[SOLVED] Would a 11700K be in any way a downgrade from a 10700K?

[Cyber_Akuma]

CPU: 10700K
Motherboard: Z490 Aorus Pro AX

I generally don't build a new system often, typically only every several years when my current system is just simply too old to even be reasonably upgraded to run even decently with current software, so I am not too familiar with differences between a single CPU generation.

In fact, if my current 3770K system had not died on me, I would still be running that as it was still more than adequate for my gaming uses, even if it was starting to suffer from virtualized systems. And if it wasn't for the fact that I needed to replace it quick and the only parts I could get reasonably and at a cheap price were a 10700K for less than a 5600X and a z490 board for cheaper than an AMD equivalent and needed Intel RAID support to recover some data I would have just gone AMD.

But regardless, I have a 10700K system right now, and I am going to likely be stuck with it for many years, but my motherboard apparently has some enhancements that will only work if I install an 11th gen CPU in it. It supports PCIe 4.0 and will enable that for some of it's current PCIe 3.0 ports, as well as enable a currently disabled 3rd m.2 NVME port that will operate in 4.0 unlike the current ones that operate in 3.0. So the main reason I want a 11700K is not for performance over my 10700K, but to get PCie 4.0 support.

I know that for now 4.0 isn't much of a difference over 3.0, but as I said, I will be stuck with this system for years, and it could very well be a more important factor later on (both for GPUs and if DirectStorage starts to matter later on), so I just wanted to make sure what my options would be in the future.

I know that the 11900K is more or less a downgrade from the 10900K in just about every way except for PCIe 4.0, but from my understanding the 11700K wasn't hit as badly compared to the 10700K right?

What I want to know is, if I were to replace my 10700K with a 11700K, would it perform worse in any way? In terms of single-core/threaded performance, multi-core performance, hyperthreading, thermals, etc? I am ok with it performing the same as my 10700K since as I said, the main reason I want it is for PCIe 4.0 support, but I don't want it to perform even worse than my current 10700K or run hotter..... since when running a CPU torture test with AVX enabled my current 10700K already came very close to thermal throttling. (I had heard that some games are starting to implement AVX now, so I don't think it's as ignorable as it used to be, temps are fine when I turn AVX off).

And as mentioned, since I am not too familiar with single-gen CPU upgrades, how likely is it that a microcode update could in any way improve the 11700K? Has there ever been a decent improvement in performance or thermals from a microcode update? Or is it almost never much of a difference and I should not even bother considering that a possibility? (I know that there were several small microcode updates around launch, no idea how common that is or if I should bother to expect any more.... especially ones that do anything noticeable)

Now, granted, I am not going to be rushing out and getting a 11700K anytime soon. I will likely do this within about a year if it's feasible for me to do so. I just wanted to know if there would be any reason for me not to upgrade from a 10700K to a 11700K if my main reason was to get PCIe 4.0 support and I am fine with it performing the same as my 10700K just as long as it doesn't in any way perform any worse?

 

[Karadjgne]

What you have is a bunch of pcie3.0 parts. Motherboard, storage, cpu etc. While the motherboard might have pcie4.0 support, it's limited to certain things, like the gpu and

Upgrade to PCIe 4.0 storage performance on the Z490 platform with AORUS RAID SSD 2TB. The SSD is embedded with RAID controller, transfer speed up to amazing 6300 MB/s. The performance is twice faster than regular PCIe 3.0 SSD. It surely brings high efficiency to your work, shorten the time of waiting. It’s the perfect solution for prosumers like video editors, 3D file creators and engineers who make giant files daily. Further more, Users can easily to configure RAID array to meet your needs under BIOS.

which honestly won't affect gaming and most other aspects.

Honestly, pcie4.0 currently isn't worth the upgrade, not unless you are aiming for 4k/144Hz or 8k gaming, where gpu bandwidth can be a factor. You'd be hard pressed to get a 3090 to soak up the entire bandwidth of pcie3.0 x16, especially considering the 3090 was intended with SLI support, which would max out at pcie4.0 x8, the same thing as pcie3.0 x16.

Save your money, when you are ready to upgrade to take advantage of pcie4.0, DDR5 will most likely be a thing and you'd need a new platform anyway. Most likely LGA1200 will be the last of the Intel DDR4 platforms, and USB-C will have a stronger impact. Your current pc will be good enough until then.

 

[siaan312]

The i9 11900k is not worse than the 10900k.
It's different.
It's 12-18% faster in single core, but has 2 less cores, and takes about 25-35 watts on average.
Depending on what you do, it might be a pretty solid upgrade, or a slight downgrade. it's not "worse."
The i7 is on an even better ground, having the same amount of cores as before, but again 12-18% faster.

i7 11700k is quite a bit faster in single core performance than the 10700k, and just slightly faster or on equal ground in multicore.

As for pci-e 4.0, you have a solid 3-5 years before it's really needed, I can almost guarantee it, so don't hurry with the purchase, give it a few years.
Who knows, maybe in 4 years we'll have a generation that's 120% faster than the old one with a breakthrough in cpu innovation.

Anyways, The 11700k does run a bit hotter than the 10700k. I'd say about 2-3C hotter, depending on the scenario.

 

[siaan312]

What you have is a bunch of pcie3.0 parts. Motherboard, storage, cpu etc. While the motherboard might have pcie4.0 support, it's limited to certain things, like the gpu and
which honestly won't affect gaming and most other aspects.

Honestly, pcie4.0 currently isn't worth the upgrade, not unless you are aiming for 4k/144Hz or 8k gaming, where gpu bandwidth can be a factor. You'd be hard pressed to get a 3090 to soak up the entire bandwidth of pcie3.0 x16, especially considering the 3090 was intended with SLI support, which would max out at pcie4.0 x8, the same thing as pcie3.0 x16.

Save your money, when you are ready to upgrade to take advantage of pcie4.0, DDR5 will most likely be a thing and you'd need a new platform anyway. Most likely LGA1200 will be the last of the Intel DDR4 platforms, and USB-C will have a stronger impact. Your current pc will be good enough until then.

Agreed on the waiting for next gen and not bothering with 11th just for pci-e 4.0



But just an FYI, the 3090 wasn't made with SLI in mind. They threw it in basically to say: okay, SLI is officially dead, you can try it one last time just to see how bad it is.

 

[Cyber_Akuma]

What you have is a bunch of pcie3.0 parts. Motherboard, storage, cpu etc. While the motherboard might have pcie4.0 support, it's limited to certain things, like the gpu and which honestly won't affect gaming and most other aspects.

Yes I have a bunch of 3.0 parts, but only because I had to cannibalize most of the parts from said 3770K system as I could not afford (especially in this market) an entirely new build, but I am going to be replacing all of those when I can and putting them back in the 3770K if I can get it working right as a backup system.

Honestly, pcie4.0 currently isn't worth the upgrade, not unless you are aiming for 4k/144Hz or 8k gaming, where gpu bandwidth can be a factor. You'd be hard pressed to get a 3090 to soak up the entire bandwidth of pcie3.0 x16, especially considering the 3090 was intended with SLI support, which would max out at pcie4.0 x8, the same thing as pcie3.0 x16.

I do want to eventually get on board with 4K and at least 120FPS once I can upgrade my GPU and monitor. Likely not going to be able to afford a new GPU until the RTX4000 series if that.

Save your money, when you are ready to upgrade to take advantage of pcie4.0, DDR5 will most likely be a thing and you'd need a new platform anyway. Most likely LGA1200 will be the last of the Intel DDR4 platforms, and USB-C will have a stronger impact. Your current pc will be good enough until then.

Again, since I just built this 10700K since I needed to replace the dead 3770K, I can't really afford to do ANOTHER entirely new build anytime soon, so my only options are upgrading this current system.

I just wanted to make sure that I would not be in any way worse off than with my 10700K if I upgrade it to a 11700K.

As for pci-e 4.0, you have a solid 3-5 years before it's really needed, I can almost guarantee it, so don't hurry with the purchase, give it a few years.

Well, I had that 3770K since 2012, and would have still had it as my main system had it not died on me. I am fully expecting this 10700K/Possible11700K system to be my main system for far longer than 3-5 years.

And I don't mind waiting, not an upgrade I am going to do anytime soon. I just don't want to wait so long that it might become hard to find a 11700K (especially one that was not used) or sell my 10700K for anything other than pocket change.

Anyways, The 11700k does run a bit hotter than the 10700k. I'd say about 2-3C hotter, depending on the scenario.

Hmm, that's a bit worrying. In the most extreme example I had a spike on one of the cores that was a mere 4C below throttling range, on average they were about 8-10C from throttling in the hardest torture test I put the CPU under with AVX enabled.

Agreed on the waiting for next gen and not bothering with 11th just for pci-e 4.0

Problem with that is I highly doubt my motherboard will support 12th Gen CPUs, and I won't be able to build an entirely new system anytime soon.

Had my 3770K system not died on me I would have waited until another gen or two and when prices were sane again, my system dying kinda forced my hand and now I am going to be stuck with this one for a while.

 

[Bassman999]

PCIE4 gives solid speed increases on NVMe M.2 speeds when you buy 4.0 drives, if you need that

 

[USAFRet]

PCIE4 gives solid speed increases on NVMe M.2 speeds when you buy 4.0 drives, if you need that

Depending on use.

In a lot of use cases, fractions of a second, at best.

 

[mdd1963]

the 11700K should be a complete 'non-consideration factor' for 10700K owners, IMO....

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jVAfk4AG3A&t=626s


(Although the 11700K's performance is not included in the above gaming comparison, the 11900K is....and that says it all.)

 

[geofelt]

I7-10700K has 16 threads and a passmark rating of 19577. The single thread rating is 3083
I7-11700K has same 16 threads and a rating of 26044/3573.

In theory, 11th gen is a bit better, but likely not worth spending much to change it out.

You are unlikely to see any great performance boost from pcie 4.0 ssd devices to warrant the change.

 

[sonofjesse]

I suggest never upgrading from year X to year X+1, you just don't see a big enough increase in performance IMHO.

The 11700k costs more than than the 10850k. I think the 10850k is better value for most people, more cores, and its cheaper.

Also the 10700 non K is a great value at 229 when its on sale.

I run my 10700k on B560 MB and it works great, you don't really need PCIE 4 gen for NVME drives, unless you want bragging rights and willing to spend the cash on sn850 or 980 pro.

Good luck!

 

[Cyber_Akuma]

I suggest never upgrading from year X to year X+1, you just don't see a big enough increase in performance IMHO.

The 11700k costs more than than the 10850k. I think the 10850k is better value for most people, more cores, and its cheaper.

Well like I said, I want to upgrade not for performance, but to get PCIe 4.0 support in the long run, just as long as upgrading does not give me worse performance, I am fine with it being equal performance.

 

[siaan312]

PCIE4 gives solid speed increases on NVMe M.2 speeds when you buy 4.0 drives, if you need that

Solid sequential numbers. not real world performance.
When have you last copied a terabyte from 1 super fast ssd to another, and not just from your HDD nas or the internet?

 

[siaan312]

Yes I have a bunch of 3.0 parts, but only because I had to cannibalize most of the parts from said 3770K system as I could not afford (especially in this market) an entirely new build, but I am going to be replacing all of those when I can and putting them back in the 3770K if I can get it working right as a backup system.



I do want to eventually get on board with 4K and at least 120FPS once I can upgrade my GPU and monitor. Likely not going to be able to afford a new GPU until the RTX4000 series if that.



Again, since I just built this 10700K since I needed to replace the dead 3770K, I can't really afford to do ANOTHER entirely new build anytime soon, so my only options are upgrading this current system.

I just wanted to make sure that I would not be in any way worse off than with my 10700K if I upgrade it to a 11700K.



Well, I had that 3770K since 2012, and would have still had it as my main system had it not died on me. I am fully expecting this 10700K/Possible11700K system to be my main system for far longer than 3-5 years.

And I don't mind waiting, not an upgrade I am going to do anytime soon. I just don't want to wait so long that it might become hard to find a 11700K (especially one that was not used) or sell my 10700K for anything other than pocket change.



Hmm, that's a bit worrying. In the most extreme example I had a spike on one of the cores that was a mere 4C below throttling range, on average they were about 8-10C from throttling in the hardest torture test I put the CPU under with AVX enabled.



Problem with that is I highly doubt my motherboard will support 12th Gen CPUs, and I won't be able to build an entirely new system anytime soon.

Had my 3770K system not died on me I would have waited until another gen or two and when prices were sane again, my system dying kinda forced my hand and now I am going to be stuck with this one for a while.

Then it might be worthwhile to change out your cooler.
A nice, small, nh-u12S won't be throttled by such a load, or any 140/240 mm aio.

 

[Cyber_Akuma]

Solid sequential numbers. not real world performance.
When have you last copied a terabyte from 1 super fast ssd to another, and not just from your HDD nas or the internet?

Isn't the whole point of DirectStorage not just about raw access speed, but the GPU being able to directly access the data on the NVME without having to go through the CPU?

Then it might be worthwhile to change out your cooler.
A nice, small, nh-u12S won't be throttled by such a load, or any 140/240 mm aio.

A U12S? I currently have a D15S with two fans installed in this thing, that's beyond the U12S

 

[siaan312]

Isn't the whole point of DirectStorage not just about raw access speed, but the GPU being able to directly access the data on the NVME without having to go through the CPU?



A U12S? I currently have a D15S with two fans installed in this thing, that's beyond the U12S

You have a d15s and your chip is almost throttling? even overclocked, and with avx that should not happen, or be even close.
Try reseeding your cooler and replacing the thermal paste.

About what you said about directstorage, somewhat.
Basically it makes it so the gpu could talk to the ssd directly, instead of to the ram, vram and cache.
Also, directstorage is not as close as you think it is.
I give it a minimum of 3 years before even starting to show on games, and atleast 5 years before it's wide spread. Though this is based on nothing, You can still believe DS is a few years off.
And even when DS is released, I personally believe gen 3 ssds would be more than enough.

 

[Cyber_Akuma]

You have a d15s and your chip is almost throttling? even overclocked, and with avx that should not happen, or be even close.
Try reseeding your cooler and replacing the thermal paste.

MCE is also enabled, I assume that plays a big factor in that, and that's only with AVX enabled, I get in the 70s-80s without AVX even with MCE enabled when testing with things like Prime95 or OCCT.

I give it a minimum of 3 years before even starting to show on games, and atleast 5 years before it's wide spread. Though this is based on nothing, You can still believe DS is a few years off.
And even when DS is released, I personally believe gen 3 ssds would be more than enough.

That's the thing though. My 3770K was built 8 years ago, and I was still using it as my main system, had it not died on me I would still be using it today. I am definitely going to be using this new system for more than 5 years, especially since a GPU upgrade tends to go a long way for the vast majority of games out there while older CPUs tend to still remain quite viable for gaming.

This is not a "I will see improvements TODAY if I upgrade" thing, more of a "If I wanted to do this someday, will I see a downgrade in any way over my 10700K if I basically just want my current system but with PCIe 4.0"

 

[siaan312]

MCE is also enabled, I assume that plays a big factor in that, and that's only with AVX enabled, I get in the 70s-80s without AVX even with MCE enabled when testing with things like Prime95 or OCCT.



That's the thing though. My 3770K was built 8 years ago, and I was still using it as my main system, had it not died on me I would still be using it today. I am definitely going to be using this new system for more than 5 years, especially since a GPU upgrade tends to go a long way for the vast majority of games out there while older CPUs tend to still remain quite viable for gaming.

This is not a "I will see improvements TODAY if I upgrade" thing, more of a "If I wanted to do this someday, will I see a downgrade in any way over my 10700K if I basically just want my current system but with PCIe 4.0"

Gotcha.
As mentioned, I think gen 3 ssds would also still be okay for DS.