Compare the performance of these processors: i5-10600K, i7-10700K and i9-10850K.
Compare the performance of these processors: i5-10600K, i7-10700K and i9-10850K.
You're correct, the slight increase in FPS from 8700k to 9900k at 5.1GHz is noticeable. The 8700K model is performing well on eBay, which helps offset the cost.
He’s not really focusing on those chips. The 9900k doesn’t fit his needs since he doesn’t require extra cores. No, I share that opinion completely. Everyone around here seems to overlook this when they spend other folks’ money.
I never think about spending more than 8700K or 8086K over 9900K. Then I have to explain why the performance gap is just one digit at the same clock speed. Using 14nm chips plus a few extra boosts makes it feasible. At around $250 for a 3% improvement, it still feels like a solid deal.
Same issue before. I bought the i9 because I usually feel frustrated when I spend less on the cheaper option, but I rarely get upset about spending more. It might be in my mind. Still, the excitement of owning parts is important to me. In my case, it wasn’t just about replacement—I still use both systems.
I'm currently running an i7-8086k on my 1440p 144Hz monitor, and it's more than I need. 2 extra cores can be adequate or can be overkill, depending on the games. I say hold off for a bigger single core speed boost
I’m just pleased I can retire or sell the 1600. It’s really frustratingly slow, even at 1080p. Some games drop in performance because of its low IPC. FF14 in busy zones? 35-40fps. On the coffeelake areas? 70-80fps.