645.00 for it in 2018.
I just bought an 8700k 4 days ago lol
me too and maybe i have to rock it until next 4-5 years
You poor thing, how do you get by?
paid 590 for 1080ti duke clocked at 2050mhz, have 8700k @5.1 1.35 volts
Here it's i7 8700k for 475.49 USD, i7 9700k for 422.54 USD and the i9 9900k for 560.21 USD. So I just bought the i7 9700k :)
How does it perform? :)
@@darkoniketic2836 so far so good :)
@@Ivolo89 Im planing on getting one soon.
Do you think its a good chip for gaming plus browsing and things like that?:)
@@darkoniketic2836 Yes I do. For me atleast it works great with rtx2080 for gaming :) and browsing is of course not demanding so that works great too
@@Ivolo89 ty for answer
2020, and still happy with my i7 8700k, playing heavy titles and not even near "i need to upgrade" :)
That should last a few years
I too have a 8700k, but I have considered selling it and getting a 9700KF if I can split the difference and end up paying under $90 out of pocket. Why not?
@@professorxavier9991 no hyperthreading on the 9700kf
yeah but i was on a 4770k its def time to upgrade, just bought 9700k
What GPU?
I upgraded my aging 2600k with a 9700k last month and couldn’t be happier.
Well that is a big jump lol
Actually sold that and got a 9900KF that overclocks to 5.3ghz and is still thermally limited. Need a bigger cooler.
@@brkbtjunkie Bro Progamers have a Watercooled CPU.. get on our level Pleb
KlausKinski it is watercooled derp master flex
@@brkbtjunkie idk why you wouldnt go for a 9900k feel like the extra threads will future proof u for a bit longer for not much extra cost considering you kept your 2600k for so long
Thank you GN for including 4790k in your charts. 4790k still rocks the charts. Waiting for Zen2 and next Gen. From Intel.
Yep ... that good old 4790K still rocks after all these years.
Yeah it’s amazing
Using i7 4770 with vega 56 for 1440p 144hz and 4790k with a 1080 ti for vr on a Samsung odyssey (identical screen to the vive pro) and other than wanting my game storage drives to be ssds, see no reason to upgrade.
Btw it’s not overlocked in tests. Mine one can run 4.9ghz 1.35vc and 2100ddr3, scores is between oc’ed 7700k and 8400. Still a decent cpu, next buy will be new rtx 2060 replacing 970
17:42 In Sweden, if I wanted to go and buy a i7 *right now*, I'd have to pay 4879 SEK (544,6 USD) for a i7-8700k and 4590 SEK (512,3 USD) for a i7-9700k.
Since the i7-9700k performs slightly better in games, runs cooler, and is 289 SEK (32,2 USD) cheaper, there's really no reason for me to pick a i7-8700k.
MinscS2 Now compare that to Ryzen pricing. Why people are suddenly ok with paying more for less is way beyond me, but hey, it’s your money.
@@spencercarruth9706 Ryzen can't do 1440p/144Hz. My 9700K purchase was well worth the money because I intend to keep my frame rates above 100fps at that resolution. No Ryzen chip on the market can compete with the likes of the 8700K/9700K at that display output. I don't get why AMD fanboys think that buying high-end Intel CPUs are a waste of money. If you value 1440p/144Hz then Intel is the way to go. Yeah, an i7 costs more than a R7, but you're paying a premium to maintain fps over 100 at 1440p. If you think the 9700K is a waste of money then you also think 1440p/144Hz is a waste of money, too.
@@spencercarruth9706 Apples and Oranges. Compare The 9700k with any Ryzen CPU on these charts and you'll quickly see why people still buy Intel i7's. Ryzen CPU's are excellent bang for the buck, and great at multi-core workloads, but they're still outmatched by Intel when it comes to gaming, so people who want "the best" will continue to buy Intel.
Neiva hopefully the next series could come close.
I bought 9700k just for that reason.
Let's see the 9700k (8 threads) vs 7700k (8 threads) to see how well SMT performs.
I second vote this video idea!
Lol 9700k just pummeled the 8700k, in every aspect, which itself brutally raped the 7700k... it's not even going to be fair.
It's like you bring four friends to a fight and I bring 8 MMA fighters with each of them having a arm tired behind their back... Spoilers: the MMA fighters are still going to win all day.
@@LocoMe4u so u bought handicapped mma fighters that costs u more
@@rahulprattipati3574 yeah and they still beat you
A Streaming test between the 8700k and the 9700k would have been cool.
Oddly enough it appears that 9700k is about 30USD (equivalent) cheaper than 8700k here in Poland.
Same in Sweden. The 9700k is cheaper, so there's no reason to buy a 8700k.
This must be a europe thing in germany it is the same
Same thats why i bought 9700k
In Finland the 9700K costs 45€ more =E
same thing on amazon IT with the 9700k 23€ cheaper ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
So basically it's an i5 cosplaying as an i7.
I still say that the only reason the 9700K and the i9 CPUs exist is because Intel didn't want to make an 8-core i5.
Naw or they had a ton fail with the ht so might as well make a new series line. Like the new cpus without the igpu....but still sell them at the same price.
Also because it wipes the floor with the 8700k
@@Boomkop3
Work = more threads higher base clock is better especially for avx workloads
Gaming = more cores higher turbo is better
I don't give a crap about a tiny differential between the CPU's. Why? Because right now they are all space age compared to my current 2008 vintage core duo...... I'm going to go cry now
That's like coming to a car show in a honda civic and getting mad at people for having nice cars.
No worries, If you have an SSD and about 16 gig of RAM for that system, its still going to provide much service for years to come. Especially for the money it would cost to change over to newer hardware which would be around $700 or so.
One note: Prices have already dropped, if you keep an eye out. For me, the choice was $400 for a 9700K (really not changed), but the 9900K could be had new retail for a deal price of $460. For the original $150 price difference, I agree, outrageous. But at sixty bucks difference when I only rebuild every 5 years (was going from a 4790K), it seemed to be worth going all in.
