i9-9900k vs i7-9700k vs i7-8700k -After New 9th Gen Reviews-

[Ransome]

Hey,
I'm planning a new PC build.
And up until yesterday I was sure I will grab the i9-9900K CPU.
I an upgrading from i53570k and I don't build a new PC often. So I wanted to have a highest possible leap of performance and longest degree of future-proofing possible.

So, I watched Hardware Unboxed review. He claims the new CPU draw much more power and are extremely hot.
Saying they reach 84-100c in a stress test even with Noctua Nh D15 air cooler, or h100i Pro
Sounds extremely hot and even unsafe. I assume it's hotter than I7-8700k.

There's also little to no gaming performance gain. He claims 5% only if you play on 1080p. An pretty much no fps gain on 4K.

I wanted to have the best up to date tech, but not at a cost of impossible temps to manage and no gain.

So now I am really confused on what CPU and motherboard to take (z370 vs z390)?

And if I should consider going to the strongest latest AMD Ryzen CPU? (2700X)

This is the video:
https://youtu.be/_I--zROoRws

What do you guys think?

 

[vMax]

OKAY... NOW I'M EVEN MORE CONFUSED:
https://youtu.be/NGHiRrQ2AAo

Hardware Unboxed just released a video, basically talking about 4-Phase vs 6-Phase VRM design, un Motherboards.
He basically said Asus Strix Z390-E and Maximus XI Z390 -"pack a measly 4 phase vrm" - and said it means they don't run Intel latest 9th CPU at full clock speeds out of the box. Essentially downclocking i9-9900k. Making clocks and thermals lower and worse performance.

This just makes no sense. The Strix Z390-E is super high end costing way over 200$. And Z390 Maximus 11 Hero costs close to 300$+. They are both enthusiastic high end z390 boards.
Why would they be lacking full support for the very CPUs they were made for?

Something is really sketchy and vague about this video explanation.

(He basically say we should buy MSI GODLIKE? That board costs over 500-600$!)

This makes choosing a proper 9th gen motherboard difficult and the whole thermals question very unclear.

I have to admit I too am confused with the Hardware Unboxed follow up as they tend to be fairly good reviewers...Why would Asus make a Z390 board with only 4 true phases...

Still Buildzoid did a look at the Gigabyte boards and came up with a surprising find that all Gigabyte Z390 boards from the Elite upwards have the same 12+1 VRM phase setup making them very good....Worth checking out Buildzoid who is liked to Gamers Nexus...review of the whole Gibabyte Z390 line up here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVUON93T2j4

43.06 minutes in there is a page covering the VRM line up...

H ave the Gigabyte Z370 Auros Gaming 7 and never had an issue and runs my 8700K to 5GHz no issues...Oh and they look great too..

Slow down. I have no idea what these terms even mean.
Can you try to explain this, please?
What is VRM about?
What's the thing with 4-Phase, 6 Phase and eveb 12+1 phase? What does it mean exactly and What are the consequences of each?

And how come top of the line Asus Z390 that barely released days ago, don't fully support their targeted CPUs?

And what was that setting they turned on/off that changed the temps by 30-50c?

I don't see why anyone needs to mess with the settings to get full clock speeds and performance out of the box.

The easy quick explanation on VRM's:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRRODHoQAHI

A more in depth:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDRHV3qtSWc&list=PLpS0n7xxSadUrlcFiJBAEGBzGet16k92k

VRM's are important and in a nutshell: VRMs supply voltage to the CPU.

More VRM phases = cleaner/stable voltage output and better heat dissipation for the VRMs hence safer operation. It also means the CPU can draw more power when overclocked.

Others will jump in and beat me up as I probably have not done the best job...but then again its good to educated on this subject...

 

[vMax]

OKAY... NOW I'M EVEN MORE CONFUSED:
https://youtu.be/NGHiRrQ2AAo

Hardware Unboxed just released a video, basically talking about 4-Phase vs 6-Phase VRM design, un Motherboards.
He basically said Asus Strix Z390-E and Maximus XI Z390 -"pack a measly 4 phase vrm" - and said it means they don't run Intel latest 9th CPU at full clock speeds out of the box. Essentially downclocking i9-9900k. Making clocks and thermals lower and worse performance.

This just makes no sense. The Strix Z390-E is super high end costing way over 200$. And Z390 Maximus 11 Hero costs close to 300$+. They are both enthusiastic high end z390 boards.
Why would they be lacking full support for the very CPUs they were made for?

