You’re Still Gonna Buy Intel… - Core i9 10900K & i5 10600K Review

[Haro]

5 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

yeah theres clickbait

I'm not sure about that

If the video shows what the title says ( wether it was changed or not ) I wouldn't consider that clickbait

[Jotoco]

14 hours ago, pApA^LeGBa said:

Well everyone who is not a pro gamer or has PC building as a hobby likes to get a new monitor plus a new expensive GPU plus a new PSU. The average income in NA and EU doesn´t allow the big masses to just go WQHD 144Hz that easy. I am in a FB group for 7 days to die. Most people asking for help with a new PC are around 600$-800$ budget (without monitor that is). Same for pretty much ever PC forum that i know. Most people ask for PC´s under 1000$.That´s also the usual price range within the people i know from work and friends. Good luck with WQHD for that price.

Not that someone spending 800 total will buy these anyway. How much for the CPU + a good AIO or a big Air cooler? That alone would almost kill this budget. 

 

10900k will end up being used in 1200+ budget and 10600k ins 1000+, that is how I see it anyway. Probably even higher than that.

 

It is usually MUCH better to buy a U$85 1600 AF or a U$120 3300X and spend U$500 on a GPU then vice versa. 

 

Edit:

 

Actually, going through PC part picker, selecting bare minimum SSD, power supply, a very basic case, a mother board that will probably catch fire how basic it is, you're still looking at 1200 before adding a GPU. 

 

And anything bellow 2080 you're probably GPU bottlenecked even at 720p 50% resolution scale. 

 

Anyone spending 2k+ on the tower alone will probably have a decent monitor. Aside from competitive I don't think there is a reason for this CPU. You're better served by it, older i7 or ryzen. And let's face it, even older CPUs can push CS GO over 400fps in competitive settings.

[pApA^LeGBa]

I was actually refering to the post that everyone should have WQHD by now and only pro gamers still play on FHD, basically offtopic not taking into place what CPU one has. But yeah, you are still right with your post. @Jotoco

 

Saying everyone should have WQHD by now, is the same BS as saying you need Intel for gaming with high FPS. It´s so funny, most people, including the audience of this forum, wouldn´t even recognize the difference between AMD and Intel in a blind test with no FPS counter on the screen. I bet even a lot of the tech youtubers wouldn´t even recognize the difference.

[Jotoco]

1 hour ago, pApA^LeGBa said:

I was actually refering to the post that everyone should have WQHD by now and only pro gamers still play on FHD, basically offtopic not taking into place what CPU one has. But yeah, you are still right with your post. @Jotoco

 

Saying everyone should have WQHD by now, is the same BS as saying you need Intel for gaming with high FPS. It´s so funny, most people, including the audience of this forum, wouldn´t even recognize the difference between AMD and Intel in a blind test with no FPS counter on the screen. I bet even a lot of the tech youtubers wouldn´t even recognize the difference.

Not everyone will have more than FHD displays (I don't) but also my most expensive machine is a U$500 notebook. 

 

If say everyone investing 2k+ have one, which is the target audience for these 2 CPUs. 

 

I'd even argue 2k is lowballing it a lot, because it assumes minimal storage, minimal RGB and other niceties, doesn't take into account peripherals, which at this market tier can amount to over 1k easily. 

 

So we are talking about people spending 3 to 4k on their gaming experience. The probability of these people having a triple 4k monitor setup is huge. So his point stands. 

[Egg-Roll]

  

18 hours ago, TofuHaroto said:

I'm not sure about that

If the video shows what the title says ( wether it was changed or not ) I wouldn't consider that clickbait

I wouldn't waste my time on the clickbait complainers, neither titles are really clickbait imo as Intel is technically on its last legs with the 14nm and many people are still going to buy intel regardless. Personally if this was Gen 9 I would have, if it wasn't for the 3800X going on sale being cheaper than the 3600X I still might have gone intel Gen 9. While imo "Hanging on for Dear Life" isn't the best wording, it still is technically true since they don't have any other good nm architecture yet in mass production and with yearly releases not releasing a new one could kill their consumer chip sector. While 1 year hiatus isn't likely isn't going to completely kill the Intel consumer market, not releasing a new series would push everyone making/buying a new computer this year over to AMD, and once there they might not want to go back, which is a very bad thing to happen for Intel with computer manufactures.