😒👍 hell yeah, go balls deep ftw! 👍
are you still on the same CPU or have you upgraded now?
Let's just applaud these guys for the amount of work put into this video.
Just built my first PC and got the 9700k. Got a great deal on it, sub $300 after taxes and shipping.
Thanks for this video! You are one of, if not, the only tech youtubers to have done this video: 8700k vs 9700k in gaming. My current PC is a Gateway DX-4870 (iirc) and I've added a better PSU, graphics card, and 16 GB of DDR3 (oh yes I know lol). Its rocking a i5-3330 and I felt like if I was going to be building an entirely new system from the ground up I might as well go 9700k instead of 8700k. Why go with the older part?
Anyways, TL;DR: I'm still going to wait for CES to see what Zen 3 looks like, if it's announced then, but I'm pretty sure I'm going with the 9700k.
I am in the same boat but not for gaming. I think I should go big or go value not in between.
@@DarkPa1adin Exactly... Its gonna be about $1800 for my entire build so what's the difference of $50? And it's going to last me 5 years or more so pretty fair investment.
I mean, that’s an upgrade from your current situation, but I feel that a Ryzen processor would give you more for your money. Or, should you really want to remain with Intel the 8700k is a much better buy than this part.
Im waiting for Ryzen 3xxx. Currently 4790K at 4.8ghz.
I like the idea of AM4 being supported till 2020... Albeit that's irrelevant being that its coming up, what seems, quicker and quicker for me lmfao. Also, irrelevant, if I plan on keeping the system together for 5 years or more. I'd hate to commit to either 12nm Ryzen 2XXX or 14nm++++++ Coffeelake without at least seeing what "7nm" Ryzen 3XXX looks like. I feel like it'll be good, but won't hold up to the hype and rumors it's creating. And I can only wait so long into the new year to build it cause I've been wanting to do this for awhile already lol.
If CES comes around and no word about Ryzen 3XXX comes around I'm going 9700k. Same for GPUs. Navi seems to be awhile away and possibly lackluster as Radeon has been, BUT, I plan to keep my opinions unbiased and hopefull as maybe Radeon will come out swinging and be somewhat competitive.
We'll see what happens...
During Black Friday got the 8700K for 299, Asus ROG Strix Z390-E for 170, 970 evo for 100, plus a 30 combo discount, all at micro center. Couldn’t be happier!
So basically HT is like, nah pay 500$ or nothing
What I'm gathering from this is that the i5-9600K has a really good cost-to-performance ratio.
Especially if it's clocked up. Very easy to run constantly locked at max turbo 4.3 for all cores (or 4.6 if MCE is turned on, possibly with minor voltage adjustment), and depending on the lottery, people are getting 4.9-5.2GHz with tweaking.
🙂 no get the 97k
I'm running my 9600k at a static 4.8GHz at 1.26V and it isn't even breathing hard playing current games. Around 36C idle and 55C in heavy gaming, with air cooling. I'll probably try to push it up to 5GHz eventually, don't foresee any problems with it. Well worth the cost in my opinion!
@@joecamel914 🙂 sounds eco friendly 🌈
@@MrSamadolfo Definitely! I tried to keep power demands low with this build. Using m.2 drives and a Rog Strix rtx2060oc that I've tweaked the clock settings on. At idle I'm probably using less than 3 or 4 watts I think.
Thanks for the review. I noticed that frame time graphs usually go by frame number as the x-axis, but higher FPS usually indicates a larger number of frames. Is there a reason you don't use the frame timestamp as the x-axis instead? If you did that, predictable spikes (perhaps due to I/O or other reasons) between different components would be much closer to each other in the x-axis, instead of being offset by the ratio between the different average FPS. That way, we'd be able to sort of compare "who spikes harder for that same frame".
Yeeeeah, gonna stick with my 8700k for a good while
If this comparison came out earlier I might have forked out extra for the 9900k. The 9700k wasn't that much more expensive than the 8700k for me. Still a massive upgrade though over my 2600k. Performance matters more than price for me, to a degree. I didn't like that most reviews pushed bang for buck, where a lot of people are more interested in just the bang, in turn not recommending high performance products.
@Keirnoth Super exaggeration about the price, it's only a $200 USD or 46% extra for the 9900k or $30 USD or 8% extra for the 9700k compared against the 8700k based on Amazon prices. The 9900k isn't much of a stretch if you want top end gaming AND production performance if you don't want to get into X399 or X299 platforms. You can cater to both crowds in reviews though, those who want good price to performance and those where price is less of a concern when compared to performance.
Not everybody shits money like you do. Thanks for supporting overpriced product with your unsmart spending.
@@thongorshengar Sorry for not wanting the best consumer products? I don't shit cash, I save up money like most people do so I can buy what I want and what I want are performance parts. The 9900K sees a boost over the 8700K, especially for production value, and a noticeable difference over the 2700X. I buy the best so it'll last the longest. The 9900K will hold up a damn sight better in 5+ years time than previous generation CPUs, I'm upgrading from a 2600K that's lasted me over 7 years. If I was upgrading every 1-2 generations then it'd probably be a stupid buy, but I'm buying something I want to last for more than 5 years and still perform well. So you need to check your attitude at the door buddy, we all buy for different reasons so there's no need to get shitty about people with builds that differ from yours.
@Keirnoth even if 9900K costs double of AMD 2700x, it only adds 15-20% in an RTX 2080 Ti build, so is that 15-20% worth saving to get 15-40% (40% slower in Premiere) lesser CPU performance?
@@thongorshengar damn son get rekt
I got a i7-9700k for $330 from a sale. So I think it was worth it!
Me too!
@@Th3_ArCh0n WTF HOW
Just upgraded from an i5 8400 to the 9700k for $200 from Micro Center
Can you guys please cover the 2700 with very fast b die memory using tweaked memory subtimings? Using Dram Calculator you can tighten timings quite a bit, and I saw frametimes for Assassin's Creed origins go from 8 or sometimes 9ms CPU render times to a consistent 7ms. The change in the graph results were dramatic. I can post similar results for other titles like Forza in the comments.
I believe this to be a really interesting avenue of exploration your channel has just not covered.
Agreed, and maybe use a real 2700X for your benchmarks too, instead of an OC'd (and possibly binned) 2700. I've never seen you imitate the performance of a top Intel chip by overclocking a slower model and calling that good enough.
As a viewer, it looks like you're OK spending $5000 on dual Titan RTX cards, but have never purchased a $300 2700X for proper benchmarks.
@@tylerperry7552 to be fair, Intel chips are locked unless it's the highest tier so you can't really take a lower CPU to imitate a higher one as in the case of AMD.
B die memory is at a premium
Yeah 9th gen just isn't that exciting, not for the price, especially for the 9900k. Frankly I think the 9700k should be the new "i5" and the 9900k should be the new "i7", along with the pricing of the current i5/i7. THEN I think we'd all be excited, because that fits within expectations. I.e. Hyperthreading on i7, not on i5.
Well that would be exciting because it would put the 9700K at no more than 300 USD.
This processor must be a monster. Im looking on silicon lottery right now and its 5.2 ghz without a delid? impressive.
This video was long overdue, but we knew you would eventually do it. I was about to ask the same question for an ask GN. Keep up the good work, guys. Absolutely love your content. Cheers from Romania 🇷🇴
Should have done 8700k vs 9700k Streaming test as well.
Cliché as F agree
Would've been nice. But for now, as it's encoding, the performance, like with everything else, will be more or less the same. A 25% increase with HT, essentially making the 8700K a 7.5c/7.5t CPU. The 9700K should be better at it by ~7% at equal clocks, but 7% isn't really noticeable and the 8700K is good enough at it that it may not even be reflected in practice.
@@Najvalsa not necessarily. The 9700K may bring choppy with HUGE low fps lows when data runs out of cores. Hyperthreading adds responsiveness as tjr cores run more efficiently
@@timothygibney159 Isn't it the opposite? Assuming raw multithreaded performance is equal, a CPU without hyperthreading will usually be more consistent. You can see this in some games that don't use many threads, where performance can be improved by disabling hyperthreading.
@@Malus1531 hyperthreading means each core can do more things and multitask efficiently. In the past poor game engines confused virtual cores with real ones. Today it's not the case. You gain big with it on in almost every scenario as it is common now and game engines which thing is a real core to use and which is fake
0:12 this i7-8700k have been thru some rough times :D
You should have also mentioned streaming in this comparison
Use NVEC or get a 2nd PC setup. Easy.
Streaming does not have a significant (if any) impact unless you're already bottlenecked by your CPU. I did stream many times under a i5-7500 and didn't have any hit. Of course that would change depending on what games you're playing. But from a 8700 to a 9700? Not even worthy testing
NoahKingOHigherPlane i guess the video was designed for people above the age of 14.
Is everyone damn youtube streamer or something
@@HayateAzekura People (mostly AMD fans) are just pretending that everyone streams these days to try and make Ryzen look good
I love how incredibly data-laden your videos like this are. I especially love the interpretations, like explaining when and why something is a limitation of frequency, thread count, or something external.
agreed, i dont care to normally comment but good job
Just upgraded to a 9700K for $270 new, excited to complete the build and move on from my i5 4670K
my top reasons for buying the 9700k:
-getting it for less than 400$
-9700k pcb is thicker than the 8700k so it can be used direct die using the derbuar tool, will be delidding it and will use it direct die for the best temperatures.
-all 9700ks can do 4.9ghz
-8 cores is sufficiently good for me.
I didn't think you could delid the i79700k? Because it is solded on
I was really debating between 9th gen or 8th gen stuff for Christmas. I was wanting to get a 9900k as an upgrade from my 4790k, but I ended up getting a 8700k from Microcenter for $330. I couldn’t justify the $540 for the 9900k or the $400 for the 9700k. I did get a Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra motherboard so that in a year or two when the 9900k drops to a reasonable price, I can upgrade to that.
its been an odd few years for pc hardware , i bought a 2700x because at the time the i5 8600k was the same price . its gone lower now with intel stock coming back. I'm not sure what i think about I7's siting at £400
Holy shit same. I bought 8700k from micro center earlier today for $330. I went with 8700k over 9700k so I can delid it and use liquid medal to drop 20 celcius.
I'm using an MSI z390 motherboard though.
Edit: I'm using the processor for a VR racing simulator (with pedals + shifter + wheel) and I expect to be playing a few hours at a time so it'll be under a huge load. I'll also be going with a custom water loop to maximize cooling potential.
the 8700k works wonderfully with one of the new gigabyte aorus boards. ( pro, elite, or pro wifi)
I also upgraded from 4790k to 8700k w/ z390 board around Black Friday. The 9700k was between $70-$100 more than 8700k and the fps gains are not that much more/less between the two processors.
"Upgrade" yeah you are never gonna do that
I started feeling the need to upgrade this past year. I5-760. I actually want to transition into racing games, but don't want a furnace in my room either. I think it's time to do a CPU upgrade but will wait for the new Ryzen offerings. Realistically 8400-9600k or an R5 would be what I'm looking at and we'll see how that plays with my HD 7870 XT. The budget for this grows quickly when factoring in a wheel and whatnot. It's a shame how good this rig has done over the past decade. SC2, LoL, and CS:GO aren't the most demanding titles admittedly.
I REFUSE to use a non hyperthreaded or SMT CPU. This is a blatant rip off. Not everyone plays games. Virtualization is huge among IT support, web developers, and those needing specialized apps. A 6 core/12 thread CPU vs an 8 core means the difference to me between glitchy performance and stuttering even with more cores. In 2018 people run many things like tabs in Chrome where hyperthreading can add responsiveness.
@@drunksquirrel2051 LOL agreed. His comment is so out of place. It's like he really is ignorant of market segmentation and different products for different folks and usage case scenarios. Maybe he is having a really bad day and wanted to bitch, about some or other nonsense. I am also wondering if he actually watched the review...
@@onTopOfYoMutha wtf? How did you infer all that from his comment? Seriously people on yt are allways looking for a reason to get offended.
The entire reason of not having SMT is to avoid the Spectre and Meltdown vulnerabilities that antivirus can't even defend against. Read up on that.
@@BombaJead How did I infer all that from his comment...that's easy...reading comprehension and understanding context. You mention people on UA-cam looking for a reason to get offened, so I'll just refer to the original commenters clueless remarks. I will also like to point at your butthurt response and those shoe-size-IQ sheeple who liked your dumb-ass snowflake comment.
Anyone who cares about security will love this change. Hyperthreading/SMT is inherently insecure and shouldn't be on any cpu where security is important.
I recently upgraded from a 4790 to a 8700k, glad I did not blow the extra 100 bucks on the 9700k. Happy with my purchase.
now they are at same price and sometimes 9700 cheaper
I wish the 9700k was an 8-core, 12-thread part. Seems like 2 more physical cores would still be an advantage in most workloads, and they could pick the 4 best performing cores to enable HT on, while maintaining some justification for the higher price of the 9900k. Is there a technical reason that you know of that Intel wouldn’t be able to enable selective HT? If this was case, the 9700k would likely be slightly better then the 8700k at every workload type, rather then lateral or a bit worse in the case of Blender, and slightly better all around would be acceptable, since that’s what we all expect between adjacent Intel CPU generations anyway.
Even as it is, the addition of 8 threads sounds difficult to justify the price of the 9900K, let alone only adding 4.
It’s cool seeing in the comment section how many people that actually had a 4790k (Devil’s Canyon) and are just now upgrading. That is probably one of my favorite processors of all time.
same. mine died yesterday :(
John Nicholls Sorry to hear that.
Me too haha! Except mine was the i5-4690k, I probably should have upgraded sooner...
yay i just bought a 9700k! so excited to pair it with my rtx 2080!
Omg yes, finally found someone on the same page as me.
What is your PCU and motherboard?
Also, is there a special SSD brand you recommend?
Pls respond!
@@Chronically_ChiII Hello there friend, I got a intel i7 9700k overclocked to 4.9ghz all cores, and the motherboard I got is a MSI z390 gaming plus, I recommend Samsung ssd either 860 evo or any nvme that is 500gb or more. Good luck on your pc.
@@Asianiscool1 we all must be on the same page, thats what im trying to get how do you guys think of my build
pcpartpicker.com/list/GNnXD2
@@zakusa9891 did you buy it yet?
@@Leo9az I actually switched to i9 9900k because the 9700k was out of stock for so long and the store didn't have 9700k but yes I finished the build it was a success
Plot Twist: i7 9700k is the new i5 but they double their price and Re-name it as "i7" just to sell you their new i9 (which is the real i7) xD
Yeah fans can claim and says: he it's have same performance as 8700k..
Me: yeah.. right.. and how an i7 doesn't have Hyper Threading? oh yeah.. it's an Enhanced i5 xD
@@Neiva71 For you and me.. they're the same (98% same performance) But with different price tags
For Casuals & new-comers, They will think having Newer Release Date means it's better
Intel knew that there are a lots of costumers being Casuals & Newcomers
ehem allow me to add to that statement, i7 7700 performs lower or equal than i5 8400. i7 8700 perform lower or equal in some cases of i7 9700k.
@@tenchu_117ch Yeah.. I used to have that filthy i7 - 7700.. The new i5 - 8400 have same power as my i7 but like $120 cheaper..
I was Triggered why Intel only introduce their Hexa (6 Cores) CPUs suddenly.. because of AMD... AMD was the Spark
I have 0 care for Intel & AMD.. am not a Fan, and I will never be.. but as long as AMD is the Value King, am gonna support them
In fact, I sold my I7 - 7700 for $190 and bought Ryzen (Zen+) and am happy with the performance increase I got :)
aboud alaboud preach brotha, im on the value for the money guy. im now on ryzen 2200g + 1060 6gb. waiting for ces 2019 for the ryzen 3 series announcement
+
Im glad im doing research for my next computer. From what Ive gathered, if I want to get a better fps for gaming, then i want a 9700k, where if I want to have an all around kind of work experience for gaming, music, rendering, etc., then the 8700k would be a better route. I dont plan on OC so maybe going with the 8700k would be the optimal solution
Thanks for mentioning Amdahl's law. It's really important to understand when talking about multi core CPUs.
I went from a 4770k to the 9700k and I love it. Now with the memories and Mb also new my 980ti Evga Hybrid runs so much better. I love it for gaming and for video editing. I notice such a massive performance increase. I didn't get the 9900k as I could not justify the purchase. After seeing your review I have no buyer's remorse at all. Ty so much for you honest review!
I just now finally upgraded from that exact setup lol. Still rocking the cpu though, alongside a 4070
Thank you for pointing out the 4790K Its time to move on.
Put on 0.5x to watch Steve in drunk mode, lol!
I have i7 4790K - 2014 processor and 5 years later I don't even see a reason to upgrade lol...there is not much progress as I see. If I put some top performance graphic card into my pc then even with my old DDR3 I can play same games as everyone with late 2018 PC. Really not too many reasons to waste money. Keep your old PCs
Same here with an Oced 4770K. However, I do virtualization while it performs amazing with 4 cores it is showing it's slow age in scenarios requiring work
@@timothygibney159 Yes I have no doubt there is more progress in performance when using CPU for work related stuff but I was talking only about computer games really:)
4770k fo life! Cuz I’m broke and because it still works, otherwise I’d get unbroke
I have a 4790k and bought a 1080ti a few weeks ago. It runs games silky smooth on a 1440/144 monitor.
@@circleofsorrow4583 yes I am thinking about the same card actually. I have also 1440/144 monitor
This is the CPU in my build. I got it for $410
Picked up a 9700k for 349$ CAD in Canada last week.
how good is it compared to an AMD ryzem 5 3400 vega graphic?? i am thinking of buying it
I got the 9700K back in October for two reasons:
1. it's immune to Meltdown - as opposed to any Intel 8th gen and older,
2. it's immune to L1TF (Foreshadow) and PortSmash - as opposed to anything with SMT (like the 8700K and 9900K, or every single Ryzen above 2300).
So it's literally the most secure CPU in their lineup at the moment (actual whole lineup! Cascade Lake aka new Xeons and i9-X will come next year at the earliest, same for Ice Lake / Sunny Cove in the consumer space).
And at the same time, it's one of the fastest "gaming" CPUs on the market. This test confirms it's better than the 8700 for most stuff. I know a single person who _actually_ works with Blender, but he uses GPU rendering, so my anecdotal evidence suggests that the single test you use as reason people should get the 8700K instead of the 9700K is pointless ;)
8 series is for people who accept EULAs of Facebook polls.
9 series is for people who care about security.
(PS. There are also other reasons for disabling HT, like ultra-low-latency work, but I'm not doing that at home.)
no one is going to bother with hacking you,you are nobody,nobody cares about you,me or that guy over there
Paranoid people like you make me laugh.
it is isnt immune to meltdown and ryzen isnt effected by foreshadow in portsmash
So you're saying all the attacks are targeted? Maybe do some research, in the meantime I'll just say almost none are.
And I'm attacked literally thousands times a day between my PC and two servers. None of that is targeted at me, just people's scripts scanning for vulnerabilities. Inevitably, one day they will get unprivileged access to one of my boxes or even a privileged access to a VM inside. So it's worth reducing further attack vector for privilege escalation or escaping sandboxes/VMs.
I bet you agree, too. Otherwise, you'd never install any updates.
Besides, for Meltdown and the Spectre family, having hardware mitigations reduces performance hit from software work-arounds.
Early this year I've tested KPTI on vs off and performance hit for some workloads is really big. Now I have a CPU that doesn't need most of it, so the OS doesn't enable the software work-arounds. It's worth it, even if all you do is gaming :)
(Of course in games it's like 10% tops, but here in GN's comments we're discussing fraction of FPS advantages, so still! :))
Yes, Coffee Lake Refresh IS immune to Meltdown. (As well as L1TF apparently, I didn't know that.)
Back in October I read that while AMD wasn't vulnerable to L1TF, it was supposed to be vulnerable to Foreshadow - maybe that was debunked in the meantime.
Even more reason to be hyped for Zen 2 then!
What do you do with your PC that L1TF, Meltdown and Spectre fixes in hardware are so desparately needed?
Thanks for starting to include workloads beyond gaming. There are *a lot* of people out there who essentially build gaming pcs for things like animation and 3D modelling. It's a lot more work to include this more diverse array of tests, but it adds significant value to your content and we appreciate it.
*UK Prices as of 27/12/2018*
- 8700K: £398.98 (US$505.05)
- 9700K: £399.98 (US$506.31)
- 9900K: £518.97 (US$656.92)
Absolutely no point in buying the 8700K at the current prices.
What about 9700k vs 8700k for streaming?
I'm actually upgrading from 4790K, thanks for the comparison
Thanks for the Test, was waiting for that since the launch!
greetings
For those kind of comparisons i would like to see an equal manual (over)clock setting on both systems. I think, especially in that case, this would show the real difference even better.
Great and informative Video none the less! :)
So far I played with all 3 processors, and what I can tell you is that the answer is not clear. 9700k vs 8700k produces results that vary into each direction. In some scenarios 8700k wins, in others 9700k wins. In games that is. I did notice that 8700k is less sluggish, and for gaming I would recommend 8700k, but 9700k has stronger physical cores. In overall value and actual snappiness I recommend 8700k, but 9700k is more consistent, with higher highs in FPS. and lower lows. BUT...average fps was higher for 8700k in R6 Siege (for me), at same settings.
9900k wins against both, even at lower clocks. If you are gaming...get 8700k, if you want the best, get 9900k. 9700k is very consistent cpu, if you want middle ground, get 9700k, but for gaming 8700k is best for $350. I have 9900k now, and I love it, but it needs a water cooler to maitain 5.0 ghz while rendering or at 100% cpu load
Thank you! I want to buy a 2080 with my 8700k, but I don't know if the motherboard and PCU matters.
What do you think?
Where i live the 9700k is 10$ cheaper. Which should i buy? im gaming for the most part but may be streaming/youtube in some years.
Exact same situation here. Think I might just go for the 9700k. But the loss of hyperthreading seems something to not overlook. I think in situatuions where you are streaming gameplay it could prove better to have that, thus going with the 8700k. I'm really torn for which to go with. What are you upgrading from? I'm currently on a i7 3770k
@@razza12003 im happy with my 9700k. 2 more cores. + HT seems to be having security issues atm
@@TriggaHappy00121213 Should i get 8700k or 9700k? I will be mostly playing games and browsing in the backround
@@darkoniketic2836 Is what i use my 9700k for ;) I recommend
@@TriggaHappy00121213 Ty bro
saaaved. i came across an extra 9700kf chip, but i already i have an 8700k and am perfectly happy with it. this video just solidified my thoughts. thank you!
Finally upgrading my CPU to a i9 12900k after using a 9700k for the last 2 years. It did me well and it was a pretty fair experience.