Something is really sketchy and vague about this video explanation.

(He basically say we should buy MSI GODLIKE? That board costs over 500-600$!)

This makes choosing a proper 9th gen motherboard difficult and the whole thermals question very unclear.

I have to admit I too am confused with the Hardware Unboxed follow up as they tend to be fairly good reviewers...Why would Asus make a Z390 board with only 4 true phases...

Still Buildzoid did a look at the Gigabyte boards and came up with a surprising find that all Gigabyte Z390 boards from the Elite upwards have the same 12+1 VRM phase setup making them very good....Worth checking out Buildzoid who is liked to Gamers Nexus...review of the whole Gibabyte Z390 line up here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVUON93T2j4

43.06 minutes in there is a page covering the VRM line up...

H ave the Gigabyte Z370 Auros Gaming 7 and never had an issue and runs my 8700K to 5GHz no issues...Oh and they look great too..

Slow down. I have no idea what these terms even mean.
Can you try to explain this, please?
What is VRM about?
What's the thing with 4-Phase, 6 Phase and eveb 12+1 phase? What does it mean exactly and What are the consequences of each?

And how come top of the line Asus Z390 that barely released days ago, don't fully support their targeted CPUs?

And what was that setting they turned on/off that changed the temps by 30-50c?

I don't see why anyone needs to mess with the settings to get full clock speeds and performance out of the box.

As to your final point, if you are going to be running stock and not overclocking then there should be no problems with your choice in the Strix Z390...

 

[Ransome]

Where do you see this Vrm Phase specs?
So is this something you have to research and look for when choosing a mobo?

I'll have to watch the vid later. Still unclear to me. I remember reading here in Tom's that "it doesn't matter which Motherboard you get, the only differences are in added features" like Wifi, bios, sound card etc.

To answer your question, I am probably not going to overclock right off the bat. Or at least not by much.
But the problem with the issue presented in the video, is that supposedly those high end z390 motherboards (most of them aren't even released to public) are restricting/downclocking 9th Gen CPUs with their out of the box default settings. And don't produce the CPU's stated specs.
This is really odd and illogical to me.

I hope someone clears this up, because I feel like the YouTubers are just spreading false information and a lot of confusion.
(I mean, people should be in an uproar if Maximus and Strix don't support or have proper Vrm Phase).

 

[vMax]

Where do you see this Vrm Phase specs?
So is this something you have to research and look for when choosing a mobo?

I'll have to watch the vid later. Still unclear to me. I remember reading here in Tom's that "it doesn't matter which Motherboard you get, the only differences are in added features" like Wifi, bios, sound card etc.

To answer your question, I am probably not going to overclock right off the bat. Or at least not by much.
But the problem with the issue presented in the video, is that supposedly those high end z390 motherboards (most of them aren't even released to public) are restricting/downclocking 9th Gen CPUs with their out of the box default settings. And don't produce the CPU's stated specs.
This is really odd and illogical to me.

I hope someone clears this up, because I feel like the YouTubers are just spreading false information and a lot of confusion.
(I mean, people should be in an uproar if Maximus and Strix don't support or have proper Vrm Phase).

I have to agree and will do a bit more digging as the Msximus Hero and Strix series on the Z390 should more than be able to handle overclocking on the 9900K, even if only to 5GHz/5.1GHz all core without the issues that are being covered, maybe we are miss-understanding but will check it out...

 

[mdd1963]

Isn't the TDP on the 9900k 95? I have a 140 TDP 7800x and a standard AIO cools it fine. I doubt you need to be worried about heat that much at stock speeds with it.

Hardware Unboxed commented on this yesterday reviewing Linus' cool temps.

If the mainboard is left with a 95W max power cap, the CPU will VRM throttle itself to about 4.2 GHz or so on all cores to meet the 95w cap, and, only hits 60C or so. Remove the power limit in the BIOS to hit 4.7 GHz, and you will be at 150-160 watts in short order, and, at 85C with a good/great cooler. Running at 5 GHz on all cores will hit about 98-100C.

 

[xxxlun4icexxx]

Isn't the TDP on the 9900k 95? I have a 140 TDP 7800x and a standard AIO cools it fine. I doubt you need to be worried about heat that much at stock speeds with it.

Hardware Unboxed commented on this yesterday reviewing Linus' cool temps.

If the mainboard is left with a 95W max power cap, the CPU will VRM throttle itself to about 4.2 GHz or so on all cores to meet the 95w cap, and, only hits 60C or so. Remove the power limit in the BIOS to hit 4.7 GHz, and you will be at 150-160 watts in short order, and, at 85C with a good/great cooler. Running at 5 GHz on all cores will hit about 98-100C.

So when we get these CPUs we have to make bios changes to get the stock boost frequencies? Good to know.

 

[vMax]

Isn't the TDP on the 9900k 95? I have a 140 TDP 7800x and a standard AIO cools it fine. I doubt you need to be worried about heat that much at stock speeds with it.

Hardware Unboxed commented on this yesterday reviewing Linus' cool temps.

If the mainboard is left with a 95W max power cap, the CPU will VRM throttle itself to about 4.2 GHz or so on all cores to meet the 95w cap, and, only hits 60C or so. Remove the power limit in the BIOS to hit 4.7 GHz, and you will be at 150-160 watts in short order, and, at 85C with a good/great cooler. Running at 5 GHz on all cores will hit about 98-100C.

Thanks mdd1963...Good to know but it does set an awful president when an overclocking chipset in the Z390 needs to remove the power limit before it will allow better performance.

I don't have to remove the Power Limit on my Z370 Gaming 7 motherboard for my 8700k when overclocked to 5GHz and it is obviously going way beyond 95w, why the difference with the Z390 and the 9900K? Is it just an automatic function when setting an overclock?

Apologies if I am coming across as dumb...

 

[mdd1963]

If it hits 4.7 GHz on all cores, clearly the 95 watt TDP limit is already disabled, and MCE enabled...(not sure if MCE is enabled by default anymore, it was on my Z270A Prime)

If all cores seem to auto-limit themselves to about 4.2 GHz, the 95 watt TDP limit is definitely enabled.

Not a single reviewer seems to have given the impression that these cpus are even going to run at 4.7 GHz on all cores without seeing 84C...if lucky.

No big deal, the user can decide if to impose the power limit or remove it, and/or specify an upper limit clock speed anyway to allow for something in between 60C (stock, limits in place) and 4.7 GHz all core at 85C, and all core 5 GHz at 99C...

(Hardware Unboxed discussion on power limits in BIOS--- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGHiRrQ2AAo

5.1 GHz sustained all-core turbos is not happening without a chilling cart, apparently...

 

[vMax]

If it hits 4.7 GHz on all cores, clearly the 95 watt TDP limit is already disabled, and MCE enabled...(not sure if MCE is enabled by default anymore, it was on my Z270A Prime)

If all cores seem to auto-limit themselves to about 4.2 GHz, the 95 watt TDP limit is definitely enabled.

Not a single reviewer seems to have given the impression that these cpus are even going to run at 4.7 GHz on all cores without seeing 84C...if lucky.

No big deal, the user can decide if to impose the power limit or remove it, and/or specify an upper limit clock speed anyway to allow for something in between 60C (stock, limits in place) and 4.7 GHz all core at 85C, and all core 5 GHz at 99C...

(Hardware Unboxed discussion on power limits in BIOS--- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGHiRrQ2AAo

5.1 GHz sustained all-core turbos is not happening without a chilling cart, apparently...

Okay, I get it... Still I hope it is not that bad as a 4.8/4.9 or even 5GHz all core overclock with decent cooling like a triple AIO and a minus 2 AVX setting should allow for things to run sub 80 degrees C in bench tests and hopefully gaming should still be around 60 degrees C....I could be dreaming though...

 

[ttran7701]

Thanks for posting the question Ransome. I'm in the same boat. I don't swap out CPU's but will upgrade GPU every few years. I wanted the best CPU I could get and get as many GPU upgrades as possible. The reviews are all over the place when it comes to thermals and power usage!! Now the whole MOBO thing too??!!

 

[JasenSensation]

I was pretty much in the same dilemma as you. I am upgrading from the z87 chipset with a i5 4670k along with a 1080ti. I chose the z390 chipset because it works with both 8th and 9th gen processors, and chose the 8700k to go with it. My reason is that it's cheaper, runs cooler, and is much better in price to performance.
If the 9900k comes down in price within the next couple years and if somehow pulls way ahead in terms of gaming performance by using the extra cores, then I still have that option of upgrading and selling the 8700k.
That seemed like the best route for me to get the best performance without spending more than what was necessary.

 

[vMax]

Okay after a fair few reviews, this one covers the 9900K on the Asus Strix Z370-G and the Maximus Hero XI, the bottom line was that a good high end Z370 will handle the 9900K overclocked and not mid range Z370 boards for overclocking...

The Asus Z390 Maximus XI did not do a great job overclocking stopping at 5.05GHz...May have been the CPU lottery...but!

http://www.legitreviews.com/intel-core-i9-9900k-cpu-review-9th-gen-8-core-16-thread-benchmarks_208526/9

Guru3d and others have managed to get 5.2GHz across a range of Z390 boards but at 5.2GHz it did run hot, hot, hot!

 

[Ransome]

Great. The more I hear about these new CPUs, the more I hate them lol. Heck, this new upgrade/build plan of mine sounds less appealing and exciting- and more frustrating.
I hate sounding dumb, but all these tweaks sounds like way too much hassle- for something that should be automatic.
And what's your reward? Higher clocks but 84-100c? The chip will burn. Melt. Heck maybe the board's socket will be damaged. I remember hearing that the 3rd gen shouldn't reach above 85-90 for long periods.

And WHY ON EARTH does the average consumer need to TWEAK a new CPU in order to achieve its stock frequencies?
Who the hell thought it's a good idea to Power Limit those mobos by default?
I really don't like messing with default optimal settings (a simple OC and XMP is fine).

Do we know if i7-9700k behaves the same way? Perhaps there's no power limit issue?
Wish we had proper thermal tests (without OC too) for the i7-9700K and the other CPUs compared to 8th series.
Perhaps, you can OC the i7-9700k to be better and cooler than i9-9900k?

I'm sorry if I'm kinda ranting at this point, but perhaps picking i7-8700k is simply easier, cooler and safer.
Although, I heard many people delid their i7-8700k to reduce temps, I don't want to go down that path .

 

[vMax]

Yep, it does seem very convoluted especially on boost, cooling and temps... I can vouch for the 8700K being a absolutely fantastic CPU that does not require any hardcore cooling and will just blitz anything on the gaming side and even the light productivity side....Stick it on a Z390 Motherboard and be done with...4.7GHz all core out of the box with no changes and a simple multiplayer change to 48 will give you 4.8GHz...If you feel like overclocking later, it will do 5GHz without too much effort...

 

[Ransome]

Isn't the TDP on the 9900k 95? I have a 140 TDP 7800x and a standard AIO cools it fine. I doubt you need to be worried about heat that much at stock speeds with it.

Hardware Unboxed commented on this yesterday reviewing Linus' cool temps.

If the mainboard is left with a 95W max power cap, the CPU will VRM throttle itself to about 4.2 GHz or so on all cores to meet the 95w cap, and, only hits 60C or so. Remove the power limit in the BIOS to hit 4.7 GHz, and you will be at 150-160 watts in short order, and, at 85C with a good/great cooler. Running at 5 GHz on all cores will hit about 98-100C.

What exactly do we need to look for in the BIOS, and what do we do with it ? (what's the name of the settings and action needed?).
Additionally -is running at 85C and above, not to mention 90-100C even normal with these chips? Won't they just get damaged (or even damage the mobo's socket?). Those temps are in the extreme.

I was pretty much in the same dilemma as you. I am upgrading from the z87 chipset with a i5 4670k along with a 1080ti. I chose the z390 chipset because it works with both 8th and 9th gen processors, and chose the 8700k to go with it. My reason is that it's cheaper, runs cooler, and is much better in price to performance.
If the 9900k comes down in price within the next couple years and if somehow pulls way ahead in terms of gaming performance by using the extra cores, then I still have that option of upgrading and selling the 8700k.
That seemed like the best route for me to get the best performance without spending more than what was necessary.

Did you already built that PC? Have you tests your CPU clock speeds and checked if they reach their stock maximum - out of the box? OR did you have to remove power limit, as mentioned above?
Also, I'd like to know what: motherboard, case and cooler - you chose and how are your temps.

 

[Ransome]

Yep, it does seem very convoluted especially on boost, cooling and temps... I can vouch for the 8700K being a absolutely fantastic CPU that does not require any hardcore cooling and will just blitz anything on the gaming side and even the light productivity side....Stick it on a Z390 Motherboard and be done with...4.7GHz all core out of the box with no changes and a simple multiplayer change to 48 will give you 4.8GHz...If you feel like overclocking later, it will do 5GHz without too much effort...

So what are your temps in gaming and in stress tests?
As for overclocking: Did you manually tweaked the voltage or LLC (or anything else) to achieve your 4.9GHz Overclock?
If so, what's your voltage, and was it offset or fixed? (just for reference).
Thanks for that.
I am still keen to hear about the i9-9700K. Perhaps it's a safer option. (although I still REALLY want to buy that i9-9900K !!!).
I'm rather thorough person, and I think I will withhold any purchases until I'm absolutely sure it's the right choice. Gotta pick every part super carefully.
And now with the mobo thing... it makes matters even more convoluted.

 

[vMax]

For a 4.9GHz overclock on my 8700K (my go to 24/7 settings), I required a vcore of 1.278v and a LLC setting of High with a AVX setting of -2. For 5GHz, I needed 1.307v again with a LLC set to High. 5.1GHz was achievable but I needed 1.394v which for me was way to much!....This was all done on an Offset/Adaptive voltage setting.

Temps for Prime95 and Aida64 Extreme were around the mid 70 degrees C mark though I am running a Corsair H150i Pro 360mm AIO. Without AVX offset, I was hitting mid 80's degrees C.

Once delidded, I am now running temps at load under Prime95 version 26.6 and Aida64 Extreme at mid 50's degrees C.... Yes, delidding made a huge difference. Also I have noticed that others have managed to get there 5GHz overclocks at just under 1.3v so I may have lost the CPU lottery but still more than happy with the performance.

 

[Ransome]

I defintely rather NOT deliding anything. I don't even know what it is and how it's done, and in my country I probably can't get good service for it.
Did you delid it by yourself?
Regardless it sounds way to risky.
I understand the new 9th gen soldered CPU don't need to OR shouldn't be delided at all?

What does the AVX offset setting do exactly? And what's "AVX -2"? I remember seeing a lot of users putting "AVX -2".
I know LLC kinda pushes the overclock voltage further, and the higher it is, the less Vdroop and more consistent, but high Vcore.


---
So anyway,
PCgamer posted a review for the i7-9700k:
https://www.pcgamer.com/intel-core-i7-9700k-review/
That's thier i9 review:
https://www.pcgamer.com/core-i9-9900k-review/

I also chatted with the reviewer (you can check it out in the comments - I'm Ransom Seraph). He says:
" The i7-9700K does run quite a bit cooler for me, never breaking 65C at 'stock' even with y-cruncher. That's at least 15C lower than peak temps on the i9-9900K."
Also said, regarding i9-9900K and Kraken X62:
"So 70-75C under load for most tasks, spikes to 85C in a few situations, but nothing 'dangerous.' Most games meanwhile will probably leave the CPU at <60C, because they won't come anywhere near loading all 8 cores/16 threads."

Temp difference of ~15c is kind of a big deal.
However, like I said, I don't want to regret later not picking the best and latest CPU money can buy.
Last time I picked the i5-3570K vs i7-3770K I did regretted it.
I have a feeling 8c/16t VS. 8c/8t - will be a big deal long term in Gaming performance- and add extra degree of future-proofing, minimize bottleneck in the future, and better support to later GPUs.

 

[ttran7701]

Isn't the TDP on the 9900k 95? I have a 140 TDP 7800x and a standard AIO cools it fine. I doubt you need to be worried about heat that much at stock speeds with it.

Hardware Unboxed commented on this yesterday reviewing Linus' cool temps.

If the mainboard is left with a 95W max power cap, the CPU will VRM throttle itself to about 4.2 GHz or so on all cores to meet the 95w cap, and, only hits 60C or so. Remove the power limit in the BIOS to hit 4.7 GHz, and you will be at 150-160 watts in short order, and, at 85C with a good/great cooler. Running at 5 GHz on all cores will hit about 98-100C.

I'm trying to understand why Linus was getting reasonable temps and the other fellow was getting HOT AS HADES temps. Was one guy running "over-clocked"? For example, Asus has multicore enhancement which I believe add 400mHz to the clocks. Is the what you mean? Please, explain the max power cap? Isn't removing the power cap the same as manual over-clocking? Please forgive my ignorance. I haven't built a PC in years!!

 

[Jimmy_DA]

I generally dislike this kind of question. But to answer you -

As a general rule of thumb, in computing the more you spend the bigger the performance. So to answer, decide how much you are willing to spend then spend as close as possible to that amount.

Another consideration is what components will this CPU support. As you need to consider whether the CPU lanes of the CPU will be able to support all your components and potentially any additional added future components. Aka more hard drives, sound card etc etc

 

[Ransome]

I have two new important questions:

1) Best Z390 Motherboards with high VRAM power phase:
What would be a great, especially considering VRM PHASE count, Z390 motherboard to get?
I'm thinking either:
Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master:
https://www.gigabyte.com/us/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#kf
or
MSI MEG Z390 ACE:
https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/MEG-Z390-ACE

Couldn't find good comparison for both boards or other alternatives.

I've gathered Asus are not that great, because most of their boards are 4-phase vrm only - or "4x2 with doubers"
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?105731-Can-someone-clear-up-misinformation-on-the-Z390-XI-Hero-s-power-phasing

I've watched Hardware Unboxed video and it seems having high VRM-PHASE power with good VRMs quality is very important for 9th gen CPUs.


2) AMD vs Intel Motherboards: Future CPU Upgrade Support:
What about AMD boards + Ryzen? In therms of future upgrade-ability of CPUs/RAM?

I read that with AMD Motherboards and Ryzen 7 CPU (for instance) - you will be able to replace your CPU - with next gen/s CPUS - without replacing Motherboards.
Is this true? And how many gens of CPUs will the current AMD boards support ?

In contrast, I read that z390 will NOT SUPPORT any more CPUs beyond 9th gen. Is this confirmed?

Therefore the dilemma here:
Is it wiser to buy AMD Motherboard with Ryzen 7 NOW (or whatever new Ryzen releases soon?) - Even though Ryzen 7 is currently weaker than Intel - since a new Ryzen will be stronger and still be supported by the mobo - making it BETTER than i9-9900K in the future.


In other words: does AMD boards have more upgrade-ability?
And will current Z390 Mobos support future gen Intel CPUs?

 

[emperor_bassel]

I have two new important questions:

1) Best Z390 Motherboards with high VRAM power phase:
What would be a great, especially considering VRM PHASE count, Z390 motherboard to get?
I'm thinking either:
Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master:
https://www.gigabyte.com/us/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#kf
or
MSI MEG Z390 ACE:
https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/MEG-Z390-ACE

Couldn't find good comparison for both boards or other alternatives.

I've gathered Asus are not that great, because most of their boards are 4-phase vrm only - or "4x2 with doubers"
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?105731-Can-someone-clear-up-misinformation-on-the-Z390-XI-Hero-s-power-phasing

I've watched Hardware Unboxed video and it seems having high VRM-PHASE power with good VRMs quality is very important for 9th gen CPUs.


2) AMD vs Intel Motherboards: Future CPU Upgrade Support:
What about AMD boards + Ryzen? In therms of future upgrade-ability of CPUs/RAM?

I read that with AMD Motherboards and Ryzen 7 CPU (for instance) - you will be able to replace your CPU - with next gen/s CPUS - without replacing Motherboards.
Is this true? And how many gens of CPUs will the current AMD boards support ?

In contrast, I read that z390 will NOT SUPPORT any more CPUs beyond 9th gen. Is this confirmed?

Therefore the dilemma here:
Is it wiser to buy AMD Motherboard with Ryzen 7 NOW (or whatever new Ryzen releases soon?) - Even though Ryzen 7 is currently weaker than Intel - since a new Ryzen will be stronger and still be supported by the mobo - making it BETTER than i9-9900K in the future.


In other words: does AMD boards have more upgrade-ability?
And will current Z390 Mobos support future gen Intel CPUs?

Hi,

I just wanted to comment real quick about your statements concerning the radiator placement. It is a huge mistake to mount the radiator as an exhaust on top, especially with CPUs that get really hot like the 9700 and 9900. Watch some videos about optimal radiator placement that show how much worse your CPU temps become, like this one: https://youtu.be/xNAMxZgvves

If you set it to intake, with a rear fan as exhaust, and the front fans as intake too, it will be better. However, try to mount the radiator in front not on top whenever possible, as heat rises and will heat up your radiator, affecting the CPU temps.

 

[Ransome]

I have two new important questions:

1) Best Z390 Motherboards with high VRAM power phase:
What would be a great, especially considering VRM PHASE count, Z390 motherboard to get?
I'm thinking either:
Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master:
https://www.gigabyte.com/us/Motherboard/Z390-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#kf
or
MSI MEG Z390 ACE:
https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/MEG-Z390-ACE

Couldn't find good comparison for both boards or other alternatives.

I've gathered Asus are not that great, because most of their boards are 4-phase vrm only - or "4x2 with doubers"
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?105731-Can-someone-clear-up-misinformation-on-the-Z390-XI-Hero-s-power-phasing

I've watched Hardware Unboxed video and it seems having high VRM-PHASE power with good VRMs quality is very important for 9th gen CPUs.


2) AMD vs Intel Motherboards: Future CPU Upgrade Support:
What about AMD boards + Ryzen? In therms of future upgrade-ability of CPUs/RAM?

I read that with AMD Motherboards and Ryzen 7 CPU (for instance) - you will be able to replace your CPU - with next gen/s CPUS - without replacing Motherboards.
Is this true? And how many gens of CPUs will the current AMD boards support ?

In contrast, I read that z390 will NOT SUPPORT any more CPUs beyond 9th gen. Is this confirmed?

Therefore the dilemma here:
Is it wiser to buy AMD Motherboard with Ryzen 7 NOW (or whatever new Ryzen releases soon?) - Even though Ryzen 7 is currently weaker than Intel - since a new Ryzen will be stronger and still be supported by the mobo - making it BETTER than i9-9900K in the future.


In other words: does AMD boards have more upgrade-ability?
And will current Z390 Mobos support future gen Intel CPUs?

Hi,

I just wanted to comment real quick about your statements concerning the radiator placement. It is a huge mistake to mount the radiator as an exhaust on top, especially with CPUs that get really hot like the 9700 and 9900. Watch some videos about optimal radiator placement that show how much worse your CPU temps become, like this one: https://youtu.be/xNAMxZgvves

If you set it to intake, with a rear fan as exhaust, and the front fans as intake too, it will be better. However, try to mount the radiator in front not on top whenever possible, as heat rises and will heat up your radiator, affecting the CPU temps.

I don't like this video. It's just 1 example, in 1 system from 1 dude. I don't know why everyone keeps pointing it out as some evidence. I also don't like this guy's channel in general. I found many good recommendations from people here in Tom's and other sources to mount TOP.
To be honest, the fact heat rises makes mounting in the top more sensible: because you don't mess with physics and don't disrupt the natural flow of air. Since heat will rise up through and out through the top.

However, mounting in the front has some big downsides:
1. you block some of the precious intake airflow- due to having large heatsink radiator restricting the front.
2. You also throw hotter air on all you main components: your GPU, nvme, RAM, and mobo. Heating up the GPU is no joke.
I rather have fresh unobstructed air shooting at my interior from the front. And hotter air flowing upwards and out the top and rear.

I wonder about mounting top as intake, I saw PC Part Picker do that in build video. It gives you more intake but goes against physics somehow. As you might recycle your cases hot air pulling it back in after exhausting it.

 

[emperor_bassel]

There are a lot of other radiator placement guides dude. That was just one of the top results. Are you crazy that hear rising makes it more sensible to mount on top? Heat rising will heat up the radiator placed on top, degrading liquid cooled CPU temps... If you don’t think that’s obvious I’m not sure what to tell you. It’s basic physics.

 

[Ransome]

There are a lot of other radiator placement guides dude. That was just one of the top results. Are you crazy that hear rising makes it more sensible to mount on top? Heat rising will heat up the radiator placed on top, degrading liquid cooled CPU temps... If you don’t think that’s obvious I’m not sure what to tell you. It’s basic physics.

Yes, it is a tradeoff. But there are big drawbacks placing the AIO in the front.
Not only you block the front intake (because you have a huge radiator with many fins and pump in the front restricting the volume of air going in), you also HEAT UP everything else (except CPU). Sure you will have cooler CPU because it's in the first row of intake air.
Your GPU will get hotter, as well as RAM, nvme, Vrms and the general air circulating the PC space's interior will be hotter.

However, when you place the RAD on top as exhaust: logically it's close to the ceiling and shoot air directly at the rad and straight OUT of the case. You get rid of hot air.
Plus, the case's optimal exhaust is generally rear and top anyway. So you use this to both cool the CPU and dump the air outside. Without throwing the hotter air back into the case to just circulate there.
I also think it looks way nicer and more space efficient in the top. And clears more room in the center bulk of the case,making navigation and handling the case easier.

This is all speaking from common sense, research, other people's experience and theory because I never had an AIO before. Only used Air Coolers so far.

I'm not saying putting in the front isn't optional, but I don't think it's mandatory.