Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Overclockers/Amazon UK Question

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    K.O.Kiki
    Registered Users Posts: 18,707 ✭✭✭✭K.O.Kiki


    dreamers75 wrote: »
    Gonna hold off on a GPU until I see what AMD bring out, the 2080TI is simply not worth the upgrade from a 1080 right now. The 9900 vs the 5960 is a 38% increase with an option of OC later in its life (if I buy a decent mobo this time).

    I intend to get 3/4 years out of the 9900K same as I got from my last CPU.

    Also, just going to call this out - RTX 2080 Ti is 60-100% faster than the GTX 1080, without DLSS.


  • Options
    #33
    dreamers75
    Registered Users Posts: 20,558 ✭✭✭✭dreamers75


    K.O.Kiki wrote: »
    What about the 9700K (8cores, no HT)?

    Performance is practically identical with the 9900K (just depends on which chip OCs higher) but it's 25% cheaper.
    K.O.Kiki wrote: »
    Also, just going to call this out - RTX 2080 Ti is 60-100% faster than the GTX 1080, without DLSS.

    You have 1 "depends" and one "without".

    I like to have my PC at the near current to bleeding edge as it can get budget wise for 3 to 4 years.

    I have decided that my CPU is holding my 1080 back (its an issue) I have also decided that the 2080ti in my current build is not worth the upgrade (toms hardware, EG, reviews, benchmarks etc).

    So the 9900k is the most cost effective solution to me in 2018 (as in right now).

    https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2018-10-31-rtx-2080-vs-gtx-1080-ti-benchmarks-performance-features-7001

    The 2080 is not a €1300 upgrade on a simple 1080 as I said its simply not worth an upgrade. I would be left with the same CPU based issue if I did that, and its main feature is not something i care about....Ultra 4k60fps is the only thing i care about.


  • Options
    #34
    tuxy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,983 ✭✭✭✭tuxy


    dreamers75 wrote: »
    Ultra 4k60fps is the only thing i care about.

    So you're saying that the 5960X is the bottleneck at 4k and not the 1080?
    How did you come to this conclusion?


  • Options
    #35
    Venom
    Registered Users Posts: 6,984 ✭✭✭Venom


    dreamers75 wrote: »
    You have 1 "depends" and one "without".

    I like to have my PC at the near current to bleeding edge as it can get budget wise for 3 to 4 years.

    I have decided that my CPU is holding my 1080 back (its an issue) I have also decided that the 2080ti in my current build is not worth the upgrade (toms hardware, EG, reviews, benchmarks etc).

    So the 9900k is the most cost effective solution to me in 2018 (as in right now).

    https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2018-10-31-rtx-2080-vs-gtx-1080-ti-benchmarks-performance-features-7001

    The 2080 is not a €1300 upgrade on a simple 1080 as I said its simply not worth an upgrade. I would be left with the same CPU based issue if I did that, and its main feature is not something i care about....Ultra 4k60fps is the only thing i care about.


    What resolution do you game at? If it's 1440p or 4k the difference between a 9900k, 8700k or 2700x is tiny and in no way worth the €200-300 extra over the other two chips. The 9900k also required serious high-end cooling if you plan to overclock it and that's after deliding it.


  • Options
    #36
    tuxy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,983 ✭✭✭✭tuxy


    Venom wrote: »
    What resolution do you game at? If it's 1440p or 4k the difference between a 9900k, 8700k or 2700x is tiny

    How does his 5960X compare to those CPUs?

    He says the most important thing to him is getting 60 fps at 4k and the 5960X is preventing his gtx 1080 from performing well at 4k


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    K.O.Kiki
    Registered Users Posts: 18,707 ✭✭✭✭K.O.Kiki


    tuxy wrote: »
    How does his 5960X compare to those CPUs?

    He says the most important thing to him is getting 60 fps at 4k and the 5960X is preventing his gtx 1080 from performing well at 4k

    OP is incorrect, his bottleneck will be GPU.


  • Options
    #38
    TerrorFirmer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 29,930 ✭✭✭✭TerrorFirmer


    While I personally wouldn't ever buy it, if you're that eager to spend that much money, and 4K60 ultra is the goal, then the 2080Ti is worth the €1300 odd; spending not far off the same to go from a 5960X to a 9900K not so.

    I don't get why it has to be a 9900K as well. Especially for 4K60. Why not a Ryzen 2700X or i7-8700 or whatever at a fraction of the price if you want a more modern DDR4 platform (that part is understandable obviously)? Either will push frames so far north of 60fps I can't really see the logic in it.

    It would make more sense if it was a monster productivity machine plus a 1440p144hz gaming machine, but for 4K60fps it seems like just a cash-burning exercise. If you want to burn cash, it makes far more sense to invest in a 2080Ti and get a high-end normal consumer CPU like the 2700X/8600K/8700K/etc (lets be honest; for 4K60, even a €180 Ryzen 2600X will excel) and at least reap huge benefit from the money invested

    The 5930K with a mild overclock would broadly be somewhere near i7-6700K class level (at a guess).

    Finally, Assassins Creed Odyssey is a major system killer (not great optimisation rather than anything else)? Even the RTX2080Ti, a €1300 card, can't do 4K ultra @ 60fps.

    A quick look at CPU and GPU benchmarks on Techspot actually shows even the GTX1080 can't even do 1080p ultra @ 60fps, let alone 1440P or 4K. So I feel like you're pointing the figure entirely at the wrong culprit here for whatever reason.

    At the end of the day it is your money and decision but personally I think it's a very strange and illogical one when looking at the full picture.


  • Options
    #39
    Dcully
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 14,710 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dcully


    Just to echo what the others are saying, your mad buying the 9900k when you get almost identical gaming performance from either 8600K,8700K or 2700X.
    I have decided that my CPU is holding my 1080 back (its an issue)

    I think you are very wrong there.

    I guarantee you an upgrade to 1080ti,2080,2080ti with your existing CPU will give you a better performance boost than going with the 9900K and sticking with your 1080.


  • Options
    #40
    Venom
    Registered Users Posts: 6,984 ✭✭✭Venom


    tuxy wrote: »
    How does his 5960X compare to those CPUs?

    He says the most important thing to him is getting 60 fps at 4k and the 5960X is preventing his gtx 1080 from performing well at 4k


    When it comes to 4k gaming, it's the GPU and not CPU that really makes the difference when it comes to FPS in games. If you were to take the very best CPU, motherboard and ram on the market and pair it with a high-end GPU, the difference in is only about 2-5 FPS max over lower specced hardware (within reason) with the same GPU.



    The OP's plan to spend at least €900 (very lowball price here and which may also require faster ram) on a new CPU and motherboard for an extra 2-5 FPS over their existing system, instead of picking up a new GPU is just nuts.


Advertisement