Question gpu + cpu? upgrade

[Haxorx21]

Hey all,
So right now I noticed the i7 9700k is $150 cheaper than normal price for the next day and am pretty tempted to buy it as $425 is better than $570 lmao. I also plan on getting an rtx 3080/3080ti when they release hopefully next month to replace my 1070. However my worry is that my psu wont be enough for both upgrades.

I currently am running this build:
i7-8700(non k) turbo 4.3Ghz
gtx 1070
gigabyte aorus ultra z390
trident z rgb 3200mhz 16gb
evga 650gq 80+ gold (54a 648w on 12v rail)

I plan on getting a 1440p monitor when I get my gpu for reference.
First major question is, do I even need to upgrade my cpu? I dont think the 8700 bottlenecks a 2080 ti much if at all but this is why im asking lul.
Second is, is 650w actually enough for both upgrades with decent headroom? I'd like to OC if I get the 9700k slightly but if I have not much headroom it would be stuck at stock for the time being. I know it isnt valid but go off a tdp of about 320w or so.

 

[madmatt30]

That gq650 is more than enough.

8700 to a 9700k?
For gaming alone I dont personally think it's worth upgrading. Probably less than 10% performance increase for games fps IF the 9700k is overclocked.

Moving up to 1440p that becomes even less relevant, the 8700 is perfectly capable of driving any gpu at that resolution.

 

[boju]

Psu is fine, the GQ ranks pretty high.

https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/psu-tier-list-psucultists.3624094/

Imho, i wouldn't change the cpu. Okay, the 9700k has eight cores and quicker IPC but not by much. What it lacks is HT which is turning into a big deal nowadays moving forward venturing more and more into multi threaded games. Intel has moved away from single core cpus in their latest offerings, mostly supporting HT now. And it's about time they did because even the 9700k has too high usage at times.

Could spend the money on a kit of 32GB ram instead and maybe improve ssd configuration.

 

[Haxorx21]

That gq650 is more than enough.

8700 to a 9700k?
For gaming alone I dont personally think it's worth upgrading. Probably less than 10% performance increase for games fps IF the 9700k is overclocked.

Moving up to 1440p that becomes even less relevant, the 8700 is perfectly capable of driving any gpu at that resolution.

I figured at 1440p it wouldnt be a big bottleneck point if it did as thats where the gpu just gets wrenched for everything it has at higher resolutions than 1080. if I theoretically did buy the 9700k, how much headroom do you think i'd have with it for OC with a proposed say 320w tdp gpu? I just dont know how much power the rest of my pc draws outside cpu and gpu. Dont want to be keeping my psu at 95% load all the time lmao. Thanks a lot for replying.

 

[Haxorx21]

Psu is fine, the GQ ranks pretty high.

PSU ranking and tiers

I've started seeing this guide recently spring up from the PCMasterRace subreddit: http://i.imgur.com/tgrbCnr.jpg And honestly, it really needs some editing, and needs to be a version that's not set in stone like that image but rather a thread. And I'm bored. So here we go: Tier 1Antec - High Cur...

linustechtips.com

Imho, i wouldn't change the cpu. Okay, the 9700k has eight cores and quicker IPC but not by much. What it lacks is HT which is turning into a big deal nowadays moving forward venturing more and more into multi threaded games. Intel has moved away from single core cpus in their latest offerings, mostly supporting HT now. And it's about time they did because even the 9700k has too high usage at times.

Could spend the money on a kit of 32GB ram instead and maybe improve ssd configuration.

expand...

completely forgot to put my storage setup in my post lul. I currently have a 970 pro 500gb as my boot drive and a 1tb 860 evo as my games/other stuff drive. So having a 8700 shouldn't really limit a possible 3080/ti in its performance theoretically? The thing I was mainly looking at was the 8 cores and being a little bit faster but I totally forgot the 9700k lost HT but the 8700 still has it. Even slightly bottlenecked I imagine it would be a mile difference over my 1070 and probably equal a 2080 ti or beat it depending on how it's built. Also any reason for 32gb over 16gb in terms of performance? I always thought 16 was enough but I guess it is 2020 and games are getting more demanding. Thanks for the reply!

 

[boju]

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-ti-founders-edition,5805-10.html

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-i7-8700k-cpu,5252-12.html

650w is still plenty and wouldn't come close to maxing it out.
Say if 2080Ti uses 279w and cpu also at 160w constantly which wont be the case mostly, unless you run torture tests all day, you still have almost 250w spare and that's also including say 50w worth of power running the motherboard, ram and drives.

16GB is enough but is closely being followed by an increase in pagefile activity the more games become resource heavy. Since you have a fast boot drive which the PF resides on, performance would be decent but more data in ram is better. 32GB would allow you to comfortably limit PF size to prevent Windows from increasing it which can have an impact on performance slightly. More ram caching and smoother overall performance now and into the future.