Should I get 10700k?

[rpalmz46]

So I just got a 3080 and realized my i5-8600k bottlenecks it harder than I thought it would and want to upgrade, my motherboard is also starting to screw up as my usbs dont work. I was thinking of getting the 10700k or the 3700x or something like that but was wondering if there was anything better I could do or if it's worth waiting for ryzen 4 or 5000 series whatever the name may be.

[boggy77]

the next ryzen series will be announced in two weeks. I'd say it's worth waiting.

otherwise, a 10600k should be enough if you're mostly gaming.

[rpalmz46]

1 minute ago, boggy77 said:

the next ryzen series will be announced in two weeks. I'd say it's worth waiting.

otherwise, a 10600k should be enough if you're mostly gaming.

Yeah but does the 10600k have hyper threading ive made the mistake buying i5s in the past and always wish I bought the i7

[VeganJoy]

2 minutes ago, rpalmz46 said:

Yeah but does the 10600k have hyper threading ive made the mistake buying i5s in the past and always wish I bought the i7

it does. best value intel chip and its basically a slightly better 8086k if you overclock. really its the only good 10th gen chip lol. although you could just get an 8700k or 9th gen i7/i9 and keep your current motherboard. 10700k in particular is binned kinda badly so no point in getting it over a 9900k if youve got a mobo for 8th-9th gen already

[boggy77]

6 minutes ago, rpalmz46 said:

Yeah but does the 10600k have hyper threading ive made the mistake buying i5s in the past and always wish I bought the i7

yes it does. 6c/12t

[Dedayog]

9 minutes ago, VeganJoy said:

it does. best value intel chip and its basically a slightly better 8086k if you overclock. really its the only good 10th gen chip lol. although you could just get an 8700k or 9th gen i7/i9 and keep your current motherboard. 10700k in particular is binned kinda badly so no point in getting it over a 9900k if youve got a mobo for 8th-9th gen already

This as well.  5GHz 8700K will be up to the task with the 3080 for 1440p/4K.

[rpalmz46]

3 minutes ago, Dedayog said:

This as well.  5GHz 8700K will be up to the task with the 3080 for 1440p/4K.

Yeah but as I said I want to get a new Mobo since my usbs don't work and if im going to do that I may as well upgrade to a new platform that being lga 1200 or am4

[rpalmz46]

Think I may wait if I can for the new ryzen chips and see what they get me since they also have pcie 4

[Orfieus]

21 minutes ago, boggy77 said:

the next ryzen series will be announced in two weeks. I'd say it's worth waiting.

otherwise, a 10600k should be enough if you're mostly gaming.

we shall see how easy it will be to get those CPUs

 

Personally I'm waiting for the new Ryzen, I want to support AMD for their hard work and I don't want to support Intel right now so that is the main reason why I am waiting

[rpalmz46]

Definitely need a new cpu tho this 8600k causes massive stuttering in many games like borderlands 3 pegged at 85-100 usage and it makes my gpu usage his like 31 and I had a fps drop as low as 14 lmao 

[rpalmz46]

Well I think I read with the new chips they may have found a way to increase the fps in games to be more in line with Intel's 

[VeganJoy]

1 hour ago, rpalmz46 said:

Definitely need a new cpu tho this 8600k causes massive stuttering in many games like borderlands 3 pegged at 85-100 usage and it makes my gpu usage his like 31 and I had a fps drop as low as 14 lmao 

is it running at stock clocks? intel keeps the base boost clocks pretty low on their i5's to segment their product stack but a 4.9-5.0 ghz 8600k should be pretty decent in most games. your average fps should be similar to benchmarks, just with a few more frame drops than hyperthreaded chips due to inefficient game code

[Mister Woof]

As much as I hate the idea of the 9700k, compared against the 8700k its still slightly better and is on sale right now on newegg for $299

 

https://www.newegg.com/core-i7-9th-gen-intel-core-i7-9700k/p/N82E16819117958?Description=i7-9700K&cm_re=i7-9700K-_-19-117-958-_-Product&quicklink=true

 

You can just slot it in for $300 and be done. Going up to a 10600k, 10700k, or 10900k will easily cost you twice as much but not be any better at gaming.

 

Even though it lacks hyperthreading, it's still better objectively for gaming than an 8700k.

 

It will game better than any Ryzen chip and when overclocked it will perform as well as a 10900k.

 

Alternatively, if hyperthreading is that big a deal, you can get an i9-9900k for only $399, which is about even with the 10700k in cost and performance (well, not thermally) and you can just slot it in your current board.

 

https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i9-9900k-core-i9-9th-gen/p/N82E16819118147?Description=i9-9900k&cm_re=i9-9900k-_-19-118-147-_-Product

 

But it's much harder to cool and you'll need a very high quality motherboard for this to work well.

 

Ultimately you have to ask if potential gains now offset the possibility that your $300-400 might get you something better from AMD in a few months. And you'll have to gamble.

