Question Did I made a a wrong decision buying i9 9900k?

ganeshnampalli98800

Commendable
Sep 13, 2017
31
0
1,530
0
So yesterday I ordered i99000k and just a day after I heard Intel comet lake CPUs are coming .. So should I just return my CPU & wait for comet lake I'm confused as hell don't know what I did please help
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
Yes, Comet Lake is coming within the next couple of months assuming it does not get delayed.

The biggest change is that the $500+ i9-9900K will be equivalent to the new i7-10700k which is likely to cost ~$350 instead.

The brand-new motherboards and CPUs will likely cost a fair bit more than MSRP initially, so you may ultimately not save all that much by returning your current parts and re-purchasing as soon as Comet Lake becomes available.
 
Reactions: ganeshnampalli98800

ganeshnampalli98800

Commendable
Sep 13, 2017
31
0
1,530
0
Yes, Comet Lake is coming within the next couple of months assuming it does not get delayed.

The biggest change is that the $500+ i9-9900K will be equivalent to the new i7-10700k which is likely to cost ~$350 instead.

The brand-new motherboards and CPUs will likely cost a fair bit more than MSRP initially, so you may ultimately not save all that much by returning your current parts and re-purchasing as soon as Comet Lake becomes available.
Right now the i9 9900k has stock shortage and it is priced for like 669$ in my country I just made a return yesterday and my current pc has i7 4790k with 2080 super so will wait few months and maybe comet lake will get fairer price
 
Now that AMD is ascendant with a herd of new products coming down the pipeline Intel will also be coming out with a lot of new products. That's going to mean a lot of relatively fast-paced "change" in the market. Much faster than before when Intel had it to themselves.

Either get used to being second dog or get a better job to pay for new hardware more frequently.
 
Nov 21, 2019
13
1
15
0
I was struggling with a similar thing when building my computer, best thing id suggest is scale the price with performance, (I'm not educated with Intel at all so might be wrong) if i9 9900k meets your budget and is a worthy upgrade for you, go ahead. Prices fluctuate so I wouldn't hold out for the next thing as the next thing will constantly keep getting announced
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
Either get used to being second dog or get a better job to pay for new hardware more frequently.
Not that much. Zen 2 is only ~25% faster than Zen for a given price point. If you don't bother upgrading for less than 50% extra performance for a given price, then that's four years between upgrades at this rate which is only ~5%/year faster than what we've been getting from Intel for the past ~10 years. Zen's launch was a welcome break but the rest of it so far is a return to relatively tiny annual performance gains.

The only thing I'd qualify as genuinely fast-paced is the rate at which older AMD chips are shedding (re)sale value after next-gen parts launch.
 
Not that much. Zen 2 is only ~25% faster...
You missed the whole point... there's going to be steady progression of product releases in the coming years in Intel and AMD's steady game of one-upsmanship. That means whatever you buy today WILL LOOSE it's shiny cachet in the marketing hoopla accompanying those releases.

Whether performance difference is real or not, small or big, it doesn't matter. You're going to be left feeling you have 'second dog' pretty quick after you get your system bought/built/setup/optimized, no matter what else happens. Get used to it.
 
If you wait for the next best thing, you will wait forever.
If the 9900K does the job for you now, and for the next year or two, keep it.
If your interest is primarily gaming, consider returning the 9900K for a i7-9700K which will game just as well.
If your interest is multithreaded batch apps, keep the 9900k.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
You're going to be left feeling you have 'second dog' pretty quick after you get your system bought/built/setup/optimized, no matter what else happens. Get used to it.
At only 10-15%/year, most people aren't going to give a damn about new products for multiple years, this just isn't worth bothering with no matter how many new products are launching. The "second dog" mentality only applies to enthusiasts who like having the newest shiny stuff all of the time, normal people want something that works well enough and won't be looking back for 5+ years.

Me, I don't bother with upgrades smaller than +100%. By that standard, I'm overdue to upgrade my i5-3470 but at the moment, I value my i5's exceptional stability more than any sort of performance upgrade.
 
Reactions: Gee_Simpson

RodroX

Prominent
Aug 4, 2019
530
155
640
15
Hi there, the 9900K is a real beast for games (actually the best for games) and even productivity programs too (but not as high end Ryzen 7 and 9 parts).

Comet lake is coming yeah, but as other mention the price will be the main standing point diference, youre going to be able to get a 8 cores / 16 threads cpu but in the i7 segment instead of the i9. And you wil still need a new motherboard.
In any case I really don't expect a 10 cores 20 threads Core i9 1xxxx comet lake processor to give you a huge bump in performance over the 9900K. And the i7 1xxxx counterpart will probably give the same if not lower performance than the Core i9, but for lower price.

This comet lake CPU's are going to use the old 14nm+++....+ node which Intel have been refining for years. 9th gen CPUs are already consuming a lot of power and needing powerful coolers or aio to keep then under the right temps, so I can only guess tha this new 10th gen chips, under the same fabrication node will likely to keep similar working frecuencies and if they add more cores they are going to get worst for power usage and need even better cooling systems.

Juts get the I9 9900K, specially if you have the motherboard already, and enjoy it!!!!!!!
 
Reactions: Gee_Simpson

ganeshnampalli98800

Commendable
Sep 13, 2017
31
0
1,530
0
Hi there, the 9900K is a real beast for games (actually the best for games) and even productivity programs too (but not as high end Ryzen 7 and 9 parts).

Comet lake is coming yeah, but as other mention the price will be the main standing point diference, youre going to be able to get a 8 cores / 16 threads cpu but in the i7 segment instead of the i9. And you wil still need a new motherboard.
In any case I really don't expect a 10 cores 20 threads Core i9 1xxxx comet lake processor to give you a huge bump in performance over the 9900K. And the i7 1xxxx counterpart will probably give the same if not lower performance than the Core i9, but for lower price.

This comet lake CPU's are going to use the old 14nm+++....+ node which Intel have been refining for years. 9th gen CPUs are already consuming a lot of power and needing powerful coolers or aio to keep then under the right temps, so I can only guess tha this new 10th gen chips, under the same fabrication node will likely to keep similar working frecuencies and if they add more cores they are going to get worst for power usage and need even better cooling systems.

Juts get the I9 9900K, specially if you have the motherboard already, and enjoy it!!!!!!!
I don't have anything yet I just ordered my build two days all the components like cooler processer and mobo
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
I can only guess tha this new 10th gen chips, under the same fabrication node will likely to keep similar working frecuencies and if they add more cores they are going to get worst for power usage and need even better cooling systems.
In the case of 9900k vs 10700k, the 10-series CPUs have the benefit of having its TDP spread out across two extra cores worth of die area and having its two worst cores disabled. I'd imagine that having a significant positive impact on overall power-efficiency and slightly relaxed cooling requirements from reduced power density.
 

ganeshnampalli98800

Commendable
Sep 13, 2017
31
0
1,530
0
At only 10-15%/year, most people aren't going to give a damn about new products for multiple years, this just isn't worth bothering with no matter how many new products are launching. The "second dog" mentality only applies to enthusiasts who like having the newest shiny stuff all of the time, normal people want something that works well enough and won't be looking back for 5+ years.

Me, I don't bother with upgrades smaller than +100%. By that standard, I'm overdue to upgrade my i5-3470 but at the moment, I value my i5's exceptional stability more than any sort of performance upgrade.
Thats what im looking for not to upgrade or spend money on anything for atleast 5 years after spending a hell of money
 
Thats what im looking for not to upgrade or spend money on anything for atleast 5 years after spending a hell of money
The thing is...if you wait for that 10700K (or whatever) and you'll be experiencing the same doubts and asking this same question because the marketing people will already be pushing for the next processor.

It's a never ending cycle that will always leave you open to feelings of buyer's remorse. Just get used to it and get the processor/system you need when you need it and DON'T LOOK BACK!
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
The thing is...if you wait for that 10700K (or whatever) and you'll be experiencing the same doubts and asking this same question because the marketing people will already be pushing for the next processor.
If you buy a $660 CPU knowing that a $350 CPU is coming 3-4 months later to take its place, paying $660 today makes very little sense unless you absolutely need the upgrade today. Intel's next CPU after that won't be anywhere near as drastic of a short-term value loss if any loss at all since Comet Lake is pretty much the practical limit for mainstream 14nm and mainstream 10nm is still vaporware based on how mobile 10nm is struggling to provide net benefits beyond the IGP.
 

atljsf

Honorable
BANNED
yes, if you wait, there will always be a new cpu

the thing at this moment is that the new cpus will not use lga1151, it will need new motherboard with lga1200

this means that there is no way old cpus will work on these motherboards and forget the idea of try a new cpu on a old motherboard

apart from that the new i9 should have 10 cores, not 8, and should be as fast or faster than this

personally i am a amd fanboy, but i think is a great cpu, that should have not come now, nor should be bought by anyone thanks to the release of the new series that will make look like crap the current 9th gen offered

is not like the amd cpus, we know the next year there will be a 4000 series, that will reuse socket and lots of old motherboard will support it and it will offer lots of performance but will not add all of a sudden threads and more cores to some of the most expensive models

after that generation thins on both amd and intel side should becomes abit more equal in terms of cost, performance, cores, the general offering for the customers
 

RodroX

Prominent
Aug 4, 2019
530
155
640
15
In the case of 9900k vs 10700k, the 10-series CPUs have the benefit of having its TDP spread out across two extra cores worth of die area and having its two worst cores disabled. I'd imagine that having a significant positive impact on overall power-efficiency and slightly relaxed cooling requirements from reduced power density.
But you are still on a 14nm+++++++ node, every new "+" bringed some small performance leap over the previous gen counterpart but also an increase in power consumption and cooling need it. Youre very optimistic and thats great, I guess time will tell, but I wouldnt bet too high on it.
Also keep in mind that the 10700K wont have two extra cores, is the same 8c/16/t. There may be a Core i9 10c/20t but I guess we will have to wait and see if that sku ever see the light at all.
Theres a reason why intel is not launching the 10nm parts, and I believe thats because theres not a huge gain over the super refined 14nm+++++ node, they spent soo many years working on the 14nm node and thier "+++++" that they made it really, really good, but everything has a limit. And if theres something we are seen in the 10nm notebook cpu is that they are not performing better than the 14nm ones. The only thign better in those moveil cpus, for now, is the iGPU.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
Also keep in mind that the 10700K wont have two extra cores, is the same 8c/16/t. There may be a Core i9 10c/20t but I guess we will have to wait and see if that sku ever see the light at all.
The 10700 will be made from the same die as the 10900, it will have 10 cores with the two worst cores disabled similar to how current i5 and i7 are made from the same die as the i9 with HT disabled for the i7 and two disabled cores on top for the i5. That's where my "optimism" comes from: it is much easier to improve efficiency when the die has two 'spare cores" and you get to disable the worst two on the die instead of having to get all cores up to speed like you do now with the 9900k/ks or will later with the 10900k.

Same reason AMD's 3950 got delayed, couldn't spare enough exceptionally good chiplets to afford slapping two of 'em on a high-end consumer CPU. Much easier to ship 3900s where the worst core of each CCX can be disabled to improve yields.
 
Newer CPUs are always coming, but, whatever is released does not/will not suddenly make a 9900K 'slow'....and, thus far, there is no firm preview date, much less a release date...

(Take the 8700K, for example....; a full 2 years after releasem it's gaming performance is only just now being matched by 3700X/3800X/3900X in most games, for which most sing the latter's praises like the proverbial '2nd Coming'. That a 9700K or 9900K was faster indeed did not relegate the 8700K for a dusty scrap bin of $3 parts....)
 

RodroX

Prominent
Aug 4, 2019
530
155
640
15
The 10700 will be made from the same die as the 10900, it will have 10 cores with the two worst cores disabled similar to how current i5 and i7 are made from the same die as the i9 with HT disabled for the i7 and two disabled cores on top for the i5. That's where my "optimism" comes from: it is much easier to improve efficiency when the die has two 'spare cores" and you get to disable the worst two on the die instead of having to get all cores up to speed like you do now with the 9900k/ks or will later with the 10900k.

Same reason AMD's 3950 got delayed, couldn't spare enough exceptionally good chiplets to afford slapping two of 'em on a high-end consumer CPU. Much easier to ship 3900s where the worst core of each CCX can be disabled to improve yields.
We will see. In any case it wont change the fact that youre already on the limit of what the 14nm node iterations can offer, with this high operating frecuencies and with the same architecture design you been using for years.
So more eficient per core perhaps, but that will cost a lot for intel. More cool and less power hungry, I don't think so.

I really wish and hope they come with the 10nm node soon, and bring a real perfomance leap, with energy savings and less waste heat.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
More cool and less power hungry, I don't think so.
If you have an 8-core die like the 9900k and want to ship an all-core 5GHz part, you have to push vcore up to whatever the weakest core requires. If you have a 10-cores die like the 10900 and can drop the two worst cores that may require 50mV extra to reach a given clock frequency, then you can make 8-cores parts that draw 5-10W less. Since the die is also ~15% bigger from having two disabled cores, that's 15% more die area to couple heat onto the IHS and help it stay cooler. So the i7-10700k is almost certain to be more power-efficient and cooler than the 9900k.

As for 10nm, my bet is that desktop Icelake will be Broadwell-II: a chip that technically exists, that almost nobody will be able to actually get and will be obsolete by the time it gets out of OEM-exclusive land just like Broadwell was nearly impossible to get outside OEM channels until Skylake launched.
 

Gee_Simpson

Reputable
Mar 4, 2015
67
2
4,535
0
This may be a late bump but I was in the same predicament. I decided to purchase the i9 9900k in the end for £449.99= $584.90 and will be building it over the next few days (for the very first time, so I hope it's easy!)

My stance on it is similar to others in here, if you put off buying things you will never take the plunge as you will always be worried about the next best thing. I thought to myself I may as well go for it because I want the processing power for a specific game (Football Manager) and I want to start playing it asap.

I also read online that the 10th gen could possibly be delayed, so it put me off waiting. Q1 could be as late as April and tbh I don't want to wait that long. The way I see it, I'm paying a premium on this (vs a potential 10700k) but if it lasts me at least 5 years then I won't be complaining. It's the trade off I'm willing to make, wait potentially 4 months or get it now to run my favourite game at an acceptable speed. Plus my current system has a 3rd gen i7 3770(non k) so it's pretty old now and has lasted me a good 7 years.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS