[SOLVED] Should I wait for intel 10th gen?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
T

turbotong

Distinguished
Aug 11, 2010
70
0
18,630
Deciding whether to buy now or wait.

My computer died last week. An internal USB connector cable melted. From what I can tell after diagnostics, both the mobo and CPU are ruined.

I had a 6700k. I looked at current options. AMD seems to have caught up or slightly surpassed Intel. The latest Intel released chips like 2 years ago (really?) and were only a marginal improvement over the 6700k. So really I'm like 4 years out and it seems like cpu's haven't advanced that much.

I use this for gaming (a variety from 2D to intense 3D) with a 9800ti on an Acer x34 predator (3440x1440p). I can make do with a laptop for a bit if I need to.

Rumors are that Intel's 10 gen processors will be available (or announced?) in May. Should I wait? What are your thoughts?
 
Solution
justin.m.beauvais
Intel has pretty much stated that until 2021 they won't have anything new or innovative. So look forward to rehashes and possibly a die shrink if they can get their 10nm yeilds up. So If you need a system now and Intel is what you prefer, just get it now. There won't really be a lot more coming out of Intel for a while. They might add another couple cores, but what they have on the market right now is going to be plenty for most users for a while.

If you're looking at an AMD system, well, you could wait. Or you could buy a nice lower or mid-range Ryzen with a good motherboard and upgrade to the super high end when Ryzen 4000 series comes out... or get a 3600 and call it good for 4-5 years. AMD currently offers a lot more flexibility...
Sort by date Sort by votes
Whether you should wait or not is entirely dependent on how long you can bear using your laptop in the meantime. Intel's 10th-gen is little more than 9th-gen on a slightly more refined 14nm process, higher clocks and generally higher TDPs, so nothing particularly ground-breaking there aside from the entire product stack likely shifting one rung down in price-to-performance brackets to maintain some semblance of competition with AMD.

In other words, nothing particularly interesting coming from Intel's side this year IMO. If I was going to wait for something (which I am), it'd be the Ryzen 4000 series.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TCA_ChinChin and King_V
Upvote 3 Downvote
Ugh . . that's a hard call to make, and I hate having to buy in a hurry.

That said, I think I agree with @InvalidError, 10th gen is Intel pushing up core counts and clock speeds over 9th gen, along with even more ridiculous heat production. If you're going with Intel, it doesn't seem like 10th gen is going to be all that compelling.

If you can live with your laptop for a while, great, it never hurts to wait, but since your most intense usage is gaming at 3440x1440, even though Intel has the edge over Ryzen in gaming, that edge is really mostly noticeable if you have a high end video card running at low (1920x1080) resolution. Once the resolution starts climbing, the GPU becomes the larger determinant of gaming performance.

Likewise, again agreeing with Invalid, if you're going to wait for something, the Ryzen 4000 series seems like it would be the more compelling argument to wait.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phaaze88
Upvote 0 Downvote
Intel has pretty much stated that until 2021 they won't have anything new or innovative. So look forward to rehashes and possibly a die shrink if they can get their 10nm yeilds up. So If you need a system now and Intel is what you prefer, just get it now. There won't really be a lot more coming out of Intel for a while. They might add another couple cores, but what they have on the market right now is going to be plenty for most users for a while.

If you're looking at an AMD system, well, you could wait. Or you could buy a nice lower or mid-range Ryzen with a good motherboard and upgrade to the super high end when Ryzen 4000 series comes out... or get a 3600 and call it good for 4-5 years. AMD currently offers a lot more flexibility when it comes to upgrade paths and cost of entry into its product stack. Add to that the performance and you have a compelling argument to buy AMD.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
turbotong said:
Deciding whether to buy now or wait.

My computer died last week. An internal USB connector cable melted. From what I can tell after diagnostics, both the mobo and CPU are ruined.

I had a 6700k. I looked at current options. AMD seems to have caught up or slightly surpassed Intel. The latest Intel released chips like 2 years ago (really?) and were only a marginal improvement over the 6700k. So really I'm like 4 years out and it seems like cpu's haven't advanced that much.

I use this for gaming (a variety from 2D to intense 3D) with a 9800ti on an Acer x34 predator (3440x1440p). I can make do with a laptop for a bit if I need to.

Rumors are that Intel's 10 gen processors will be available (or announced?) in May. Should I wait? What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...

Intels 9900K will still beat AMD's fastest at gaming. The difference with highest details at 4K is minimal however. AMD is faster where core count matters. (Like if you stream and game at same time, encode audio/video)

No one knows for sure what the 10 series will hold performance-wise. But early indications are the top chip will be faster, but consumes TWICE the power. Also Zen 3 (Ryzen 4000) is around the corner. My advice would be to wait for Computex which is in early [edit]June 2nd[/edit]. That will tell you what the latest and greatest will be.