Nice still going on with mine
I still like my 6700k
I want to upgrade from my 6600k but it's such a shitshow at the moment. Do I upgrade to more expense and heat on the Intel side, or worse single-threaded performance on the AMD side? Hopefully Zen2 answers the question for me.
Zen 2 offers a 35% IPC boost based on some month old-ish info, as well as 16C/32T CPUs (Although gamers won't make use of the many cores for a while)
My main hopes from Zen 2 is that it offers great overclockability akin to the Bulldozer/Piledriver series, but with a little better performance/watt when overclocking.
I have the same CPU and love it still wonder if I should get the 8700k or wait until the next batch of CPU’s from intel and amd
The danger with waiting is that you can wait forever as there's always something new and better coming around. I finished my new PC a couple of weeks ago, I sold my i7-4790K and 2 GTX 1080s and upgraded to an i9-9900K and 2 RTX 2080s. I do major upgrades every 3 years on average with whatever is available on the market.
Unlike my 1080 ti which doesn´t overclock for crap I was very lucky with the 6700k back then. Got mine at 4,9 ghz on all cores with watercooling, it only runs a bit too hot on stress tests, in games it does well. With clock speeds being dead in the water there is no reason to upgrade from the 6700k.
my 2500k is starting to feel old...
I'm in the process of upgrading part by part, right know a 2500 is serving my RTX 2080 and I can tell that cpu is complete trash by now.
My AMD FX8320 is feeling really old right now
It's still not a dead system. I have one too and use it often. Got it updated with 16 gigs of ram and an SSD drive which makes it just as fast as some of todays machines.
Thinking of buying the 9700k from overclockers here in UK. OEM/tray prices for both the 8700k and 9700k are the same £369.
Just upgraded my motherboard to an Aorus Z390 pro wifi, my cpu to an i7 9700k ($489 boxing day sale in Canada) and ram to corsair vengeance lpx 3000mhz 16 gb and honestly, I went there to buy the i9 9900k but the price just killed it for me. The i9 was literally $200 more on sale at $689 so I decided, because I don't stream or do video editing, the latest generation i7 processor should be MORE than enough. Turns out I was right, I previously had an MSI Radeon RX 580 8gb and I decided to keep it for a bit longer and just overclock it for better performance and ohhhh boy, my rig shreds Gears 5, Hellblade, and Outer worlds with ease. Even gives killer scores in cinebench. Overall, I am really happy with my new PC build, considering my previous cpu was an i7 875k
I've found Intel products value for money for nearly a decade, but I don't find the '9th generation' range that appealing and certainly not value for money for my use-case. I game at 2160p, render on home home server (headless Xeon E5), and do some encoding on my workstation. I also strongly object to the cost of motherboards for both Intel and AMD - especially with the majority not using finned heatsinks. I think Intel's '10th generation' and AMD's Zen 2 will be interesting, depending on the value.
Blame Trumps tariffs for the cost of motherboards.
@@wysetech2000 The US tariffs haven't changed UK prices.
@@piers389 Yes..you're right.
Got myself an i7 9700k & RTX 2070 but its weird, when I play for an exmaple Apex & Anthem the CPU goes to 100% and if I have open a stream on the other monitor, the stream start to lag/freeze. It shouldnt and I dont know why it is. The gameplay is smooth as hell but why does the stream lag?
I mean, I had a years old CPU i7 2700k (or 2600k, something like that) and could play Apex & the stream wouldnt lag. I don't know why it lag on my new CPU as it didn't for my years old CPU.
My CPU is defective? I dont know, feels bad man.
There is definitely something wrong with your setup. The 9700K is far better than the 2700K.
Hey had the same problem with anthem. i have a i7 7700k and an gtx 1080 i just fiddled arround in the options a bit for me it worked to just switch to "borderless windowed" and my cpu usage was around 60% also turning off V-sync helped :) hope you get that figured out ^^ the lagging of the os and other programms in the background is normal if your cpu is at 100% usage ... dont think its cause of a faulty cpu
@@Xompsy Mind helping me out with something?
Currently running i5-7600k with a GTX 1070 and 16 GB (2x8) RAM @3000 MHz. However, with the consideration of a 240 Hz monitor, buying a new CPU/GPU is in question. Thing is, seems most of what I'm playing (Apex rn for example) is barely exceeding 130 FPS, and it seems to me that buying a new CPU is the right way to go (considering either 8700k or 9700k). However, I've gotten a tiny amount of comments saying I shouldn't do that unless I also plan on getting something crazy like an RTX 2080, and I don't get that. From what I know, if I'm looking to get high FPS on games like Apex, Overwatch, CS, and the likes on low graphics settings, then the GPU doesn't do any work. My question is, should I invest in this new CPU, granted I install more powerful liquid cooling, or not bother since it won't give me this crazy boost without a godlike GPU? thanks
@@SariYT4 well if i would be in your position i wouldnt go for a 240Hz monitor if you dont get arround that number of frames :3 im using a 1440p 144Hz monitor and its really more then enough plus the difference between 240Hz and 144Hz isnt that noticable in my opinion. now to the gpu/cpu thing... the cpu doesnt give you that big of a difference when it comes to games mostly about 10-20 frames difference. the gpu is pritty much the most important when it comes to fps. Even though your current cpu with only 4 cores is a bit dated, if you boost it to 4.2 GHz it shouldnt really make a problem in most games as they dont even use more then 4 cores. Plus most Fps games are more dependend on the GPU then the CPU for rendering the enviroment and such. I think if you wanneh upgrade something in your pc it really is the cpu cause of the small core count ofc either the 8700k or the 9700k is a bit overkill for your GPU... you could still upgread that at a later point or you save up and get both at the same time :) i mean i bought my i7 7700k allso before getting the 1080. at that time i was running a rx480... which was really not that demanding a high cpu performance to not bottleneck.
