[SOLVED] Switch from i7-4790 to i5-9600K?

Basinho0211

Prominent
Apr 6, 2020
39
0
530
0
Hi, I need some expert advice, I’m wondering if it would be beneficial to change my older i7-4790 to a i5-9600K. I’m already planning to upgrade my gpu from a NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 to a GTX 1650S (Super) and upgrade my power supply, but I can’t find any evidence that would prove that the i5-9600K is better than my i7-4790. The i5-9600K is also considerably cheap, which means if I were to buy it, I could still have food on the table!
 

Phaaze88

Titan
Ambassador
Userbenchmark is useless for showing performance gains. The difference between those 2 cpus is much smaller than 35% - more like 10%.
1)That site is run by Intel shills. Check out reddit, Youtube, etc, on the matter.
It does have it's uses, but measuring performance isn't one of them.

2)You can't get an accurate representation of performance because the cpu and gpu there are being compared to overclocks instead of stock performance. Results will always be skewed.

@Basinho0211
The 9600K is more expensive than it appears, and it would be a 'sidegrade' for you.
1)You have to shell out more money for a cooler if you don't already have one. A Hyper 212, for example, is fine for stock operation, cuts it a little too close for a good overclock.
2)Overclocking, as well as memory XMP is locked on anything other than the more expensive Z370/Z390 mobos.
3)while the 9600K does have more physical cores, thus giving it stronger single core performance, it also has 2 fewer threads. This is going to bite you in the ass in titles that can use 6 or more threads, and would force you to upgrade again before long.
This cpu was obsolete before it even launched.

4)The non-hyperthreaded cpus, such as that one, suffer high frame time spikes when all their cores are loaded, causing stutter.
 

EndEffeKt_24

Commendable
Mar 27, 2019
659
157
1,340
70
The question really is if the 9600k is better than a Ryzen 3600 or 2600 which would be direct competitors. I personally would take the Ryzen options for multi-threading and the higher upgrade-headroom on the am4 socket.
 
Reactions: RodroX

Basinho0211

Prominent
Apr 6, 2020
39
0
530
0
I have seen this site before, and the preformance of the i5 seems to knock it out of the park when it comes to
The question really is if the 9600k is better than a Ryzen 3600 or 2600 which would be direct competitors. I personally would take the Ryzen options for multi-threading and the higher upgrade-headroom on the am4 socket.
I am thinking of getting a Ryzen, but I’ve used intel my whole life, and no intel I’ve ever used failed on me, the i7-4790 I’m using right now as started to get bad, but is started to get bad after 5 years, but I might look at the Ryzen because they are cheap
 
I have seen this site before, and the preformance of the i5 seems to knock it out of the park when it comes to

I am thinking of getting a Ryzen, but I’ve used intel my whole life, and no intel I’ve ever used failed on me, the i7-4790 I’m using right now as started to get bad, but is started to get bad after 5 years, but I might look at the Ryzen because they are cheap
Same always used intel and yes AMD are ch
I have seen this site before, and the preformance of the i5 seems to knock it out of the park when it comes to

I am thinking of getting a Ryzen, but I’ve used intel my whole life, and no intel I’ve ever used failed on me, the i7-4790 I’m using right now as started to get bad, but is started to get bad after 5 years, but I might look at the Ryzen because they are cheap
Yeah i edited my post you might need new motherboard to surrport the gen of the motherboard socket!
 
Reactions: RodroX

Phaaze88

Titan
Ambassador
Userbenchmark is useless for showing performance gains. The difference between those 2 cpus is much smaller than 35% - more like 10%.
1)That site is run by Intel shills. Check out reddit, Youtube, etc, on the matter.
It does have it's uses, but measuring performance isn't one of them.

2)You can't get an accurate representation of performance because the cpu and gpu there are being compared to overclocks instead of stock performance. Results will always be skewed.

@Basinho0211
The 9600K is more expensive than it appears, and it would be a 'sidegrade' for you.
1)You have to shell out more money for a cooler if you don't already have one. A Hyper 212, for example, is fine for stock operation, cuts it a little too close for a good overclock.
2)Overclocking, as well as memory XMP is locked on anything other than the more expensive Z370/Z390 mobos.
3)while the 9600K does have more physical cores, thus giving it stronger single core performance, it also has 2 fewer threads. This is going to bite you in the ass in titles that can use 6 or more threads, and would force you to upgrade again before long.
This cpu was obsolete before it even launched.

4)The non-hyperthreaded cpus, such as that one, suffer high frame time spikes when all their cores are loaded, causing stutter.
 
I have to agree with many here, theres no much point going from a Core i7 4xxx to a Core i5 9600K

Now if you say should I change for a Core i7 9700K, than that will be a better option, since it has some serious fire power.

Then again, considering what AMD and Intel are about to launch (lets hope this year, September at least for AMD), I would either go with a Ryzen 5/7 3xxx + AM4 platform to be able to upgrade again later on (the new rumor said the Ryzen 4xxx will come with a 5nm node, but I guess that doesn't make much sense at all, probably some wrong translation); or just wait for the new (yet old architecture) intel 10xxx launch.

Cheers
 
D

Deleted member 1560910

Guest
If anything you are lossing 2 threads. I dont like this upgrade 9700k would be better
 

Basinho0211

Prominent
Apr 6, 2020
39
0
530
0
Userbenchmark is useless for showing performance gains. The difference between those 2 cpus is much smaller than 35% - more like 10%.
1)That site is run by Intel shills. Check out reddit, Youtube, etc, on the matter.
It does have it's uses, but measuring performance isn't one of them.

2)You can't get an accurate representation of performance because the cpu and gpu there are being compared to overclocks instead of stock performance. Results will always be skewed.

@Basinho0211
The 9600K is more expensive than it appears, and it would be a 'sidegrade' for you.
1)You have to shell out more money for a cooler if you don't already have one. A Hyper 212, for example, is fine for stock operation, cuts it a little too close for a good overclock.
2)Overclocking, as well as memory XMP is locked on anything other than the more expensive Z370/Z390 mobos.
3)while the 9600K does have more physical cores, thus giving it stronger single core performance, it also has 2 fewer threads. This is going to bite you in the ass in titles that can use 6 or more threads, and would force you to upgrade again before long.
This cpu was obsolete before it even launched.

4)The non-hyperthreaded cpus, such as that one, suffer high frame time spikes when all their cores are loaded, causing stutter.
Thanks, just what I needed. I also figured out that the best CPU my motherboard can use is just an i7-4790K, sorry so much for not mentioning that I already have a motherboard with me.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS