I9 9900k

Why should I buy this/why shouldn't I buy this piece of hardware?
Upgrading from a 4770k

Attached: i9.jpg (1500x1500, 107K)

Other urls found in this thread:

technical.city/en/cpu/Core-i9-9900K-vs-Ryzen-7-2700X
youtube.com/watch?v=hzIGD9qJsaQ
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

don't because you'll hurt amd's feelings

Because even if you don't like AMD, their new lineup should bring down the cost of Intel CPUs.

if you have the money to blow sure. However the price to performance really isn't there except for high res gaymen, video editing and the like.

+it's the fastest processor on the market for mainstream processors
-but only ~20% faster than 2700x
-it also costs nearly twice as much and doesn't come with a cooler

If it's not going to put a dent in your wallet then sure.

Are you merely pretending to be retarded? Intel never lowers prices.

I mean they are by far the superior processors after all. AMD are for poorfags

So long as I get 60fps in gaymes I couldn't give a fuck which one gets 170 and which one gets 190.

Yes sir please making sure to buying the Intel products for best stability and performance. There are no rival to this Cpu.

the 9900K is the fastest CPU currently available for a non-HEDT/server chipset. It runs hot and it draws a shitload of power, even relative to its performance. Prices are likely to drop in about a month and a half, as Zen 2 will be announced.

It's way past the point of diminishing returns. If you want an Intel processor, get the 9700K.

Hey does anybody know how to permanently remove the 20+ security mitigations on my intel system that cut SSD performance literally in HALF? I just want a fast computer, security doesn't matter.

Attached: meltdown_crystal_disk_mark_6_4k_read_q32_t1_broadwell_xps13_corei5-100747467-large.jpg (700x421, 33K)

Because you can get a threadripper for that many shekels.

Wait for Zen 2 like the rest of us. 9900k is overpriced and in a bad spot in the perf/watt.

These benchmarks are already confirmed fake by result of internal testing. Performance is not negative effected by this patches.

And yet nobody buys Intel.

>t. schomo mcsteinerburg

Attached: 950_Atto.png (1316x1634, 85K)

If you have money to throw away sure. Otherwise unless you really need the performance you should go with the 8600K, R5 2600/X or 8700k, they have better value.

4770K is still pretty decent. You've used it for all those years, I suggest you wait a couple more months because new CPUs are supposed to be announced/launched. Buying right now is likely going to be a bad move since new shit is imminent, so unless you really need to, wait a bit longer.

Explain why you're even considering it.
$500+, insane power draw, insane thermals, requires insane cooler.
For literally $200-300 less, you can get a CPU that's within 10-15% performance. And you can put that money towards the rest of your build (better graphics card, etc)

>he actually installed security updates

What motherboard you got?

I mean in your current system.

technical.city/en/cpu/Core-i9-9900K-vs-Ryzen-7-2700X

JUST

this is always the case; they hype train never stops rolling

>20% better in (((most))) applications
>70% more expensive
Yeah that makes sense.

Because you should wait and spend the money on a top of the line Zen 2 Threadripper instead, and get more cores for your money with similar single threaded performance.

No, we're not always 2 months away from major CPU releases, because major CPU releases do not happen every 2 months.

that's why I said JUST you retard, 2700x is a much better deal, 2600x is even cheaper and still has comparable performance

Shup up shill

If you're upgrading from a 4770K like I am, then it's pretty clear you should get a 3700X in the middle of this year.

If you really want to stay with Intel, and are happy to spend a bit more for less performance, then just get a 9700K.

Attached: 1555402013230.jpg (1366x768, 382K)

see yourself and lets see who's the shill here

youtube.com/watch?v=hzIGD9qJsaQ

Attached: 1548083053400.gif (480x238, 443K)

You say those things but did not provide proof to back them up

The SSD thing seems to be true, as far as I'm concerned.

>linking pajeet YT videos
Kill yourself currynigger

I guess Epyc never happened?

9900K costs $899 in Australia and doesn't even come with a cooler
2700X costs $469 and comes with a cooler.

Pretty clear what people upgrading this year should get, a 3700X.

I don't think the AMD X SKUs come with coolers dawg.

>using stock coolers

my 2700x x came with one

I just looked at two big retailers here and they both have them with coolers included

If you're just gonna play games, pick the 9700k instead, it's only 3% slower. For productivity stuff you could make an argument for it.

Attached: Untitled.png (1555x309, 40K)

My bad, that was the 1800X. I didn't realize they'd started including them in the 2000 series. Neat.

9400f you retard. It's the only logical intel upgrade. Even then it's shit.

>Multi-core doesn't matter!
>Productivity doesn't matter!
>Price/performance doesn't matter!
>Performance per watt doesn't matter!
>Power usage doesn't matter!
>Temperatures don't matter!
>Soldered dies don't matter!
>Stutters don't matter!
>Streaming doesn't matter!
>Data centers don't matter!
>Locked CPUs don't matter!
>OEMs don't matter!
>Hyperscalers don't matter!
>Upgradeability doesn't matter!
>Anti-competitive business practices don't matter!
>Locked platform features don't matter!
>Synthetic loads don't matter!
>PCI-e lanes don't matter!
>Burnt pins don't matter!
>Heat doesn't matter!
>1771w cooler doesn't matter!
>Server space doesn't matter!
>ECC support doesn't matter!
>Free RAID doesn't matter!
>NVMe RAID doesn't matter!
>StoreMI doesn't matter!
>IPC doesn't matter!
>7nm doesn't matter!
>HEDT doesn't matter!
>Stock coolers don't matter!
>Backdoors dont matter!
>Refreshes dont matter!
>Security doesn't matter!
>Games don't ALWAYS matter!
>Enterprise doesn't matter!
>Hyperthreading doesn't matter!
>VMware doesn't matter!
>MySQL doesn't matter!
>Unix doesn't matter!
>Linux doesn't matter!
>Waffer yields don't matter!
>Benchmarks after full patches don't matter!
>Asian markets don't matter!
>Own fabrics don't matter!
>Chipset lithography doesn't matter!
>Cray doesn't matter!
>Cisco doesn't matter!
>HPE doesn't matter!
>AZURE doesn't matter!
>5nm doesn't matter!
>TDP doesn't matter!
>10nm doesn't matter!
>Cache doesn't matter!
>IGPU doesn't matter!
>PCI-Express 4.0 doesn't matter!
>*NEW* Amazon sales don't matter!
>*NEW* Prime95 AVX doesn't matter!
>*NEW* Custom Foundry Business doesn't matter!
>*NEW* Planned obsolescence doesnt matter!

What motherboard you currrently running?

You're right, and if I was to upgrade last year I probably would have bought a 9700K

my 2600x did. never seen above 60C

ape.
if you even consider a 9900k, you are probably a gaymur and you don't need 16 threads on a CPU. get a 9700k and put the money you just saved on a GPU.

This debacle reminds me so much of Pentium 4.
Overpriced space-heaters and people keep buying them.

I remember disabling some of them on my sandy bridge machine with kernel arguments.

Even the 8700K @ 5.2ghz is enough to bottleneck an RTX 2080TI in Tomb Raider as evident from Jay's recent video and it wasn't a thread bottleneck.

Pairing it with Ryzen anything is fucking stupid.

If you're using something like an RTX 2060, then basically any current gen 6C/6T or better CPU will make full use of it.

all these performance nerfs and ayymd is still slower.

9900k is the fastest single threaded x86/x64 CPU in the world which matters in 95% of the applications we use daily. Single core performance is so good, that it can beat even the 10 core Intel HEDT CPUs and nearly catch up to 12 core part.
However, if your just gaming or casual user, its of no use. Even an OC'd 2600k is enough to push 60 frames in every game.
I bought a 9900k because I do C++ software dev and fast compile/build performance matters to me. Otherwise, my previous OC'd 2600k is indistinguishable from 9900k in games or other tasks like web browsing.

AMDtard
>time doesn't matter

Keep waiting for your next AMD promise.

Single thread matters, yes, but it's not the dominant determiner of performance for many people. Gaming is one area where you see the most performance increases, if you have a god tier GPU and are doing high refresh rate gaming.
For compiling, yeah, single thread matters a lot. For CAD and CFD programs it varies from program to program and sometimes even on project to project. Video editing and photo editing you want multithreaded performance. So it all depends on what your use case is.

You have it backwards. Games are mostly single threaded and hence gain with single threaded performance in high refresh gaming. Compiling benefits from multi-threading because you can compile/build several files in parallel.

There is so much wrong with this it's hilarious...

>1. Use GRC's InSpectre tool to disable the Spectre and Meltdown software-level mitigations
>2. If you're on Windows, go to C:\Windows\System32 and rename mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll to mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll.bak (this disables the microcode-level mitigations)
>3. Downgrade your BIOS to a version before the microcode patches were introduced

I fuckt ur mum m8

>95% of the applications
more like 95% of gaymes

>compiling
>single threaded
what a fucking retard, seriously consider to stop breathing and wasting oxygen

>unable to read
>calling anyone else retard

Price to performance ratio is very bad, OP. You get very little for so much money, regardless if it's Intel or AMD.

BUY INTEL

Attached: 1527629778452.jpg (679x758, 54K)

Games only matter if Intel is winning :)

Are you retarded? Even under linux intol shit your ssd Performance like no other