THAT SAID, for a given price point AMD will always deliver better value. So if you have $300 you spend, you'll get more fps with $300 AMD over a $300 Intel part.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
King_V said:
Ugh . . that's a hard call to make, and I hate having to buy in a hurry.

That said, I think I agree with @InvalidError, 10th gen is Intel pushing up core counts and clock speeds over 9th gen, along with even more ridiculous heat production. If you're going with Intel, it doesn't seem like 10th gen is going to be all that compelling.

If you can live with your laptop for a while, great, it never hurts to wait, but since your most intense usage is gaming at 3440x1440, even though Intel has the edge over Ryzen in gaming, that edge is really mostly noticeable if you have a high end video card running at low (1920x1080) resolution. Once the resolution starts climbing, the GPU becomes the larger determinant of gaming performance.

Likewise, again agreeing with Invalid, if you're going to wait for something, the Ryzen 4000 series seems like it would be the more compelling argument to wait.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I don't think I can wait until Ryzen 4. I think I may get a 9600KF.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
digitalgriffin said:
Intels 9900K will still beat AMD's fastest at gaming. The difference with highest details at 4K is minimal however. AMD is faster where core count matters. (Like if you stream and game at same time, encode audio/video)

No one knows for sure what the 10 series will hold performance-wise. But early indications are the top chip will be faster, but consumes TWICE the power. Also Zen 3 (Ryzen 4000) is around the corner. My advice would be to wait for Computex which is in early [edit]June 2nd[/edit]. That will tell you what the latest and greatest will be.

THAT SAID, for a given price point AMD will always deliver better value. So if you have $300 you spend, you'll get more fps with $300 AMD over a $300 Intel part.
Click to expand...

Following up on this. AMD's 3600x and intel's 9600KF are about the same $300 price, with the 9600KF having significantly more overclocking headroom and apparent edge in gaming. Am I missing something on AMD's side?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
turbotong said:
Following up on this. AMD's 3600x and intel's 9600KF are about the same $300 price, with the 9600KF having significantly more overclocking headroom and apparent edge in gaming. Am I missing something on AMD's side?
Click to expand...
-3600(non-X) is a better value than both 9600K and 3600X and is just as fast.
-The 9600K's overclocking headroom amounts to nothing once all 6 cores are being used; the non-hyperthreaded cpu also suffers high frame time problems when that happens.
-More options for cooling, due to how power efficient Ryzen 3000 is.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
turbotong said:
Following up on this. AMD's 3600x and intel's 9600KF are about the same $300 price, with the 9600KF having significantly more overclocking headroom and apparent edge in gaming. Am I missing something on AMD's side?
Click to expand...

I agree with Phaaze. Six cores might do okay today. I'm not so sure in the future. The emphasis seems to be going towards more cores, and I would imagine the leading edge games will start taking advantage of more cores. For example, two years ago, four cores was considered enough. Not any more. The trend is moving upwards. If you want something more future proof, I would lean towards more cores. For example AI path planning use more cores. The threads sit dormant, and all that is fed into the sleeping thread is the various player coordinates. (One for each player)

If you want ultra high frame rates now at lower resolutions, the 9600K is a fine choice. Be sure to pick out a good cooler.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
GarrettL said:
True, but an x570 shouldn’t be obsolete for many, many years to come. Another reason I chose this route.
Click to expand...
Most budget-constrained people won't be buying x570, they'll be getting something like a B450 Tomahawk Max so they can spare an extra $~100 for something more important and will need a new motherboard if they decide they want a 3rd/4th-gen Ryzen for PCIe 4.0 later until the B550 equivalents become available.

With AMD castrating its new lower-end GPUs by giving them PCIe x8 interfaces, PCIe 4.0 (and likely 5.0 in the near future) won't be a luxury even for budget gaming rigs: on the RX5500, PCIe 4.0 can almost double FPS in scenarios where 4GB of VRAM misses the mark.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
turbotong said:
Following up on this. AMD's 3600x and intel's 9600KF are about the same $300 price, with the 9600KF having significantly more overclocking headroom and apparent edge in gaming. Am I missing something on AMD's side?
Click to expand...
The CPUs themselves may be the same price, but to OC the i5 you need a Z series motherboard + aftermarket cooler. Total platform cost is not the same. Also, the 3600X has 6 extra threads.
 
  • Like
Reactions: King_V
Upvote 0 Downvote
What is your budget ,I've always been an Intel fanboy, but that changed with Ryzen 3000 I really enjoy my AMD rig just hoping AMD will bring to market a good high end GPU. Don't want to spend a lot look at the 3600/3600X best bang for buck on a budget..enjoy
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom