Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

$450 for a cpu and mobo VR gaming

ShayO
 Share

Hi Guys!

So i sold my old cpu and mobo and saved some money and now i got $450 to replace them,

until now i had the Xeon e3-1230V5
current rig:
GPU:1080TI
RAM:16GB 2400 DDR4

COOLING:HYPER EVO 212

STORAGE: 500GB M.2 SSD

and now im debating between the i5 9600k and the 2700x, so i can know that 9600k =more core, higher fps (then the 2700x) but less threads and less performance in productivity and 2700X more threads less cores, less FPS and better performance in productivity but i do not do ANY video editing and the current performance of daily tasks are just fine with what i have now so i wont be feeling the difference either way, the thing is this...

since i am only playing VR (and my monitors are 60fps) i will only need up to 90FPS but then also i would like to max the resolution in games.

it might be a stupid question but, from my experience and what i know, the heavier the resolution and detail etc.. the lower FPS, SO chances are higher with the 9600k of keeping the FPS at 90 with higher resolution right?

Sadly my budget IS tight otherwise i would have dig out another $50, get a 8700k and a mobo and call it a day.

and the 9600k is cheaper but sadly there's nothing performance and budget wise in between, so its either about $380 for a 9600k or $500 for a 8700k.

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I remember the 9600k doesn't have much of an advantage in gaming. I personally think the 2700x is a better choice, because games will eventually start to use the 8 cores that the 2700x has, and the 9600k only has 6 cores. 

8086k

aorus pro z390

noctua nh-d15s chromax w black cover

evga 3070 ultra

samsung 128gb, adata swordfish 1tb, wd blue 1tb

seasonic 620w dogballs psu

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mxk. said:

From what I remember the 9600k doesn't have much of an advantage in gaming. I personally think the 2700x is a better choice, because games will eventually start to use the 8 cores that the 2700x has, and the 9600k only has 6 cores. 

Yea forgot to mention that on the post. i know that the 2700x has 4 cores 8 threads and games are being developed towards more threads then cores and shifting from 4 cores to 6 cores will take years but i guess if i will upgrade in 3 years then it wouldnt matter that much since seems like that right now the 9600k is delivering more FPS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ShayO said:

9600k is delivering more FPS.

You'd get about 5 more FPS if you're lucky. Plus, the 2700X is much better for anything that isn't gaming. 

The difference for gaming is 'barely noticeable' at best.

The 2700X is also more futureproof.

Quote

i know that the 2700x has 4 cores 8 threads

It actually has 8 cores 16 threads. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ShayO said:

 9600k is delivering more FPS.

Its barely any more. You won't notice it.

8086k

aorus pro z390

noctua nh-d15s chromax w black cover

evga 3070 ultra

samsung 128gb, adata swordfish 1tb, wd blue 1tb

seasonic 620w dogballs psu

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ShayO said:

i know that the 2700x has 4 cores 8 threads and games are being developed towards more threads then cores and shifting from 4 cores to 6 cores will take years but i guess if i will upgrade in 3 years

Games seem to be developing more towards core count. The shift from 4 to 6 is already happening.

8086k

aorus pro z390

noctua nh-d15s chromax w black cover

evga 3070 ultra

samsung 128gb, adata swordfish 1tb, wd blue 1tb

seasonic 620w dogballs psu

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, 1kv said:

You'd get about 5 more FPS if you're lucky. Plus, the 2700X is much better for anything that isn't gaming. 

The difference for gaming is 'barely noticeable' at best.

The 2700X is also more futureproof.

It actually has 8 cores 16 threads. 

actually in most videos of benchmarks i watched, it was 15-30 fps difference. the question is, since higher resolution means lower fps, the 9600k will be able to handle higher resolutions in games right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ShayO said:

actually in most videos of benchmarks i watched, it was 15-30 fps difference. the question is, since higher resolution means lower fps, the 9600k will be able to handle higher resolutions in games right?

15-30fps? Haha, I wish. That's completely false. They're probably running benchmarks instead of actual gameplay.

The 9600k could handle 1440p60 with your GPU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ShayO said:

actually in most videos of benchmarks i watched, it was 15-30 fps difference. the question is, since higher resolution means lower fps, the 9600k will be able to handle higher resolutions in games right?

actually, I have a feeling they were using more powerful graphics cards, and using gameplay, not benchmarks meant to compare things. Every time an update comes out for a game that tweaks and optimizes it, it makes a game benchmark insignificant (depends on the tweaks but the point still stands).

 

Powerful graphics cards are used in benches, to show the gap between CPU's so someone can see it on a graph.

8086k

aorus pro z390

noctua nh-d15s chromax w black cover

evga 3070 ultra

samsung 128gb, adata swordfish 1tb, wd blue 1tb

seasonic 620w dogballs psu

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, mxk. said:

actually, I have a feeling they were using more powerful graphics cards, and using gameplay, not benchmarks meant to compare things. Every time an update comes out for a game that tweaks and optimizes it, it makes a game benchmark insignificant (depends on the tweaks but the point still stands).

 

Powerful graphics cards are used in benches, to show the gap between CPU's so someone can see it on a graph.

They could also have used different MSAA, resolution and FXAA settings too. Even the quality could've been adjusted between marks, who knows?

15-30fps is too much of a gap to seem like a legit difference, even with high end GPUs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, 1kv said:

They could also have used different MSAA, resolution and FXAA settings too. Even the quality could've been adjusted between marks, who knows?

15-30fps is too much of a gap to seem like a legit difference, even with high end GPUs. 

exactlyyyyy. Those shitty comparison videos by randoms shouldn't be used my randoms

8086k

aorus pro z390

noctua nh-d15s chromax w black cover

evga 3070 ultra

samsung 128gb, adata swordfish 1tb, wd blue 1tb

seasonic 620w dogballs psu

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

a

2 minutes ago, mxk. said:

exactlyyyyy. Those shitty comparison videos by randoms shouldn't be used my randoms

 

3 minutes ago, 1kv said:

They could also have used different MSAA, resolution and FXAA settings too. Even the quality could've been adjusted between marks, who knows?

15-30fps is too much of a gap to seem like a legit difference, even with high end GPUs. 

Alright, 2700X it is then. now i just have to find a deal with a mobo for $465 (managed to get another $15 after opening this thread).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, ShayO said:

a

 

Alright, 2700X it is then. now i just have to find a deal with a mobo for $465 (managed to get another $15 after opening this thread).

Well, it's 4am here and I have nothing else to do so I'll have a look too if that's alright.

I think it's possible to get one for $465.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ShayO said:

I found one on newegg's ebay account with a

GIGABYTE X470 AORUS ULTRA GAMING AM4 AMD X470 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.1 HDMI ATX AMD Mo
 
For $469
but i dont know if its a good mobo.

It's a decent board. I found the same thing but for $449.98 (that's without the discount on the board) on Newegg's website.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E1681314506

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113499

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ShayO said:

I found one on newegg's ebay account with a

GIGABYTE X470 AORUS ULTRA GAMING AM4 AMD X470 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.1 HDMI ATX AMD Mo
 
For $469
but i dont know if its a good mobo.

no pls no get that.

8086k

aorus pro z390

noctua nh-d15s chromax w black cover

evga 3070 ultra

samsung 128gb, adata swordfish 1tb, wd blue 1tb

seasonic 620w dogballs psu

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, 1kv said:

It's a good board. I found the same thing but for $449.98 (that's without the discount on the board) on Newegg's website.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E1681314506

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113499

the board has a shitty VRM. Gigabyte did really bad on the x470 boards

8086k

aorus pro z390

noctua nh-d15s chromax w black cover

evga 3070 ultra

samsung 128gb, adata swordfish 1tb, wd blue 1tb

seasonic 620w dogballs psu

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you going to overclock?

8086k

aorus pro z390

noctua nh-d15s chromax w black cover

evga 3070 ultra

samsung 128gb, adata swordfish 1tb, wd blue 1tb

seasonic 620w dogballs psu

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 1kv said:

It's a decent board. I found the same thing but for $449.98 (that's without the discount on the board) on Newegg's website.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E1681314506

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113499

First link didnt work

and the MSI one is $10 too much. the Gigabyte one is $129

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mxk. said:

Are you going to overclock?

eventually probably but i cant afford a better cooler so for now, no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ShayO said:

First link didnt work

and the MSI one is $10 too much. the Gigabyte one is $129

It's $129 on sale. I calculated the price without sale (so $139.99) The MSI board and the CPU should come to $449.98

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ShayO said:

eventually probably but i cant afford a better cooler so for now, no.

then don't get the gigabyte board. It's ass for overclocking. If you want to get a better board, which I recommend you do, then consider saving up more money so you can get a better cooler, too.

8086k

aorus pro z390

noctua nh-d15s chromax w black cover

evga 3070 ultra

samsung 128gb, adata swordfish 1tb, wd blue 1tb

seasonic 620w dogballs psu

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 1kv said:

It's $129 on sale. The MSI board and the CPU should equal 449.98

For some reason i dont get the sale price to show. for my it shows full price of $139. also total with tax is $484.6 so $19 over budget.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×