 

If you ask me last weeks WAN show is more clickbait than either titles of this video since you have to actually click on it and watch the video to find out what they were referring to. Whereas this video clearly is talking about 10th Gen Intel based on the image alone before clicking it, so if one doesn't want to watch it they could go google it instead.

[Arika]

4 minutes ago, Egg-Roll said:

While 1 year hiatus isn't likely isn't going to completely kill the Intel consumer market, not releasing a new series would push everyone making/buying a new computer this year over to AMD, and once there they might not want to go back, which is a very bad thing to happen for Intel with computer manufactures.

and something tells me their investors wouldn't be happy. which is something i think a lot of people forget about, huge Companies are at the mercy of their stakeholders, they work to please them first, anything else comes second or not at all. they would be given the directive "just get something out the door, we dont care how you do it"

[Egg-Roll]

1 hour ago, Arika S said:

and something tells me their investors wouldn't be happy. which is something i think a lot of people forget about, huge Companies are at the mercy of their stakeholders, they work to please them first, anything else comes second or not at all. they would be given the directive "just get something out the door, we dont care how you do it"

That's the issue with bigger companies(one I also forgot about), while Linus's past video praised the workers of Intel, it's the people who care about the bottom line who hurt the company more when it comes to poorly done products. Right now people are making fun out of the fact they are stuck in 14nm, even the forums title hints it in this video. I don't think people would really care as much if the pricing dropped to AMD levels because of the 14nm in fact doing so or undercutting AMD even with 14nm might kill AMDs market share gains. Sadly I guess Intel thinks their name tax is justified (how smoothly their stuff tends to work in 1 shot I can see for business solutions), don't get me wrong I like Intel, just not in its current state as a CPU manufacture.

 

I'm hoping for some real competition in 4-5 years when I build my next computer, only reason anyone should buy 10th gen Intel (based on this video) is only if you want to play Shadow of the Tomb Raider in 144 FPS  RDR2 is a little weird and could be a issue yet to be fixed in a future update, but as long as you still use a 60Hz monitor AMD is fine, even on 75Hz and in many situations 90Hz AMD is fine.

[pApA^LeGBa]

@Jotoco Again, i was only refering to the post that said that everyone should have WQHD by now. Independent from everything else in this thread. And that is not happening for a long time, that more people will have WQHD than FHD. Simply because it is too expensive for most people.

 

All i say is that WQHD is still the minority and will be for quite some time.

 

Apart from that (Importnant, has nothing to do with the statement above), even if i have 2K+ budget i would go AMD. Simply because Intel is overpriced for the bit of headroom they have. No matter how much money i have. If i have a no limits budget i would still go 3950X.

[Zberg]

The crux of the high end gaming CPU is that the more money you can waste on a CPU, the more likely you are building a decked out crazy system.  The more likely that is, the more likely you have money to spend on a big GPU (is anyone pairing a 9900k/10900k with a RTX 2060 or less?).  

 

So that means you are probably playing at 1440p or 4k (negating the awesome frame times of a 9900k/10900k).  Though, there are def some that are actually taking advantage in the best way, and going 1080p / 240hz.

 

All that said, when I built mine I wanted no compromises.  I play lots of different games, and wanted to be able to, at the drop of a hat, drop my resolution or settings down and get crazy high FPS, if the situation called for it.  I want to be able to play 1440p max settings at 60 fps and drop it down to low-medium settings and get 165hz guaranteed (for twitch shooters).  That is what I think CPU's like this are for.

 

And I do some productivity occasionally, but its just now and then.  I think the internet mob thinks everyone seems to need MAX CORES even though they might render a video or something else multicore very rarely.  I really think a huge amount of users are in the spectrum where they still benefit from an intel chip, if they have the dough for it.  