[VeganJoy]

29 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

As much as I hate the idea of the 9700k, compared against the 8700k its still slightly better and is on sale right now on newegg for $299

given the issues that plague the 9600k i wouldnt recommend the 9700k, some games already released play poorly with it as devs have gotten lazy and their games dont handle non-SMT chips well. far cry 5 comes to mind but there are others. i would take the 8700k for slightly lesser framerates but less frame drops going into the future. for now its fine but its more likely to become less enjoyable in use than a hyperthreaded cpu, assuming you dont upgrade immediately when it starts giving you stutter in games. and with console devs getting access to 16 threads i expect some even less optimized games than previously considered possible lol

[Mister Woof]

5 minutes ago, VeganJoy said:

given the issues that plague the 9600k i wouldnt recommend the 9700k, some games already released play poorly with it as devs have gotten lazy and their games dont handle non-SMT chips well. far cry 5 comes to mind but there are others. i would take the 8700k for slightly lesser framerates but less frame drops going into the future. for now its fine but its more likely to become less enjoyable in use than a hyperthreaded cpu, assuming you dont upgrade immediately when it starts giving you stutter in games. and with console devs getting access to 16 threads i expect some even less optimized games than previously considered possible lol

And then some games performs better with smt off - it's never a perfect world.

 

Being an 8700k owner I detest the business practice of Intel by removing ht off a chip and selling it as an i7, but I still believe objectively the 9700k is better for gaming in general than the 8700k for now.

[Dedayog]

2 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

And then some games performs better with smt off - it's never a perfect world.

 

Being an 8700k owner I detest the business practice of Intel by removing ht off a chip and selling it as an i7, but I still believe objectively the 9700k is better for gaming in general than the 8700k for now.

How is the 9700K vs the 8700K when both are 5Ghz all cores?

[VeganJoy]

8 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

And then some games performs better with smt off - it's never a perfect world.

 

Being an 8700k owner I detest the business practice of Intel by removing ht off a chip and selling it as an i7, but I still believe objectively the 9700k is better for gaming in general than the 8700k for now.

i dont know of any games that perform better with smt off, aside from the higher clock speeds possible on the non-smt cpu being higher and thus giving higher avg framerates. with 9700k vs 9900k benchmarks the 9700k in reviews would almost always overclock to 5.1ghz whereas their 9900k sample would only hit 5.0 ghz, so average framerates went in favor of the 9700k. but frametime consistency was almost always in favor of the 9900k bc hyperthreading.

[Mister Woof]

22 minutes ago, Dedayog said:

How is the 9700K vs the 8700K when both are 5Ghz all cores?

This review shows 10600k, which is actually a better case scenario than the 8700k due to built-in security mitigations and cooling

 

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3592-intel-i5-10600k-cpu-review-benchmarks-ryzen-5-3600-et-al

 

some to take note showing the 5.1ghz 10600k still being slower than a stock 9700k (4.6ghz all core) and in all cases losing when frequency is equalized.

 

 

 

 

Yes, the differences are minute, but the again we're comparing two CPUs that cost the same.

[Mister Woof]

17 minutes ago, VeganJoy said:

i dont know of any games that perform better with smt off, aside from the higher clock speeds possible on the non-smt cpu being higher and thus giving higher avg framerates. with 9700k vs 9900k benchmarks the 9700k in reviews would almost always overclock to 5.1ghz whereas their 9900k sample would only hit 5.0 ghz, so average framerates went in favor of the 9700k. but frametime consistency was almost always in favor of the 9900k bc hyperthreading.

Regarding 9700k vs 9900k, i agree. But I am comparing the 9700k to the 8700k. See above.

 

Regarding SMT on/off, there are some cases and I will search for them, but I can't remember off the top of my head. It's out there, though, although not necessarily a deciding issue. I will say that I absolutely would choose 8 true cores vs 6 hyperthreaded cores for gaming purposes. The i5 issue is a game problem, not a hardware problem. 

[Dedayog]

6 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

Regarding 9700k vs 9900k, i agree. But I am comparing the 9700k to the 8700k. See above.

 

Regarding SMT on/off, there are some cases and I will search for them, but I can't remember off the top of my head. It's out there, though, although not necessarily a deciding issue. I will say that I absolutely would choose 8 true cores vs 6 hyperthreaded cores for gaming purposes. The i5 issue is a game problem, not a hardware problem. 

The big key is being able to drop in the 8700K or 9700K without having to buy a new motherboard.

 

In that case, I'd go 8700K. Sounds cooler.

[Mister Woof]

Just now, Dedayog said:

The big key is being able to drop in the 8700K or 9700K without having to buy a new motherboard.

 

In that case, I'd go 8700K. Sounds cooler.

I'd disagree without delidding. 8700k on stock Intel toothpaste is terrible. At least the 9700k is "soldered".

[Gohardgrandpa]

2 hours ago, rpalmz46 said:

So I just got a 3080 and realized my i5-8600k bottlenecks it harder than I thought it would and want to upgrade, my motherboard is also starting to screw up as my usbs dont work. I was thinking of getting the 10700k or the 3700x or something like that but was wondering if there was anything better I could do or if it's worth waiting for ryzen 4 or 5000 series whatever the name may be.

What's your monitor specs?

 

[Mister Woof]

All that said I want to reiterate that I HATE that the 9700k is an i7. It should never have been an i7. It should have been an i5. Intel obviously learned their lesson with the 10th gen lineup.

[Dedayog]

4 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

I'd disagree without delidding. 8700k on stock Intel toothpaste is terrible. At least the 9700k is "soldered".

Good point, I take for granted I have a 360mm AIO on mine.

 

OP, what cooling are you using on the 8600K?  

[Mister Woof]

Is the 8600k really bottlenecking it that much (more than the 3080 would be by anything else, anyway)? 

 

My understanding is that literally everything is currently bottlenecking these GPUs even at 1440p, and a CPU upgrade from a highly blocked 8600k may not yield too much ROI.