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?

 

[chemmajorp53]

I wouldn't get the 9900K for pretty much any reason, it's just way too expensive for what it is. The 9700K makes a bit more sense, but it really depends on what your use case is. Here are some things to consider:

- What are you using the computer for
- How much are you willing to spend
- What results do you expect (in games or productivity workloads)
- What hardware from your old build if any are you planning on using in the new system

If all you do is play games and use your computer for basic office tasks, I don't see any reason why you'd need anything much more powerful than an R5 2600/X or an i5 8400/8600(K)/9600(K). Keep in mind that you'd be paying a premium for performance that you wouldn't be using on a 9700K/9900K in this case and you could instead save that money for future upgrades or a better GPU now. The lower the resolution of your monitor and the higher the refresh rate, the higher the difference is going to be between Ryzen and Intel. If you're just gaming at 1080p 60hz then there probably isn't even much of a reason to ditch the 3570k.

If you stream, consider which codecs you use and what bitrate you're streaming at. H264 has a better value/performance proposition on Ryzen, but with NVENC you can offload much of that work to your graphics card assuming that you don't expect insane stream quality.

If you're using this computer for work or specific programs, then it would be nice to know what those are.

 

[Ransome]

Well I'm going to use it mainly for pure Gaming build. I'm willing to spend quite a lot because I don't build/upgrade very often. So when I do I want to have the best and latest and gain the greatest performance leap. To have a meaningful jump. That's why I skipped many gens so far and why I don't replace all my hardware every couple of years. I also want to have some degree of future proofing and have better gain from future GPUs (less.bottleneck).

I play mostly at 4K 60FPS (2160p) on my Samsung 4K TV, or at 1440p 144fps Gsync monitor (less often). I noticed stuttering and drops any many games. Mostly optimized ones. But many games aren't properly optimized today.

I plan to move only my 1080Ti from my current build (see my signature). Since 2080Ti is absurdly & extremely overpriced- being way too expensive- (not to mention out of stock thus multiplying the cost) I don't plan on buying it anytime soon. Unless prices drop significantly.
So maybe my next card will be 3080Ti - IF - IT will be reasonably priced.

Also last time I picked the i5-3570k I regretted not spending extra 100$ for the i7-3770k down the line-as games became more CPU bound (which isn't a good thing I guess) and started to use more cores and even hyper threading.

So I told myself I want an i7 for the first time + Hyper Threading.
That was before I heard about i9 and that i7 stupidly doesn't have HT in 9th gen.

Hardware Unboxed latest analysis throw me totally off my rails of my plans.

The say the i9-9900k and probably i7-9700k can't be cooled and will throttle even in cool rooms.
And that temps are totally dangerous and nearly impossible to manage.
It sounds like a huge deal breaker - IF that's true.

I am surprised people don't talk about the heat levels. 84c low and 100c high with a premium cooler?

So I have huge doubts if In souls pick anything from 9th gen, even if I was a millionaire, because of that

They also show i7-8700k beating the new i7-9700k sometimes. It has more threads. Costs less, and has better cooling potential and less power usage.

Are there better temps and performance charts comparing 8th and 9th gen?

 

[Ransome]

That's the review I talked about:
https://www.techspot.com/review/1730-intel-core-i9-9900k-core-i7-9700k/page3.html
Temp test is at the bottom. But rather incomplete since it doesn't compare other 9th gen or 8th.

 

[vMax]

I am not going to bring Price versus performance into this as if you can pay and are willing to pay then why not!!! As a pure gaming build, even though the 9900K is the pinnacle, I would still consider the 8700K as the best all round gaming CPU at the moment. Yes the 9700K and the 9900K may be just a fraction better and in the 9900K's case it has more value if you include production workloads which you are not going to do, the 8700K runs cooler, especially with a decent top end Air Cooler or 240mm/280mm AIO and will hit 5GHz...In terms of raw performance it will provide great gaming for a long time to come and you can match it to a new Z390 Motherboard allowing for a future upgrade...