Ellie Puffle That's actually really good to note! So you're suggesting that if I do decide to upgrade I should just save up for both? Since the GPU is vital for FPS but having TOO good of a GPU could lead to my 7600k bottlenecking I should probably just get both simultaneously. Makes more sense than what I was thinking definitely. I think sticking to my current setup for a while is perfectly fine, but if I decide to upgrade I'll definitely temporarily get a better CPU while looking to improve my GPU to something like a 1080/1080Ti or better, I'm thinking.
Thanks for your input! You said you had a 1440p 144 Hz monitor, what kind of games do you play on it?
I just found your channel. This was the 1st vid of benchmarks I've seen you do. You kick ass at this!!!!!!
Here in Belgium the 8700K costs 470 euro the 9700K 459 euro and the 9900K 549 euro as of 22/05/2019 here in the store i always go so for me it was more then obvious to buy the 9700K I think especially if you take in account my rig will be used for gaming about 90 percent of the time.
Needed this video a week ago! Thanks for the review. About to build and decided on the 9700k over the 8 series because of the soldered TIM and the promising specs. If you're in the market for a new i5/i7, get the 9th series and skip the de-lidding, spend the $30 (399 at Newegg now)
Bill Wohl the 9700/9600/9900 have about half the spectre and meltdown mitigation on them. No is mentioning this aside from anandtech
Great point! Do you know if the 9700 K runs cooler than the 8700 k? Also does it use less power?
Only a few fps faster in games than a 8700k for $400-430. Not worth it if you already have a capable gaming chip. Also no hyperthreading.
PCCaseGear in Australia have the 8700K for $599, 9700K for $679, 8086K for $699 and 9900K for $899. For comparison, the 2700 is $419 and the 2700K is $515.
Bought my 9900K for $435 on eBay a 2 weeks back. it was 15% off everything. I'm really happy with it! Went from a 7800x to a 9900k.
9700k cheap as hell, buying one soon
320 for this beast is worth
The i9 9900K shouldn’t even exist on the mainstream. The 9900K is what the 9700K should’ve been. Maybe AMD will provide us with some actual competition in 2019?
I feel like they're competing but just not enough yet. It will take some time before they become true competitors in the high end market. FX really hurt them i think and it will take a while to combat the damage it did in the consumers mind. The 2700x is a great processor but it isnt the BEST. They need the performance crown.
AscendedBeyond for higher refresh gaming , Intel always wins due to the higher IPC. AMD will need a few more gens to hit 5GHz.
You mean as far as gaming goes, right? As far as other workloads and cost vs performance...AMD hands down. The Ryzen 2600 is a best buy all around. Competing at fasted isn't always where it counts and AMD is fastest in some task... just not gaming.
AMD proven with ryzen 2 that they are very useful and their market share is improving. If my goal wasn't gaming but instead productivity or gaming+streaming I would have gone with a threadripper over then 8700k any day. They have a use case and if the leaks of their next release are even close their next gpus will be banging too. I haven't owned anything AMD in a while and the Vega leaks were a bit off but if they nail it out of the park they might be my next gpu upgrade from my 1070.
Nah, AMD CPUs will always remain the king of Workloads and Intel CPUs is the king of gaming. Guess which market is bigger, lol
Love how informative your videos are. Keep it up
Over the xmas holidays, the I7 9700k, here in the UK, was £50 - £75 cheaper than the 8700k (depending on where you shop, and OEM vs Retail). I got my OEM 9700k for £350. At that price, you would have to be nuts to buy the more expensive 8700k. The £75 savings went on a Z390 motherboard. This thing is a beast.
Estonian prices:
8700k - 420€
9700k - 410€
wait..whaaat?
seems logic to me. 9700 has less cores....
@@reggiexp69 What?
8700k has 6 PHYSICAL cores (12 "logical" cores with hyperthreading)
9700k has 8 PHYSICAL cores! (no hyperthreading)
Hyper-threading is not a substitute for additional cores. Never. A single physical CPU core with hyper-threading appears as two logical CPUs to an operating system. The CPU is still a single CPU, so it’s a little bit of a cheat. While the operating system sees two CPUs for each core, the actual CPU hardware only has a single set of execution resources for each core. The CPU pretends it has more cores than it does, and it uses its own logic to speed up program execution. In other words, the operating system is tricked into seeing two CPUs for each actual CPU core.
How that translates? See for yourself.
i7-8700K Passmark Average CPU Mark- 15929
i7-9700K Passmark Average CPU Mark- 17172
Got it?
www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-8700K+%40+3.70GHz&id=3098
www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-9700K+%40+3.60GHz&id=3335
@@MatosTubex yes i know. but like a 4core 4T vs a 4core 8 threads. the bench doesnt mean much cause single core performance, so having 2 extra core give that extra single core performance. im still not confinced about there 8core. or 6 core 12t. like its enought both but still its kinda wierd and still feels like a downgrade
@@reggiexp69
Respectfully, I don't understand what you saying.
Single core perfomance, is to put a benchmark that uses only one core to stress, and, depends only on single core clock speed. Is it important? Depends on the comparison. If you have the same number of cores, yes. If you have more cores, not that much.
See the top of the line from Intel, Xeon W-3175X, 3.10GHz. Its single core performance is lower than the 8700k (3.70GHz). Both have hyperthreading. But, and that's a big but, Xeon W-3175X has 28 physical cores. So it's basicaly a beast.
www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-xeon-w-3175x-cpu,5976-10.html
Overall testing means putting all those cores to stress. Physical and logical.
And the real question in here is: would you take a 6c12l, or a 8c8l? All the tests (google it if you want, I did), confirm that is better overall having two extra physical cores, rather than having four more "logical" cores. Even with slighly slower single core speed. 8700k 6c12l < 9700k 8c8l < 9900k 8c16l.
www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i7-9700k-9th-gen-cpu,5876.html
Cumpliments
@@MatosTubex to be honest i know. like if i do a bench multicore on my i7 2600k at 4.3ghz is a bit lower then a i5 6400 at 4.5ghz.. still my i7 just works beter overal. but less in games.
Still rocking with my 3770k gona wait longer what AMD soon releases. Intel has been milking us since the first Core family cpu's. Thanks to AMD last cpu's Intel was forced to add more cores.
Intel disabled HT in the 9700K simply to make the i9 9900K desirable. It's incredibly easy to see what they've done here. I think it's so ridiculous and I'm glad I picked up the 8700K for my latest build instead of waiting any longer. I would have went with Ryzen if a great motherboard would have been in stock at the time, but I had trouble finding what I wanted on the AMD side so I settled for the Intel build. Haven't been with AMD since I built an AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ rig back in the day. That was when a dual core CPU was rare and AMD's 64-bit CPU's were kicking the shit out of Intel's Netburst based Pentium D dual-core CPU's. The Pentium D had to be one of the most disappointing releases for Intel, at least in terms of performance. Thanks to the marketing juggernaut that Intel was, they still sold relatively well.
Then Intel went back to the drawing board and developed "Conroe" Core 2 duo CPU's which are based on the Pentium III architecture. It was that release that blew away AMD's best CPU's and Intel was selling mid-range CPU's for $300 that beat AMD's $1000 FX CPU. You can imagine how badly I felt after spending $600 on that AMD CPU of mine lol.
I'm about to pull the trigger, but can't decide on the 8700k or 9700k. How is your 8700k holding up?
Honestly man, it's really incredible. I could understand wanting more cores, but only if you are a content creator where time is money. For gaming and lighter workstation apps, it's just a great CPU. As far as IPC performance goes, it's honestly not vastly different from the 4790K it replaced. Intel hasn't made huge strides in a long time. Just minor upgrades, aside from the larger core counts. But then you're looking at some serious money for a bunch of Intel cores. Go AMD if you want more cores.
If Intel would have sold a 9700K with HT at similar price as 8700K it would have kill 8700K sales (8700K price would have drop). Instead, they sell a 9700K that has very similar performance as previous 8th gen (just like 8600K vs 9600K) and to get more (9900K) you have to pay more. NVidia did exact same thing with 20 series : the 2080 is very close performance wise to the 1080 TI. To get more performance, you need the 2080 TI (and pay a lot more).
i went from an i5 3570k to an i7 9700k ans i am blown away how well my games now run even when streaming
I went from i7 2600k to i7 9700k, while the game is smooth as hell, the stream on my 2nd monitor lag/Freeze when Im in game... I have no idea why. Didnt lag on my 2600k, feels bad man.
i'm using a old 940 i7 lol, really need to upgrade ^^
Yeah it's probably time. I recently upgraded from a 2500k and it was a tough decision over just getting a 2600k for the hyperthreading. Old cpus are viable for most stuff but games like battlefield will start to see major problems.
stop bragging rich boy! (920 user here) :P
@@stain6160 hey I used my 2500k for 8 years. I think I got my money out of it lol
@@Falcodrin I'm with you man. Used my 2500k since 2011 then upgraded to the 9900k.
920 here
keep in mind that dislikes are going to gamersnexus not intel
Pricing in Gemany (all prices from "mindfactory"):
8700k (box) 437€ vs 9700k (box) 418€ vs 9900k (tray) 499€
box price from the 9900k is 540€. Just to compare: the pricedifference between the 9700k bx vs tray is 3,15€. Well thats's interesting.
Congrats on the merch store, btw. Will try to support when I can.
A suggestion to not use so overloaded charts where the interested chips and their performance are barely visible. Please, use charts reduced with only interested and notable devices. Thank you.
try using 1080p screen or higher i don't have the issue your having as my phone is 1080p, my monitor is 1080p the more chips listed the better as not everyone has the same chip that is looking to upgrade.
@@resColts You do realize most phones are 1080p? It's not a matter of resolution but data density. "just use 1080p!"
@@hellishinc what's the most popular phone? A shitty iphone they all 750p with terrible ppi except for iphone x here's the reality in on a 1080p 5.5inch screen and everything is visible and clear but then again I'm watching video in 1080p quality and not 480p or 720p. Average person probably doesn't even know how to change UA-cam quality on their phone which most likely the issue op is suffering from either that or his display he is using is awful.
He talks too much too
GUYS THE 9700K IS 349$ CAD IM GOING FOR IT BOYSSS.
holy shit what a deal where was that
In Denmark the 9900k goes for around 610 USD on avg, the 9700k goes for 500 USD and the 8700k goes for 430 USD. But we also have an extra tax on everything we buy at 25% that goes to the government.
Intel i7 9700K is $200 at micro center so worth it. Found a ASUS TUF Z390 motherboard like new for $65.
happy with my 9900k at 5Ghz ( v1.290) ( Maximus z390 Code XI. hope you had a good time during the holidays!
Shitty processor. Can't even delid it cause It comes soldered... laugh!
@@jorge7547 solder is a good thing. Also you can delid it. It's just a different process. And a little more risky. Gtfo.
how is solder a good thing? how about you stop fanboying your cpu and just enjoy it than to spew bs?
"different process, a little more risky". yeah, thats what we consumers need... what an ape.@@declaredsnow
Ezra G mines over locked to 5ghz at 1.340 and with a 360mm AIO it stays around 65c during gaming
look, the thermals arent really a point here, its the fact limiting the consumer.
im completely ok with the 9900k, but not the soldering on it. @@Clutch4IceCream
so the i7 9700k is better tan the 8700k ffs
theyre basically the same i went with 8700k because it was cheaper at the time, i dont regret it one bit, ill probably get the 9900k next year instead of having to change my mobo and cpu
@@user-yd4rk4gv6k
Which mobo are you using??
KillTyrant prolly a z390
I’m glad you made this because I just made my first PC on Christmas Eve with the 9700k.