F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop Two values: 9900K and 9900.

Two values: 9900K and 9900.

Two values: 9900K and 9900.

Pages (2): 1 2 Next
T
Thelo58
Member
190
04-13-2018, 12:44 AM
#1
If you won't OC, does the non-K version act quite alike? Thanks for asking!
T
Thelo58
04-13-2018, 12:44 AM #1

If you won't OC, does the non-K version act quite alike? Thanks for asking!

B
222
04-14-2018, 09:23 AM
#2
Avoid overclocking and skip the K SKU. Non-K parts only work with locked multipliers.
B
bakedpotatoboy
04-14-2018, 09:23 AM #2

Avoid overclocking and skip the K SKU. Non-K parts only work with locked multipliers.

B
Babu84700
Member
226
04-15-2018, 08:43 PM
#3
Turbo remains identical; the main change might involve supporting multiple cores in the BIOS. You could also reduce costs by using an affordable motherboard without a K
B
Babu84700
04-15-2018, 08:43 PM #3

Turbo remains identical; the main change might involve supporting multiple cores in the BIOS. You could also reduce costs by using an affordable motherboard without a K

G
GreeenBear
Member
156
04-15-2018, 11:39 PM
#4
K chips tend to run a bit quicker, though I haven’t spotted any benches yet. Their TDP is lower (65 versus 95), which usually means they’ll be slower. I’d opt for the KF model for an extra $30.
G
GreeenBear
04-15-2018, 11:39 PM #4

K chips tend to run a bit quicker, though I haven’t spotted any benches yet. Their TDP is lower (65 versus 95), which usually means they’ll be slower. I’d opt for the KF model for an extra $30.

W
WoofyMonster
Member
121
04-16-2018, 07:49 AM
#5
still prefer a solid low-end Z370/Z390 like the Pro4 and UD, or skip the B360/B365 options.
W
WoofyMonster
04-16-2018, 07:49 AM #5

still prefer a solid low-end Z370/Z390 like the Pro4 and UD, or skip the B360/B365 options.

N
77
04-21-2018, 08:48 AM
#6
Both claims are false, since the 9900 runs slower due to its lower base speed. This appears to be the area Intel monitors, while OpTik might find value in fast synchronization.
N
NothingAverage
04-21-2018, 08:48 AM #6

Both claims are false, since the 9900 runs slower due to its lower base speed. This appears to be the area Intel monitors, while OpTik might find value in fast synchronization.

E
EleqTRiX
Member
110
04-21-2018, 09:13 AM
#7
Ensure the processor speed exceeds 2666 for optimal performance.
E
EleqTRiX
04-21-2018, 09:13 AM #7

Ensure the processor speed exceeds 2666 for optimal performance.

D
Domarus
Member
241
05-10-2018, 07:32 PM
#8
This was a query from an Intel representative about replacing the 6700K. It seems it doesn’t need to be on a Z-series board. Just gaming and some light applications. I assumed Intel might have reduced prices significantly, but haven’t confirmed yet—just keeping an eye on updates.
D
Domarus
05-10-2018, 07:32 PM #8

This was a query from an Intel representative about replacing the 6700K. It seems it doesn’t need to be on a Z-series board. Just gaming and some light applications. I assumed Intel might have reduced prices significantly, but haven’t confirmed yet—just keeping an eye on updates.

E
Experimentl
Member
199
05-11-2018, 06:32 AM
#9
Their turbo boost settings match.
E
Experimentl
05-11-2018, 06:32 AM #9

Their turbo boost settings match.

T
tazman56
Member
222
05-11-2018, 02:13 PM
#10
I’m focusing on how the i7 8700 compares to the i7 8700K. If fast synchronization mattered, why would anyone choose a high-core-count Ryzen CPU? For me, the i9 9900K is the best choice since cost differences aren’t a concern and my previous video editing software was Premiere.
T
tazman56
05-11-2018, 02:13 PM #10

I’m focusing on how the i7 8700 compares to the i7 8700K. If fast synchronization mattered, why would anyone choose a high-core-count Ryzen CPU? For me, the i9 9900K is the best choice since cost differences aren’t a concern and my previous video editing software was Premiere.

Pages (2): 1 2 Next