 

[chemmajorp53]

Those reviewers are testing temperatures in prime95 and blender, which isn't really indicative of real life temperatures for 99.9% of people. I wouldn't worry about any of these CPUs having temperature problems in game unless you overclock them significantly. The 8700K and 9700K are pretty equal in terms of performance, I'd say that there really isn't that much of a difference between the 6 hyperthreads and 2 physical cores.

I don't know, it's up to you. I can't see you needing 8C/16T any time in the near future unless something drastic happens.

My suggestion would be to flip a coin between the 8700K and 9700K, but I don't think any of the CPUs you mentioned (2700X, 8700k, 9700k, or 9900k) would necessarily be a bad decision.

 

[Ransome]

Thanks for the replies guys.
I tried to scour the web for answers, but there's scarcely any data regarding temperatures in various scenarios, charts and comparisons for 9th and 8th gen CPUs.

So I don't know if we can tell well enough what temps to expect and if it's different from 8th gen.

I forgot to add I might do some game recording & upload later (shadowplay) but not really streaming.
Of course I don't know what future will hold, for other uses.

The question remains how much different is i7-8700k in terms of temps and cooling potential as well as i7-9700k and i9-9900k.
If i7-9700k is marginally better and not so hotter perhaps picking it over last gen i7 will be beneficial. As it only costs a bit more.
That way I still get the latest tech.
But the lack of hyper threading is still irritating. I wonder what potential this cpu had with it.
And how much 2 cores are better or worse than 6 threads in future games.
And if i9 isn't burning hot as said, then maybe spending more will be more beneficial in a few years, coupled with stronger GPUs.

 

[Ransome]

Those reviewers are testing temperatures in prime95 and blender, which isn't really indicative of real life temperatures for 99.9% of people. I wouldn't worry about any of these CPUs having temperature problems in game unless you overclock them significantly. The 8700K and 9700K are pretty equal in terms of performance, I'd say that there really isn't that much of a difference between the 6 hyperthreads and 2 physical cores.

I don't know, it's up to you. I can't see you needing 8C/16T any time in the near future unless something drastic happens.

My suggestion would be to flip a coin between the 8700K and 9700K, but I don't think any of the CPUs you mentioned (2700X, 8700k, 9700k, or 9900k) would necessarily be a bad decision.

That may be true, but at the same time, my Ivy Bridge i5-3570K is between 60-70c with Prime95 and RealBench, and 30-40 idle (in hot weather).
So to think the same test will push an 9th gen to 100c in a much cooler room with premium coolers in lab conditions - sounds very intimidating. Almost unmanageable. Especially in a hot humid dusty country like Israel. I couldn't find proper thermal data of i7-8700K at same/similar tests to compare it with.

Ha! Flipping a coin. Not a terrible idea

I am not going to bring Price versus performance into this as if you can pay and are willing to pay then why not!!! As a pure gaming build, even though the 9900K is the pinnacle, I would still consider the 8700K as the best all round gaming CPU at the moment. Yes the 9700K and the 9900K may be just a fraction better and in the 9900K's case it has more value if you include production workloads which you are not going to do, the 8700K runs cooler, especially with a decent top end Air Cooler or 240mm/280mm AIO and will hit 5GHz...In terms of raw performance it will provide great gaming for a long time to come and you can match it to a new Z390 Motherboard allowing for a future upgrade...

I don't know about not using 8C/16T. More cores and strength can definitely mean more performance.
Also, the last time I designed and bought PC parts- people claimed Hyper Threading and i7 won't be necessary ever in games - (and it really wasn't back the)- but as years went on- games started to use the extra cores and threads more and more. And hyper threading become important.
Had I bought the i7-3770K back then - with extra 4 threads and power - I might have had better steadier framerates, including minimum fps - in demanding games at higher resolutions like 4K.
So to think after 7 years I would not buy a Hyper Threading able CPU - AGAIN - kinda throws me off.

As for i7-8700K - I'm also beginning to think it might be the best Gaming CPU package right now. But at the same time, I waited this long, even considered upgrading every year for several years now, so not picking the latest gen and tech with the latest architecture - feels counter intuitive and maybe a missed opportunity.

I have several tough decisions with this build. Keep feeling like I'm hitting a wall.
The motherboard, the case (big dilemma), and not the CPU is kind of a big deal.

I just wonder what the actual user experience is, how does the i7-8700K and i5-8600K compete with i5/7/9 of 9th gen in terms of temperatures. And I wonder if the new gen has more future proofing - or maybe lesser bottleneck down the line.

-----
By the way, I plan on starting to buy my parts in Black Friday or maybe the holidays, perhaps I could pick a few of them in a sale.
Currently I'm thinking of this parts:
-Corsair Obsidian 500D RGB SE as my case (or Fractal Design Define R6).
-Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 3600MHz RAM (16GB) or non Pro. -Samsung EVO 860 and/or 970 M.2 (don't know about M.2 as they are expensive).
-Corsair AX860 or RM850X PSU.
-Asus Strix Z390-E or MSI mobo z390 with Wifi.
- AIO CPU Cooler: H115i Pro for the Obsidian - mounted on TOP (or H150i Pro if case is R6 -TOP).
-GPU: Same - Asus Strix 1080Ti OC

 

[vMax]

Those reviewers are testing temperatures in prime95 and blender, which isn't really indicative of real life temperatures for 99.9% of people. I wouldn't worry about any of these CPUs having temperature problems in game unless you overclock them significantly. The 8700K and 9700K are pretty equal in terms of performance, I'd say that there really isn't that much of a difference between the 6 hyperthreads and 2 physical cores.

I don't know, it's up to you. I can't see you needing 8C/16T any time in the near future unless something drastic happens.

My suggestion would be to flip a coin between the 8700K and 9700K, but I don't think any of the CPUs you mentioned (2700X, 8700k, 9700k, or 9900k) would necessarily be a bad decision.

That may be true, but at the same time, my Ivy Bridge i5-3570K is between 60-70c with Prime95 and RealBench, and 30-40 idle (in hot weather).
So to think the same test will push an 9th gen to 100c in a much cooler room with premium coolers in lab conditions - sounds very intimidating. Almost unmanageable. Especially in a hot humid dusty country like Israel. I couldn't find proper thermal data of i7-8700K at same/similar tests to compare it with.

Ha! Flipping a coin. Not a terrible idea

I am not going to bring Price versus performance into this as if you can pay and are willing to pay then why not!!! As a pure gaming build, even though the 9900K is the pinnacle, I would still consider the 8700K as the best all round gaming CPU at the moment. Yes the 9700K and the 9900K may be just a fraction better and in the 9900K's case it has more value if you include production workloads which you are not going to do, the 8700K runs cooler, especially with a decent top end Air Cooler or 240mm/280mm AIO and will hit 5GHz...In terms of raw performance it will provide great gaming for a long time to come and you can match it to a new Z390 Motherboard allowing for a future upgrade...

I don't know about not using 8C/16T. More cores and strength can definitely mean more performance.
Also, the last time I designed and bought PC parts- people claimed Hyper Threading and i7 won't be necessary ever in games - (and it really wasn't back the)- but as years went on- games started to use the extra cores and threads more and more. And hyper threading become important.
Had I bought the i7-3770K back then - with extra 4 threads and power - I might have had better steadier framerates, including minimum fps - in demanding games at higher resolutions like 4K.
So to think after 7 years I would not buy a Hyper Threading able CPU - AGAIN - kinda throws me off.

As for i7-8700K - I'm also beginning to think it might be the best Gaming CPU package right now. But at the same time, I waited this long, even considered upgrading every year for several years now, so not picking the latest gen and tech with the latest architecture - feels counter intuitive and maybe a missed opportunity.

I have several tough decisions with this build. Keep feeling like I'm hitting a wall.
The motherboard, the case (big dilemma), and not the CPU is kind of a big deal.

I just wonder what the actual user experience is, how does the i7-8700K and i5-8600K compete with i5/7/9 of 9th gen in terms of temperatures. And I wonder if the new gen has more future proofing - or maybe lesser bottleneck down the line.

-----
By the way, I plan on starting to buy my parts in Black Friday or maybe the holidays, perhaps I could pick a few of them in a sale.
Currently I'm thinking of this parts:
-Corsair Obsidian 500D RGB SE as my case (or Fractal Design Define R6).
-Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 3600MHz RAM (16GB) or non Pro. -Samsung EVO 860 and/or 970 M.2 (don't know about M.2 as they are expensive).
-Corsair AX860 or RM850X PSU.
-Asus Strix Z390-E or MSI mobo z390 with Wifi.
- AIO CPU Cooler: H115i Pro for the Obsidian - mounted on TOP (or H150i Pro if case is R6 -TOP).
-GPU: Same - Asus Strix 1080Ti OC

More than understand the dilemma and as I stated at the beginning, if you have the money to spend, then why not!!!...If you have the money available and can afford the 9900K, then that would be the route to go as that is the end of the pyramid right now in the enthusiast sector. It will last you a long time as 8 cores and 16 threads at 5GHz will more than plow through any game and productivity loads you can throw at it now and for quiet some time to come. Also you won't get that horrible feeling that you did not get the best and somehow you made a mistake...

Don't get me wrong, the 9700K and 8700K will do a fantastic job and I would lean to the 8700K for your current use case, but if I had the money and it was not an issue at all, then I would go the 9900K route and be done with...

PS, if you do go the 9900K route then a 360mm AIO like the H150i Pro would be a must....

PPS, I just released I went through what you are going through when the 8700K had just come out for my gaming build and ultimately went the 8700K as opposed to the 8600K and the Ryzen's as it was at the top of it's pyramid for gaming...Never looked back!!

 

[Ransome]

More than understand the dilemma and as I stated at the beginning, if you have the money to spend, then why not!!!...If you have the money available and can afford the 9900K, then that would be the route to go as that is the end of the pyramid right now in the enthusiast sector. It will last you a long time as 8 cores and 16 threads at 5GHz will more than plow through any game and productivity loads you can throw at it now and for quiet some time to come. Also you won't get that horrible feeling that you did not get the best and somehow you made a mistake...

Don't get me wrong, the 9700K and 8700K will do a fantastic job and I would lean to the 8700K for your current use case, but if I had the money and it was not an issue at all, then I would go the 9900K route and be done with...

PS, if you do go the 9900K route then a 360mm AIO like the H150i Pro would be a must....

PPS, I just released I went through what you are going through when the 8700K had just come out for my gaming build and ultimately went the 8700K as opposed to the 8600K and the Ryzen's as it was at the top of it's pyramid for gaming...Never looked back!!

Thanks.
I would be more relaxed if temps and voltages weren't so high.
I went through dozens of cases, and eventually narrowed it down to Obsidian 500D RGBSE or Fractal Design R6. I'm not 100% happy on either.

The former can have 360mm front or 240/280mm top.
I thought about buying the h115i Pro and mounted as Exhaust on top.
The R6 case can have 360mm front or top. If I took that case than 360mm seems like a good pick.
Thing is, I know many people started placing in the front, but I don't like it. Never had a liquid AIO cooler before. But I can't help but worrying it will dump hotter air through the RAD into the case and GPU as well as block airflow further.
I don't know how 115i Pro will handle the i9-9900k or even i7-9700k, but it's almost as good as 360mm 150i Pro according to reviews and actually quieter. Pushing more air with bigger fans.

**What's do you think between mounting top or front?
**And between exhaust vs intake?

Obsidian 500D comes with 3 LL120 intake fans. I will add 1 rear LL120 exhaust . And the 280mm exhaust or intake (not sure) on top.
Or front 360mm , and then 2 - 140mm top out/intake.

I'm hoping to get some parts at lower price at Black Friday, Cyber Monday, holidays etc.


Can I go a bit off topic here:
what's your take on M.2 SSDs? Like Evo 970.
I wasn't even aware of them a week ago. Not sure if they are worth getting and what's their cons. Aren't they hotter?

 

[snownight7]

I have a 115i Pro that I mounted to the top. I was going to go with the 150i Pro but the only way it would fit would be mounting it to the front and I agree with you, I think it would mess with airflow. If your willing to wait I watched an interview with an intel rep stating their coming out with 10mm next year. If not then im not sure why you'd go with old tech like an 8700k over a 9900k/9700k if you have a decent AIO like you do. All in all you build looks good, actually very similar to my current build.

 

[Ransome]

I have a 115i Pro that I mounted to the top. I was going to go with the 150i Pro but the only way it would fit would be mounting it to the front and I agree with you, I think it would mess with airflow. If your willing to wait I watched an interview with an intel rep stating their coming out with 10mm next year. If not then im not sure why you'd go with old tech like an 8700k over a 9900k/9700k if you have a decent AIO like you do. All in all you build looks good, actually very similar to my current build.

Thanks for the insight!
I hope the Obsidian 500D RGB case has enough airflow and cooling potential. I assume you use your top h115i as exhaust?
May I ask what's your current build exactly?

I don't know how much better or more expensive these 10nm chips will be And whether or not we will have DDR5 RAM sticks soon. So is it worth the wait? I simply can't tell. I have waited quite long already. There's always something better around the corner.

However, my goal and deadline is to have this build finished and ready for action before March 2019. When Devil May Cry 5 releases. Which is a game I waited for for over 10 years, of a favorite series.
Hopefully without many obstacles, setbacks or issues.
It's a huge project and it's been a long time (over 6 years) since I built a PC from scratch. And there are many new things for me to deal with (like AIO cooler).

I am still waiting for more info regarding thermals. There's almost a suspicious lack of proper comprehensive thermal tests for these new 3 CPUs. It's alarming to say the least.

 

[bmockeg]

For gaming at 1440p or 2160p(4k) there is a 2 fps max difference between a Ryzen 2700x and an Intel 9900k. For a pure gaming system at 1440p or higher, you are literally wasting money buying anything with Intel. I also would not recommend a corsair 150 AIO. The 360mm coolers are worse than a 280mm because they are built for decreased noise instead of premier cooling.

 

[vMax]

I have the Cooler Master H500P Mesh which is very good on the airflow side and has a great layout making it easy to build in and with the new H500M it may be worth a look though the looks are not for everyone. It can fit a 360mm radiator at the top and at the front no issues and with the 2 x 200mm fans that run quiet, it really does a great job of cooling...Just another option...

The Fractal Design R6, looks like the complete package with plenty of room to grow a very powerful system, especially if you have a lot of Hard drives but the airflow is medium though still probably good enough.

I like the look of the Corsair Obsidian, really nice lines and clean and as importantly it can take a 360mm AIO at the front, so big plus as if you go the 9900K route, that will be a better option.

Onto AIO's, nowadays, they are very easy to install, don't require any maintenance and of course provide very, very good cooling with a minimum of fuss. For me if you are going 9900K, then a 360mm AIO should be top of the list as that will cool the 9900K very well and you should have no issues, even with a decent all core overclock to 5GHz.

 

[Ransome]

I have the Cooler Master H500P Mesh which is very good on the airflow side and has a great layout making it easy to build in and with the new H500M it may be worth a look though the looks are not for everyone. It can fit a 360mm radiator at the top and at the front no issues and with the 2 x 200mm fans that run quiet, it really does a great job of cooling...Just another option...

The Fractal Design R6, looks like the complete package with plenty of room to grow a very powerful system, especially if you have a lot of Hard drives but the airflow is medium though still probably good enough.

I like the look of the Corsair Obsidian, really nice lines and clean and as importantly it can take a 360mm AIO at the front, so big plus as if you go the 9900K route, that will be a better option.

Onto AIO's, nowadays, they are very easy to install, don't require any maintenance and of course provide very, very good cooling with a minimum of fuss. For me if you are going 9900K, then a 360mm AIO should be top of the list as that will cool the 9900K very well and you should have no issues, even with a decent all core overclock to 5GHz.