[Egg-Roll]

16 hours ago, Zberg said:

The crux of the high end gaming CPU is that the more money you can waste on a CPU, the more likely you are building a decked out crazy system.  The more likely that is, the more likely you have money to spend on a big GPU (is anyone pairing a 9900k/10900k with a RTX 2060 or less?).  

 

So that means you are probably playing at 1440p or 4k (negating the awesome frame times of a 9900k/10900k).  Though, there are def some that are actually taking advantage in the best way, and going 1080p / 240hz.

 

All that said, when I built mine I wanted no compromises.  I play lots of different games, and wanted to be able to, at the drop of a hat, drop my resolution or settings down and get crazy high FPS, if the situation called for it.  I want to be able to play 1440p max settings at 60 fps and drop it down to low-medium settings and get 165hz guaranteed (for twitch shooters).  That is what I think CPU's like this are for.

 

And I do some productivity occasionally, but its just now and then.  I think the internet mob thinks everyone seems to need MAX CORES even though they might render a video or something else multicore very rarely.  I really think a huge amount of users are in the spectrum where they still benefit from an intel chip, if they have the dough for it.  

That depends on the person, one might mislook at this video and buy the 10900K only after realizing they need to buy the 2080 Ti to get the numbers claimed, so there is a possibility of that situation happening, esp in current times. While LTT did make it quite clear in a massive chart what they used someone might have glazed right threw it, while yes their fault it is still possible.

There are actually tons of people using 9900K with 2060's , most granted are using 2080's or better however.

Spoiler

https://www.userbenchmark.com/PCBuilder?searchTerm=9900K, 2060

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/16515622

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/17193972

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/16257825

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/15390115

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/15268676

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/19475243 (Super)

 

All tests here are done in 1080, fps would be far worse in 1440.

 

I do find it weird they didn't at least include one popular twitch game, that's not CPU bound like CS:Go.

 

If you look at things like that, then no one should be buying Intel and just AMD as they are cheaper, the average person wouldn't actually gain much from buying a 10900K vs the AMD 3900X, or even the 3800X I got on sale, most people won't even benefit from buying such high range CPUs either as well. That's the biggest point of all, AMD when it goes on sale, it goes on sale, unlike Intel.

 

Sadly all stats one can find are biased in some form, since it relies on people reporting, even the companies sales figures don't prove a increase/decrease in users as they could push those units to a warehouse middleman for really low prices to sell at a later date or for use in prebuilds months later. Steam showed a 3% gain one month for Intel then dropped back to the normal pattern of Intel losing ground. All I know is many users who had Intel are now going AMD system builds, here are also going that way in the suggestions side of the forum. (last I checked) How I see it if the number are equal or near equal but one is significantly cheaper, to the average user if you can't benefit from the mediocre additional power why pay the additional cost? The Intel Tax in this situation is not beneficial in anyway possible, less commercial use. Only reason anyone right now should go Intel is for "flash the cash" because most cases as of right now AMD can do what Intel does to most of what the normal user needs. Most monitors are 90Hz or less so that should be the baseline of most people. A few will spend money on a 1440 or stupidly spend it on 4K to game on, but those are the 1-5% of users who game.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/electronics/1292115011/ref=pd_zg_hrsr_electronics

This shows in the top 10 (sadly no sales numbers given) 2 are 1080 144hz and one 1440 everything else is 1080 75/60 hz monitors (didn't check all).

 

Like I said:

On 5/22/2020 at 12:48 PM, Egg-Roll said:

only reason anyone should buy 10th gen Intel (based on this video) is only if you want to play Shadow of the Tomb Raider in 144 FPS

Very few games can hit 144hz on high detail with current cards with 1080p, till many do there is no need to buy a 144hz monitor unless you mainly game on games that can hit those numbers with such detail (or if you are willing to sacrifice the quality for fps), which I guess could be possible but is it really worth the cost of such a monitor? Esp considering the advancements of tech in monitors and GPU when it comes to price to performance figures. So if one wants to go Intel, go Intel, however mho is go AMD if you are a normal user/gamer, and it has been that way for over a year esp after the disappointment in the 9000 series, and yes the 9000 series was a disappointment. Gen 9 was my tipping point to go AMD, if they did something great with Gen 9 I would have gone with Gen 9 but then AMD brought out Ryzen 3000, making it a "no brainer".

[pApA^LeGBa]

@Zberg I know all that. Again: I was purely refering to the post that says everyone should have 1440p already, wich is simply impossible. Apart from everything else in this thread. Pure offtopic.

[Zberg]

23 hours ago, Egg-Roll said:

 

If you look at things like that, then no one should be buying Intel and just AMD as they are cheaper, the average person wouldn't actually gain much from buying a 10900K vs the AMD 3900X, or even the 3800X I got on sale,

That 3900x price drop...man AMD just said "your move biatch!".  I still think the 10900k will sell because of people wanting the best of the best.  The most interesting comparison I am looking forward to, is if ryzen 4000 truly takes the gaming title, if people still buy out all of intels top line stuff over the ryzen 4800x or 4900x or whatever pulls ahead.   

 

3900x for around 400 dollars though, (even as low as 380?!).  That is a crazy deal.  I think that was a pretty baller move on AMD's part.

[Egg-Roll]

5 hours ago, Zberg said:

That 3900x price drop...man AMD just said "your move biatch!".  I still think the 10900k will sell because of people wanting the best of the best.  The most interesting comparison I am looking forward to, is if ryzen 4000 truly takes the gaming title, if people still buy out all of intels top line stuff over the ryzen 4800x or 4900x or whatever pulls ahead.   

 

3900x for around 400 dollars though, (even as low as 380?!).  That is a crazy deal.  I think that was a pretty baller move on AMD's part.

It's actually a typical move on AMDs end really since Zen, but as I said when AMD goes on sale it goes on sale. Locally the best I've seen a Intel go on sale for is $60 off +a game? Typically 30-50, no game.

 

Those who go for Intels 10900k either have a use for intels specifics, have the cash, or is just a hardcore fanboy. If it wasn't for those 3 types Intel would be in worse shape then they are currently.

 

I would love to see the 4000 series, in one sense it was a bad time to build my new computer but equally I bought/built it just before the pandemic so I literally missed the price increases, delayed shipping times and lack of sales by a few weeks tops.

 

3900x isn't really on sale around here, just $100 off on a overpriced piece of tech, basically selling for $460USD on sale... I think AMD is just having some fun at Intels expense.

[Zberg]

41 minutes ago, Egg-Roll said:

It's actually a typical move on AMDs end really since Zen, but as I said when AMD goes on sale it goes on sale. Locally the best I've seen a Intel go on sale for is $60 off +a game? Typically 30-50, no game.

 

Those who go for Intels 10900k either have a use for intels specifics, have the cash, or is just a hardcore fanboy. If it wasn't for those 3 types Intel would be in worse shape then they are currently.

 

I would love to see the 4000 series, in one sense it was a bad time to build my new computer but equally I bought/built it just before the pandemic so I literally missed the price increases, delayed shipping times and lack of sales by a few weeks tops.

 

3900x isn't really on sale around here, just $100 off on a overpriced piece of tech, basically selling for $460USD on sale... I think AMD is just having some fun at Intels expense.

I love the move though.  I have 2 x b450 motherboards that, if the price goes low enough, could find themselves occupied with 3900x's.  More power to them,

 

Im sure the people buying it (10900k) are in the same boat many are:  Have the cash, like messing around with overclocking, want no compromises best of the best.  There are people like that in every field.  I have friends that have dumped 10G's+ into their cars on upgrades for a <100hp benefit, to get the slightest of advantages.  Its the same stuff.  I also am a cyclist and have some high end bike stuff.  A guy at work who does the same (and has much more dough) has spent up to 3x more on an individual bike (compared to a VERY nice road bike I ride most of the time) for just the slightest of weight and stiffness advantages (we are talking <5% improvement).   I also smoke him on the road (thats an age and fitness thing though).  That's just how it is with high end enthusiasts.  It's why Jay has 2x 2080ti's in all his water cooled systems even though he knows the performance gain is garbage, and has made a video letting everyone know SLI is about as good as throwing cash in a dumpster.

 

That's why I think itll be so fun if AMD takes the gaming badge next launch.  Would be the a great shake up.  Would be interested to see what the high end enthusiasts buy then.  

[Egg-Roll]

3 hours ago, Zberg said:

I love the move though.  I have 2 x b450 motherboards that, if the price goes low enough, could find themselves occupied with 3900x's.  More power to them,

 

Im sure the people buying it (10900k) are in the same boat many are:  Have the cash, like messing around with overclocking, want no compromises best of the best.  There are people like that in every field.  I have friends that have dumped 10G's+ into their cars on upgrades for a <100hp benefit, to get the slightest of advantages.  Its the same stuff.  I also am a cyclist and have some high end bike stuff.  A guy at work who does the same (and has much more dough) has spent up to 3x more on an individual bike (compared to a VERY nice road bike I ride most of the time) for just the slightest of weight and stiffness advantages (we are talking <5% improvement).   I also smoke him on the road (thats an age and fitness thing though).  That's just how it is with high end enthusiasts.  It's why Jay has 2x 2080ti's in all his water cooled systems even though he knows the performance gain is garbage, and has made a video letting everyone know SLI is about as good as throwing cash in a dumpster.

 

That's why I think itll be so fun if AMD takes the gaming badge next launch.  Would be the a great shake up.  Would be interested to see what the high end enthusiasts buy then.  

I love the move too, but unless you have a use for the 4 extra cores if the 3800x is cheaper I would go for it since there isn't really any performance loss (or shouldn't be) less the extra core count.

 

Yea, same reason why I went watercooling, knowing it would make little to no difference I just wanted to try it and spend the money to do so as right as I can. However unlike others I did so to learn, more than to show off(that's what RGB and a case is for), after that build not sure if I will continue water cooling or not. For the car reference this came to mind. For me it's cameras that I tend to buy better stuff on, sure my computer is "technically" better than everyone in the family (less one other who got a 3600x with a 2060S, which is a better gpu) with at least it's CPU and RAM, but my RP is the best in the family hands down right now (so is my weird flex in old camera gear). I don't have the best lenses for it sadly and I can't really use it thanks to this pandemic, but I've always had the better camera in the family. A sibling got a Canon A series way back in early 2000s I got the S5 IS(which I later used with a DCR-2025 PRO to point at the sun, I might be able to find those images, they are somewhere, yea I need to find them), they later asked me to help them on their next P&S which was a ELPH (I think), shortly after I picked up a SX40 which is in their possession now (still mine),2 years ago someone asked for help in picking a camera within their budget, I told them to get the T7i which I picked up and held onto till they came down in May that year, I then picked up the RP last April (All major purchases I got a cheap used DSLR in 2013 along with a lens pictures from which are on this forum), and yes I let the person who uses the T7i to use it, I'm not cruel, or am I  Also I just realized it's been over a year since my last purchase from Henrys  Did recently pick this little thing up, why Canon didn't think of that is beyond me esp for the RP but whatever, I now have one lol.

 

If AMD did that it wouldn't be a shakeup it would be a massacre, next to Intels higher performance per core the only thing keeping them known is for gaming. If AMD takes that from them before they can get a better cpu out or at least in the works for the same year it won't be a nice scene. Personally I would love to see it tho. High end enthusiasts will likely still buy intel as long as they can push higher number than AMD, that is technically what the 10 series is doing, and only real market for Intel imo, best of the best for a price.

[Zberg]

20 hours ago, Egg-Roll said:

I love the move too, but unless you have a use for the 4 extra cores if the 3800x is cheaper I would go for it since there isn't really any performance loss (or shouldn't be) less the extra core count.

 

Yea, same reason why I went watercooling, knowing it would make little to no difference I just wanted to try it and spend the money to do so as right as I can. However unlike others I did so to learn, more than to show off(that's what RGB and a case is for), after that build not sure if I will continue water cooling or not. For the car reference this came to mind. For me it's cameras that I tend to buy better stuff on, sure my computer is "technically" better than everyone in the family (less one other who got a 3600x with a 2060S, which is a better gpu) with at least it's CPU and RAM, but my RP is the best in the family hands down right now (so is my weird flex in old camera gear). I don't have the best lenses for it sadly and I can't really use it thanks to this pandemic, but I've always had the better camera in the family. A sibling got a Canon A series way back in early 2000s I got the S5 IS(which I later used with a DCR-2025 PRO to point at the sun, I might be able to find those images, they are somewhere, yea I need to find them), they later asked me to help them on their next P&S which was a ELPH (I think), shortly after I picked up a SX40 which is in their possession now (still mine),2 years ago someone asked for help in picking a camera within their budget, I told them to get the T7i which I picked up and held onto till they came down in May that year, I then picked up the RP last April (All major purchases I got a cheap used DSLR in 2013 along with a lens pictures from which are on this forum), and yes I let the person who uses the T7i to use it, I'm not cruel, or am I  Also I just realized it's been over a year since my last purchase from Henrys  Did recently pick this little thing up, why Canon didn't think of that is beyond me esp for the RP but whatever, I now have one lol.

 

If AMD did that it wouldn't be a shakeup it would be a massacre, next to Intels higher performance per core the only thing keeping them known is for gaming. If AMD takes that from them before they can get a better cpu out or at least in the works for the same year it won't be a nice scene. Personally I would love to see it tho. High end enthusiasts will likely still buy intel as long as they can push higher number than AMD, that is technically what the 10 series is doing, and only real market for Intel imo, best of the best for a price.

Im confused what did you watercool?  The 3800x?

 

I am basically folding/BOINC non stop now, so for that specific purpose, the more cores the better (I would love to fill those B450 mobos with 3900X if they are super cheap).  But on my main gaming rig, will always sit whatever is the best for gaming (at the time).  Im certainly not going to waste the money to upgrade to a 10900k due to the very small improvement over the current chip.  But my 9900k at 5.1 all core will do the trick until ryzen 4000 gives me a reason to do something.  Very excited to see what it brings out

[Egg-Roll]

1 hour ago, Zberg said:

Im confused what did you watercool?  The 3800x?

 

I am basically folding/BOINC non stop now, so for that specific purpose, the more cores the better (I would love to fill those B450 mobos with 3900X if they are super cheap).  But on my main gaming rig, will always sit whatever is the best for gaming (at the time).  Im certainly not going to waste the money to upgrade to a 10900k due to the very small improvement over the current chip.  But my 9900k at 5.1 all core will do the trick until ryzen 4000 gives me a reason to do something.  Very excited to see what it brings out

Yea, I watercooled the 3800x, along with the reference cooler 5700XT I got (open box, with 10% more savings). It runs hot(mostly cpu), but I'm ok with it as it seems to only run hot while BOINC/Folding, so keep that in mind too as you likely will need to up your cooling if you haven't. Plus I don't have all computer fans in yet (intake fan will blow against the pump/reservoir) as I hastily booted it for Folding Covid, using my Thermaltake Armor Jr power/reset front panel 3.5" bay as my boot up button via the watercooling grommet in the back, because stupid me forgot to do that, Also forgot to hook up the RGB controller for all RGB, the RGB lighting for my pump, and my thermometer for the pump too  Only RGB that worked was my RAM all 64GB 4 stick stupidly overpriced RAM, because no one had the 32GB stick variant and still don't in Canada(afaik)...

 

Yea if you already got the 9900K then there is no need to upgrade possibly even when the 4000's come around. For me compared to price performance I was leaning towards AMD after gen 9 came out, the 3800X being on sale sold me on it over the 3700X I was originally looking at. The stupid part of my whole build is needing to buy the GPU waterblock from amazon.com, and at that point it was cheaper to do so then finding a 2060 or 2060S running reference.