Steam 설치
로그인
|
언어
简体中文(중국어 간체)
繁體中文(중국어 번체)
日本語(일본어)
ไทย(태국어)
Български(불가리아어)
Čeština(체코어)
Dansk(덴마크어)
Deutsch(독일어)
English(영어)
Español - España(스페인어 - 스페인)
Español - Latinoamérica(스페인어 - 중남미)
Ελληνικά(그리스어)
Français(프랑스어)
Italiano(이탈리아어)
Bahasa Indonesia(인도네시아어)
Magyar(헝가리어)
Nederlands(네덜란드어)
Norsk(노르웨이어)
Polski(폴란드어)
Português(포르투갈어 - 포르투갈)
Português - Brasil(포르투갈어 - 브라질)
Română(루마니아어)
Русский(러시아어)
Suomi(핀란드어)
Svenska(스웨덴어)
Türkçe(튀르키예어)
Tiếng Việt(베트남어)
Українська(우크라이나어)
번역 관련 문제 보고
Well, i'll think bout that, but that still leaves me with the issue that my cpu doesn't work the way its supposed to. If I buy a new mobo, how will I know it won't just be the same as the current problem?
You might need a BIOS update.
Cheaper doesn't mean better, or good at all. If you can't afford Z390 and a 9700K, you shouldn't be buying Intel, rather you should be buying AMD. Specifically the R5 3600 and a B450 Tomahawk MAX.
Now for the update. The BIOS Update is done, and it fixed the issue with the lag.
Thanks for the help.
Well you made a mistake, because the whole point of Intel is the overclockability, as competition on AMD side defeats the purpose of running Intel at stock. You get less bang for buck by not overclocking an Intel K chip because you're not making the most of what you paid for.
Everyone will question your decision because of this.
Rusty, ignore the amd fanboys. Overclocking a 9700 isn't going to do anything because the 9700 at stock is already faster than any current gpu can handle.
You can see in this review the difference in fps between a 9700 at stock and full overclock with the fastest gpu available. 0 to 3%.
https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3421-intel-i7-9700k-review-benchmark-vs-8700k-and-more
All intel cpus and mobos support operating the pc above stock speeds. The main difference between a B365 and Z390 mobo is the upper limit of how high the cpu and memory can be overclocked. The problem was never going to be buying a B365 mobo.
However your psu might need replacement in the fullness of time. If it's more than a few years old it might not be able to provide the level of smoothness in power feeds required by modern hardware.
There is a psu tier list. High end gaming systems run best with a Tier A or higher.
https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/1116640-psu-tier-list-40-rev-201/
1. Nobody is fanboying here. You're just getting mad that people support AMD because their chips are more cost effective than Intel's chips.
The difference between the 3600 and 9700K is usually within 10~15 FPS in most cases, but the 3600 uses less considerably power (usually around 50W less on average in raw power consumption) and costs around 160$ USD less than the 9700K.
So don't mistake facts for just plain fanboying, because it only makes you look like the fanboy for sticking by Intel despite how much of a joke they're making themselves to be.
2. ~3% is still a difference, so your statement that OC won't do anything is immediately false. It's free performance.
3. Depending on how cheap the power delivery is, it can prove to be inefficient. A huge example of this on AMD side is with the A320 motherboards, a lot of which struggled even to fully handle the stock turbo speed of the R3 1200.
Many cheaper B450 motherboards like the B450M-DS3H do not handle higher power chips like the 2700X as well as X470 boards did, something that I've tested myself. My DS3H only runs the 2700X at 4 GHz under normal gaming loads, while my X470 Gaming 7 was consistently 4.3~4.35 with one core boosting up to 4.5 GHz.
It all comes down to the power delivery.
Now they just debating on motherboard choice. But I have to agree, you only buy a Intel "B" chipset for locked cpus and for cheaper systems overall. Never use them for a "K" model cpu. Yes it supports those, but it's always a question of how well can it really handle them due to poorer VRMs and ram support. Always use a Intel "Z" chipset for a "K" cpu