I oscillate between 8700k , 6800k or 7820x

[Hunter-]

I don't have too much money to invest in modern PC platform for the moment,and all i want is, to replace my obsolete system and buy a decent gaming system.For the moment i have an i7 990x processor and i can 't start some modern games like Resident Evil Village and Dying Light 2 just because lack of AVX technology.I wanted to play RE Village so much and i saw it required a strong CPU at minimal requirments,at least an i7 8700k to play...Wow!
I still don't have a budget for i7 8700k+z370 or z390 mobo,and i found a cheap system with i7 6800k paired with Asus rampage 5 extreme mobo.
This system 6800K+asus rampage 5 cost me 200 $. The other system i7 8700k+z370 cost me around 300 $.I found another i7 8700K+z390+32 Gb RAM and this system cost me 400 $.I don't know what to do.My budget is around 300 $ max.
I checked with CPU-z from google,and 8700k and 6800k have same set of Instructions.I'm just wonder if that game Resident Evil village requires at least 8700k to start that game?With 6800k start RE Village or not?I don't want to have problem to buy an entire system and can't start that game....
thanks,

 

p.s i found another oportunity an i7 7820x+MSi x299 Tomahawk at price of 240$. Is a good choice?

[Alex Atkin UK]

17 minutes ago, Hunter- said:

I don't have too much money to invest in modern PC platform for the moment,and all i want is, to replace my obsolete system and buy a decent gaming system.For the moment i have an i7 990x processor and i can 't start some modern games like Resident Evil Village and Dying Light 2 just because lack of AVX technology.I wanted to play RE Village so much and i saw it required a strong CPU at minimal requirments,at least an i7 8700k to play...Wow!
I still don't have a budget for i7 8700k+z370 or z390 mobo,and i found a cheap system with i7 6800k paired with Asus rampage 5 extreme mobo.

You must not have been keeping up with CPUs over the last few years as a 8700k is not a strong CPU by todays standards, its pretty much low-end.

Are you planning to buy this system used?  As I would absolutely not be touching anything that old if its new parts.

[Neutraliz]

The 8700k is gonna be faster in gaming. It's more modern, stronger single core performances and better efficiency. But doesn't mean the 6800k is worthless, far from it. Both of thoses CPUs will play all the games you want if the rest of the pc is keeping up too ( Mainly the GPU ). 
Just depends on the value of the entire system. The 6800k could be a bit harder to justify as it's harder to cool and it's quad-channel memory. Meaning spending more on cooling and at least 4 sticks of ram to have that entire bandwidth.
I would also suggest looking at the Ryzen 5 3600 and AM4 plateform, just to widen your choices. Value of that plateforme is really good. Gaming performance crown is still gonna be on the 8700k's side vs. 6800k and 3600, but the 3600 is much more efficient, so easier to cool and is not that far off the 8700k compared to the 6800k. 
6800k and 8700k doesn't have much upgrade path tho, with the AM4 plateform, you could look at the 5000 series later down the line for exemple. It's not that extreme of an upgrade, but it's a decent upgrade path from the 3000 series compared to the competition here. 

[Alex Atkin UK]

@Hunter-

I agree with above, the 3600 seems to be very close in performance to the 8700k with an RTX 2080 GPU, for a GPU less powerful its going to perform essentially identical but still leave scope for upgrading the CPU to something more powerful later.

 

The 8700k you'd have to replace the motherboard and the CPU to have any tangible upgrade, and this might happen sooner rather than later as current-gen games are starting to use more cores to make up for the dedicated hardware decompression that the consoles are using.

 

Then there's the Ryzen 5 5600 which will outperform it.

 

[Neutraliz]

48 minutes ago, Hunter- said:

p.s i found another oportunity an i7 7820x+MSi x299 Tomahawk at price of 240$. Is a good choice?

Certainly faster than the 6800k's in pretty much all matters, the 8700k is still faster in gaming. 
It does have the same disavantages as the 6800k tho : 
 

Quote

could be a bit harder to justify as it's harder to cool and it's quad-channel memory. Meaning spending more on cooling and at least 4 sticks of ram to have that entire bandwidth.

Also, X299's motherboards, that support the 7820x, were quite up and down in terms of quality. Watch out for that.
The 7820x also have less pcie 3.0 lanes than its i9 X series brothers if that matters to you. 

 

[jaslion]

300 -400$ is enough to get a modern cpu, board, ram and potentially even a cooler. This will wipe the floor with all these options.

 

Now for what you have listed here:

 

8700k is the best for gaming flat out

7820x is on a x299 platform which has stagnated and been abandoned over and over basically to the point where the best cpu on it is barely better than a 8700k for gaming

 

The 6800k is old and slower than all

 

PCPartPicker Part List: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/kKFbpH

CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 3.7 GHz 6-Core Processor  ($167.00 @ B&H)
CPU Cooler: Deepcool AK400 66.47 CFM CPU Cooler  ($31.98 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: Asus PRIME B550-PLUS ATX AM4 Motherboard  ($124.99 @ Newegg)
Memory: Corsair Vengeance LPX 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3600 CL18 Memory  ($82.99 @ Amazon)
Total: $406.96
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2023-01-23 06:05 EST-0500

 

400$ brand new and WIPES THE FLOOR with all the other options

[Neutraliz]

2 minutes ago, jaslion said:

barely better than a 8700k for gaming

Never been, at least not in most games.
Even the lastest and greatest CPU of X299's plateform i9-10980XE, it's barely keeping up with Ryzen 3000 in gaming. It needs to be overclocked to be actually somewhat faster. But since efficiency already doesn't exist with thoses chips at stock... Ya, oc, it's basicly as much of a joke as AMD's FX CPUs at this point.
 

5 minutes ago, jaslion said:

CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 3.7 GHz 6-Core Processor  ($167.00 @ B&H)

Why the X when there is the non X ?
You basicly making him pay for a letter here.
I mean I guess you can say that gaming performances scales with the numbers of Xs your pc parts does have. xD

[jaslion]

3 minutes ago, Neutraliz said:

Why the X when there is the non X ?

For some reason pcpartpicker was showing the 5600 as at 162$ so was like ehh 5$ for a bit more performance why not. But since its actually at 140$ id opt for the 5600

[Neutraliz]

Just now, jaslion said:

For some reason pcpartpicker was showing the 5600 as at 162$ so was like ehh 5$ for a bit more performance why not. But since its actually at 140$ id opt for the 5600

Ya, even 5$, when there is what... 2-3% differences ? I don't know if I would pay that extra to be honnest xD

[05032-Mendicant-Bias]

The 8700 is a solid processor. I get 60FPS in cyberpunk with a 3080 and ray tracing on. And good DDR4 are getting really cheap.

 

I'm upgrading becase new processors blow it out of the waters, the 13700F can get double/triple the performance (whidch will not be double the FPS, reviewers try really hard to create a CPU bottleneck to measure CPU performance)

[HardStroke]

59 minutes ago, 05032-Mendicant-Bias said:

The 8700 is a solid processor. I get 60FPS in cyberpunk with a 3080 and ray tracing on. And good DDR4 are getting really cheap.

 

I'm upgrading becase new processors blow it out of the waters, the 13700F can get double/triple the performance (whidch will not be double the FPS, reviewers try really hard to create a CPU bottleneck to measure CPU performance)

Yeah, well, its not a fair comparison lol there is a 5 year difference between them haha

Of course it blows it out of the water

The 10600K also beats it but it is 2 gens ahead

The 8700K was the second best cpu of intel's long-going lga1151 cpus

Still a solid gaming cpu (especially when overclocked)

But

You can find people selling some comet lake cpu+mb bundles so the 8700K seems kinda pointless nowadays (unless you buy it in a full system)

[Neutraliz]

30 minutes ago, HardStroke said:

The 8700K was the second best cpu of intel's long-going lga1151 cpus

Absolutly agree. 
To me, its true successor is the actual 13th gen. 12th gen wasn't bad too tho.
10 series was great for value, especially the 10400. But not really worth an upgrade from coffee lake. 
But I think owners of 8700k just barely got a serious upgrade path here, in my opinion. Otherwhise, they were and they're still pretty fine. 

[HardStroke]

1 hour ago, Neutraliz said:

Absolutly agree. 
To me, its true successor is the actual 13th gen. 12th gen wasn't bad too tho.
10 series was great for value, especially the 10400. But not really worth an upgrade from coffee lake. 
But I think owners of 8700k just barely got a serious upgrade path here, in my opinion. Otherwhise, they were and they're still pretty fine. 

100%

The only cpu that's better then the 8700K is the 9900K

The 9700K is an absolute failure in my opinion (even loses to a 10600K in games because it lacks HT)

Giving the fact that they are 2 years old (8700K) or a year old (9900k) there is absolutely no reason to upgrade to 10th gen

10th gen was really nice and we finally got a really strong and solid i5 line

So, upgrading a 1 or 2 years old cpus to a 10700K is really a waste of money (when you can OC them and gen 10th gen performance 8700K=10600K, 9900K=10700K)

I'm not even mentioning the waste of silicon called "11th gen" (you can wipe your floor with that "pcie 4.0" support)

So we are left with 12th gen and 13th gen as the best option

Now that it is 5 years old you can justify upgrading it if you're running a high-end Lovelace gpu or if you need a soild workstation

12th gen is nice but 13th gen is just INSANE.

Pair the 13700K with a solid z690 mb, a solid aio, and a tight kit like a 3600MHZ CL14 (or 4000MHZ CL14) and you got an insane machine (cpu power)

DDR5 is really expensive as well as 700 boards (in my country at least) so there is no other option lol

Giving the performance that 13th gen has, I still see absolutely no reason to upgrade my 10900K (that I just upgraded from my 10600K to future proof the pc)

[Neutraliz]

3 hours ago, HardStroke said:

The only cpu that's better then the 8700K is the 9900K

Ya it was really overpriced tho. Ryzen 3000 made a joke out of it soon after. 
 

3 hours ago, HardStroke said:

I'm not even mentioning the waste of silicon called "11th gen" (you can wipe your floor with that "pcie 4.0" support)

Ahah ! I'm totally with you on that. And I think I know who you're watching to say that "waste of silicon". xD
 

[Dedayog]

8 hours ago, jaslion said:

For some reason pcpartpicker was showing the 5600 as at 162$ so was like ehh 5$ for a bit more performance why not. But since its actually at 140$ id opt for the 5600

Doesn't the 5600 come with a cooler too?  Saves that money there as well.

[HardStroke]

1 hour ago, Neutraliz said:

Ya it was really overpriced tho. Ryzen 3000 made a joke out of it soon after. 
 

Ahah ! I'm totally with you on that. And I think I know who you're watching to say that "waste of silicon". xD
 

Haha its actually my genuine opinion

When I bought my pc I got the 10600K and the z490 Vision G so I could just put the strongest lga1200 cpu on it in the future and not worry about a cpu bottleneck since this pc will be with me for the next 5-7 years

I knew that it would be a 11900K until it was actually time to upgrade and I saw this abomination of a generation

I didn't keep up with computer hardware after I bought my pc, I also didn't have the time for it

So I went online to look at prices, specs and performance and I saw that the "holy" I9 (and even I7) of the 11th gen was actually a failure

Less cores, less performance, value is pure trash

So I thought to myself that the 10900K is the only way to go

Its just better to buy a 10700K and overclock it by just a bit to get the performance of the 11900K (except the pcie 4.0 which is not important for me since my boot drive is already a 970 evo so pcie 4.0 is not even supported and I'm not reinstalling my os NO. MATTER. WHAT.)

So I just ordered a new 10900K for 475 bucks (really good in my country, when released it was 770 bucks )

Its really a shame

But intel really killed it with 12th and 13th gen

 

[Middcore]

If you have $400 to spend, don't buy any of this old shit. 

[NekoBubbles]

17 hours ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

You must not have been keeping up with CPUs over the last few years as a 8700k is not a strong CPU by todays standards, its pretty much low-end.

Are you planning to buy this system used?  As I would absolutely not be touching anything that old if its new parts.

Every cpu is relative to the task the owner is going to be putting it through though in general yeah all these parts are just as @middcore is describing. 

 

7 hours ago, Middcore said:

If you have $400 to spend, don't buy any of this old shit. 

IMO in this era if you got 400 dollars to burn pass on any of the OP's CPU options save 200 dollars more and just go up a generation. You're CPU and GPU are going to be anyways the largest hassle to upgrade in terms of longevity with any PC. May as well if your going to bother with a PC get one that will last longer than a single new PC hardware generation. There is no reason to settle for a system that will become ewaste that you inevitably throw or can't use within 1-3 years invest and get a PC that will last at min 5 or more years. Otherwise you may as well just lite the money you intend to spend on fire as a heating source instead. 

[jaslion]

12 hours ago, Dedayog said:

Doesn't the 5600 come with a cooler too?  Saves that money there as well.

Yes but its a bit dinky. It works but quite audible. The ak400 is totally optional

[Ebony Falcon]

At this point save for a 12400 or 12600k and a z690 Msi pro board 

 

it will be rediculasly better