Jump to content
Hero
Drakin

Intel Core i9-9900K vs AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

Recommended Posts

Hey guys, I'm traveling to the US soon so I have an opportunity to get some new PC parts.

 

The first thing I am definitely getting is a new monitor, mostly like a 1440P, though I'm still open to the possibility of getting a 4K since I don't expect Star Citizen to ever have significantly over 60fps. For most games I'd definitely go with 1440P, but to experience the full beauty of Star Citizen I think I must at least consider 4K. I'd like to hear any thoughts on this.

 

My GPU is a Nvidia 1080 TI, and I do NOT plan to upgrade that for now. The 2080 is just too expensive at the moment. Maybe next year.

 

What I am considering upgrading is everything else. I may put my old Nvidia GTX 970 into my current gaming rig and then pass it to my daughter. I'd take my 1080 TI and put it in a totally new rig.

 

If I do this, I'm currently looking at either an i9-9900K system or a Ryzen 7 2700X system.

 

The i9-9900K is definitely better for gaming, but the margin varies from game to game. For some it is almost not noticeable, but for others it is significant. Does anyone have any info on how big the margin is for Star Citizen in particular?

 

The i9-9900K is almost twice the price ($600 vs $300), particulary if you include the cost of the cooler that is required (Ryzen 7 2700X incudes one already). Also the i9-9900K sucks up about 50W more power under load (at idle they're about the same).

 

Basically the question here is the value proposition. We know the i9 is better, but is it so much better (for Star Citizen) to justify the price?

 

Also, if I plan to upgrade my PC again in another year (perhaps to pick up a Nvidia 20xx or 21xx), which system would withstand the test of time better? I'm thinking the i9, but I don't really have any logic to back that up.

I just looked up the CIG telemetry data for both, by the way, and at least according to that the i9-9900K is not even 10% faster than the Ryzen 7 2700X when running Star Citizen.

 

Thoughts?

Edited by Drakin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RSLtaken said:

I have a 2700X (stock clock) and I get 70 to 80 FPS with the odd drop now and then. 

 

Sounds good to me! I definitely leaning towards going with the 2700X. I could easily afford the i9-9900, but so far I'm not seeing any compelling reason to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tactical Advance said:

The only reason to go for the i7 is the single/dual core clock is higher.  So for the task that uses less core/thread,  you will get better single thread performance.

 

Also, the i7 8 have amazing overclock results with low heat

 

The thing is, I already have an i7 in my current rig that I'll be passing to my daughter. I'm looking to upgrade just a bit for my next rig, so that's why I'm looking at either the i9-9900K or the Ryzen 2700X.

 

According to CIG's telemetry data ( CIG - Public Telemetry ) both CPUs are really good options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Drakin said:

 

The thing is, I already have an i7 in my current rig that I'll be passing to my daughter. I'm looking to upgrade just a bit for my next rig, so that's why I'm looking at either the i9-9900K or the Ryzen 2700X.

 

According to CIG's telemetry data ( CIG - Public Telemetry ) both CPUs are really good options.

 

Your old  I7 is an older model.  I upgraded from an i7 3773k 4.6ghz to my new I7 8086K and it made a huge difference in FPS with the same GPU.   

 

https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i9-9900K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-2700X/4028vs3958

 

If you have the money get the I7

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/4/2019 at 7:46 AM, Tactical Advance said:

Heat.  Andrewrail bought the 9 and then went back to the 8.

 

Later I realized my 9900k heat issues were strictly voltage regular module (VRM) related, and the blowup I had was actually caused by a faulty component (although I blamed myself for walking away while on Prime95, it would have happened regardless). I purchased an Aorus Gaming Master with a more robust VRM for the 9900k, and that resolved my problem. I still kept the Aorus Gaming 7 with the 8700k and am now using it as my streaming rig over the network via OBS/NDI.

 

The 9900k is running a custom loop at 5.2 Ghz on all eight cores, the 8700k is running at 5.0 Ghz on six both with low thermals. I could push them further, I just do not see any real difference on benchmarking/gaming on either rig. I'm running two extreme overclocked 1080tis on the 9900k so the only thing that could pass these benchmarks on the GPU side are two 2080tis and I just do not feel that is reasonable considering pricing. 

 

Summarized: In having both, I really do not see a difference in gaming between the 9900k and 8700k. If I set them to the same frequency, they are pretty much identical in performance in most gaming titles. Productivity-wise the 9900k takes the cake with those two extra cores and runs a little cooler with solder. The 9900k also seems to be more stable at high frequencies as well, acting more like a bin product (8086k). I almost get the feeling intel's design brief for the 9900k was taking the 8086k material and production process and squeezing in two extra cores with solder. 

 

In BFV multiplayer, I'm at the limit of my 165 refresh 99% of the time with medium settings (droops when V-1s land near me). 

 

 

9900k.jpg

8700k.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/3/2019 at 9:30 AM, Tactical Advance said:

 

Your old  I7 is an older model.  I upgraded from an i7 3773k 4.6ghz to my new I7 8086K and it made a huge difference in FPS with the same GPU.   

 

https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i9-9900K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-2700X/4028vs3958

 

If you have the money get the I7

 

 

 

So I did go ahead and splurge to get the i9-9900K. Also a new motherboard, SD, RAM, etc.

 

And my real splurge came when I decided to get the ASUS ROG 4K HDR 144hz monitor. This monitor is INSANELY expensive at $1700. I could have bought two 4K 60hz monitors and two 2K 144hz monitors for the same price, but it is truly a thing of beauty. The color reproduction is amazing, and I don't really have space for a bunch of additional monitors at my desk (I already have my separate "work" monitor next to my gaming rig). I can choose to play SC in either 4K at 60hz (or more if I can get a higher FPS) or 2K at up to 144hz.

 

I haven't yet had a chance to actually put my new gaming rig together yet, so not yet sure exactly what my top FPS will be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATE: New system is built. I'm now enjoying an average of 62 FPS at 4K in Star Citizen PU.

Interestingly, the CIG Public Telemetry page lists me in the same square as those people who have the RTX 2080, even though I have a GTX 1080TI. I guess it is true that the 1080TI has equal performance to an RTX 2080.

62 FPS is not too bad. I'll have to give 1440P a try to see what kind of FPS I get at that resolution, but I may just be happy to stay at 4K.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...