Should I Be Ashamed In Myself? [impulse buy...]

[DWait]

So, I wanted to upgrade to a "k" version of a CPU as, right now, I have an 8400. The CPU isn't terrible at all but I just wanted to be able to overclock and get slightly better performance. I saw the cheapest ad for a 7700k over all of the others for $250. I bought it. I later realized it was probably a not great buy considering I could've bought an 8600k for for the same, if not less. How much of a performance difference is there. I know there is 2 less cores than even the CPU I have now. How much will I notice these things? I hate myself lmao. 

[Lurick]

Well...

1. You bought a 200 series chip and have a 300 series board.

2. 200 and 100 series chips DO NOT work in 300 series boards.

[DWait]

Just now, Lurick said:

Well there are 2 problems.

1. You bought a 200 series chip and have a 300 series board.

2. 200 and 100 series chips DO NOT work in 300 series boards.

I bought a Z270 board as well.

[Guest]

Yikes... dropping 2 cores and "migrating" to a dead-end platform was not a good forward-looking move. Best to just flip the stuff. The 7700K would be a break even if you found the right buyer.

[Lurick]

3 minutes ago, DWait said:

I bought a Z270 board as well.

So you bought a new board AND marginally better CPU that has no upgrade path

I would say return it all if you can and save the money.

[Fasauceome]

for $250 it was a good buy, but you'll have closed yourself off to the possibility of an 8700k for the time being. Still, you'll be getting some pretty awesome performance, since single threaded is slightly in 7700k's favor due to some clock speed advantages you can eke out, and multithreaded is very close as well.

In other words, you basically bought an 8600k.

[Sauron]

You shouldn't feel shame, you should feel regret...

4 minutes ago, fasauceome said:

for $250 it was a good buy

...hell no...

12 minutes ago, DWait said:

How much of a performance difference is there. I know there is 2 less cores than even the CPU I have now. How much will I notice these things? I hate myself lmao. 

The 8600k would be about 50% faster, as you would expect... in fact, your 8400 was already faster than a 7700k, although not quite in games that only use a couple of cores. If you can, return the i7.

 

Also, be aware that without a z series board you wouldn't have been able to overclock the 8600k.

[Lurick]

What are you using to cool the 7700K?

[Fasauceome]

4 minutes ago, Sauron said:

hell no

Going by eBay rates it's decent, since I spend a lot of time on eBay that's what I based it on

 

5 minutes ago, Sauron said:

The 8600k would be about 50% faster, as you would expect... in fact, your 8400 was already faster than a 7700k

So the hyperthreads of the i7 do literally nothing? Yes there's a 50% increase in cores but a 25% decrease in threads. The performance of these different in games, but there's no possible way a 6 core 6 thread is that much faster than a 4 core 8 thread across the board.

[DWait]

Just now, Lurick said:

What are you using to cool the 7700K?

Hyper 212 Evo but I was also planning on probably getting an AIO.

[Jurrunio]

that's ridiculous.

[DWait]

2 minutes ago, Jurrunio said:

that's ridiculous.

[Princess Luna]

You sidegrade from a perfectly working i5 8400 to an i7 7700K HAVING TO BUY MOTHERBOARD too? This is not impulsive this is straight out idiotic, pardon the term.

[xg32]

27 minutes ago, DWait said:

.

i love stories like this, i'll remember this one for sure. as for what u can do, return them both, use the money to buy a 9700k for an upgrade, oc it to the brink, call it the fastest gaming processor for the next 14months.

[Sauron]

9 minutes ago, fasauceome said:

Going by eBay rates it's decent, since I spend a lot of time on eBay that's what I based it on

That doesn't really matter, it doesn't keep up with any current gen chip at that price point.

[Fasauceome]

Just now, Sauron said:

That doesn't really matter, it doesn't keep up with any current gen chip at that price point.

By what metric? 

[Crimson9X]

 

31 minutes ago, DWait said:

So, I wanted to upgrade to a "k" version of a CPU as, right now, I have an 8400. The CPU isn't terrible at all but I just wanted to be able to overclock and get slightly better performance. I saw the cheapest ad for a 7700k over all of the others for $250. I bought it. I later realized it was probably a not great buy considering I could've bought an 8600k for for the same, if not less. How much of a performance difference is there. I know there is 2 less cores than even the CPU I have now. How much will I notice these things? I hate myself lmao. 

What are you doing? Just gaming? A little video editing? A lot of multi-threaded applications? 

[DWait]

It's funny, I didn't expect to be ridiculed as much as I did but I guess I deserved it. My thought process was that I would sell my 8400 and mobo and only be out a total of around 30-40 dollars for better performance and a capable overclocking cpu. Hopefully I can flip it. 

[Sauron]

1 minute ago, fasauceome said:

By what metric? 

Any metric. For 250$ you can get the 8600k which is superior in every way, or a ryzen 2600/x which also has smt.

[DWait]

1 minute ago, Crimson9X said:

 

What are you doing? Just gaming? A little video editing? A lot of multi-threaded applications? 

Mainly gaming and rare streaming applications. 

[Fasauceome]

2 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Any metric. For 250$ you can get the 8600k which is superior in every way, or a ryzen 2600/x which also has smt.

8600k is not superior, it's equal. Where does the absurd 50% performance increase you said earlier come from?

 

Also, I'd argue the 2600x is waaay better value at $200, very slight performance dip and tons more threads.

[Jurrunio]

1 minute ago, fasauceome said:

8600k is not superior, it's equal. Where does the absurd 50% performance increase you said earlier come from?

 

Also, I'd argue the 2600x is waaay better value at $200, very slight performance dip and tons more threads.

not 50%, but definitely a noticeable difference

 

 

 

[Sauron]

2 minutes ago, fasauceome said:

Where does the absurd 50% performance increase you said earlier come from?

The two extra cores.

2 minutes ago, fasauceome said:

Also, I'd argue the 2600x is waaay better value at $200, very slight performance dip and tons more threads.

Sure, that's beside the point though.

[Fasauceome]

12 minutes ago, Sauron said:

The two extra cores.

15 minutes ago, fasauceome said:

Vs 4 hyperthreads?

[DWait]

22 minutes ago, xg32 said:

i love stories like this, i'll remember this one for sure. as for what u can do, return them both, use the money to buy a 9700k for an upgrade, oc it to the brink, call it the fastest gaming processor for the next 14months.

Best piece of advice so far. That's most likely what I am now gonna do. Thanks.