Thanks for the suggestion, I'll consider it. Already watched videos of H500P and M.

Yeah, the Obsidian 500D RGB SE looks sleek, solid and unique.

https://www.corsair.com/us/en/Categories/Products/Cases/Software-Control-and-Monitoring-Cases/Obsidian-Series-500D-RGB-SE-Premium-Mid-Tower-Case/p/CC-9011139-WW
It has some issues like low slit and not a lot of vents in the top panel. And there's a 4mm gap between the case and each tempered glass side panel, I think. Every case have some big drawbacks, unfortunately.

Like I said I don't want to put the rad in the front because that will mean better cooling for the CPU but worse cooling (warmer air) for everything else, especially the GPU, and less air flow from front 3 intake fans.

The H115i Pro is according to several reviews I checked - has nearly identical cooling performance with the h150i Pro. And less noisy:
https://techreport.com/review/33035/corsair-h115i-pro-and-h150i-pro-cpu-coolers-reviewed/3
So I think top mounted 280mm- Exhaust- it will work well.
Then add a 120LL Rear exhaust.

I just hope it fits with Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro RAM (or maybe the non Pro) because it's freaking tall.

Off topic question: noticed some of you have Nvme M.2 SSD drives.
Is that a worthwhile investment?
Do you install your OS and games on it?
I thought about the Samsung 970 EVO or 970 Pro. And Combo that with 860 SSD EVO.

 

[vMax]

Lovely case picture on the Obsidian!!!!

On NVMe drive, they are very, very fast and have come down significantly in price...I have my OS installed on it and a couple of my main games with the rest on SSD's....I am running the ADATA XPG SX8200 which for the 480GB version is just $141, providing 3200MB/s Read, and 1700MB/s Write speeds which is blistering!...Though would you really notice over a fast SATA SSD, not sure but my load times are unbelievably quick as is getting Windows up and running..

 

[Ransome]

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.

 

[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..

 

[jankerson]

For gaming at 1440p or 2160p(4k) there is a 2 fps max difference between a Ryzen 2700x and an Intel 9900k. For a pure gaming system at 1440p or higher, you are literally wasting money buying anything with Intel. I also would not recommend a corsair 150 AIO. The 360mm coolers are worse than a 280mm because they are built for decreased noise instead of premier cooling.

It's a lot more than 2 FPS at 1080P and 1440P... A lot more on AVE.

More like 20% to 30% difference... On AVE.

 

[bmockeg]

Nope, check out the 1440p and 4k FPS, barely any difference in a 7600k and,9900k

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13400/intel-9th-gen-core-i9-9900k-i7-9700k-i5-9600k-review/18

For gaming at 1440p or 4k Intel is a waste of money. At 1080p it's the best.

 

[jankerson]

Nope, check out the 1440p and 4k FPS, barely any difference in a 7600k and,9900k

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13400/intel-9th-gen-core-i9-9900k-i7-9700k-i5-9600k-review/18

You need to look in more than one place.

It's 20% to 30% difference on AVE between the 2700X and 9900K.

 

[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.

 

[vMax]

Nope, check out the 1440p and 4k FPS, barely any difference in a 7600k and,9900k

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13400/intel-9th-gen-core-i9-9900k-i7-9700k-i5-9600k-review/18

For gaming at 1440p or 4k Intel is a waste of money. At 1080p it's the best.

Agree with jankerson, here is a review by Gamers Nxxus covering the 1440p and the difference is quiet a bit covering a few titles, well past 2% and more in the 10 to 20% range...

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3378-intel-9900k-cpu-review-solder-vs-paste-delid-gaming-benchmarks-vs-2700x/page-4

And techspot also show a greater than 2% disparity between the 9900K and 2700X at 1440p

https://www.techspot.com/review/1730-intel-core-i9-9900k-core-i7-9700k/page4.html

 

[bmockeg]

Looks like they used different GPUs. The 2080ti seems to open up the Intel CPUs much more.

 

[Ransome]

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.