i9-10900X vs i9-9900K Which is better?

[mimizukari]

topic

[mimizukari]

also is the difference between quad channel and dual channel ram that significant seeing as that's one of the benefits of 10900X?

[-=SOF=-WID99]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vjj6UyPGUtE

[Dr.Shadowds 🐉]

Well if the 9900k has higher clock speeds, then it would be the better gaming performance by how much not sure since it variest by a lot between games, since the IPC gains between each gen is really small, so take it with a grain of salt. The 10900x has 2 more cores than the 9900k that just something to note, so more multitasking there.

Depending on the very game itself you may get benefits between dual, and quad channel that can even give some performance, but don't expect by much.

Depending what you're aiming towards, get what you think you value more most. Good example shown in the video above.

[mimizukari]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Dr.Shadowds 🐉:

Well if the 9900k has higher clock speeds, then it would be the better gaming performance by how much not sure since it variest by a lot between games, since the IPC gains between each gen is really small, so take it with a grain of salt. The 10900x has 2 more cores than the 9900k that just something to note, so more multitasking there.

Depending on the very game itself you may get benefits between dual, and quad channel that can even give some performance, but don't expect by much.

Depending what you're aiming towards, get what you think you value more most. Good example shown in the video above.

so according to above, in almost all cases 10900X OC> 9900K, for literally everything?

[Dr.Shadowds 🐉]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Kurumi Tokisaki:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Dr.Shadowds 🐉:

Well if the 9900k has higher clock speeds, then it would be the better gaming performance by how much not sure since it variest by a lot between games, since the IPC gains between each gen is really small, so take it with a grain of salt. The 10900x has 2 more cores than the 9900k that just something to note, so more multitasking there.

Depending on the very game itself you may get benefits between dual, and quad channel that can even give some performance, but don't expect by much.

Depending what you're aiming towards, get what you think you value more most. Good example shown in the video above.

so according to above, in almost all cases 10900X OC> 9900K, for literally everything?

Well to put it that way yes, gaming wise 9900k will shine-ish but whatever you value more really.

IMO I would get 10900x over the 9900k that's just me. I believe 10900x would be price the same, or if not cheaper, but whatever works best for you really, you can't go wrong with either one truely.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Does it matter? Ryzen is already better then 10th gen before they released.

[xSOSxHawkens]

neither.

3800x, 3900x, 3950x or threadripper...

[r.linder]

9900K/KF/KS or 3900X/3950X.

[Zireth]

Out of practicality? 9900k

For a workstation I would actually recommend something like a 3950X or threadripper 3950x I recommend more because it’s easier to find a cooler that’ll fit and it’s better all around than a threadripper with usually takes a hit in gaming.

I would never suggest a 10900x, waste of money that can be obtained via overclocking the cpu it was supposed to replace.

[mimizukari]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από ЯΣП:

Out of practicality? 9900k

For a workstation I would actually recommend something like a 3950X or threadripper 3950x I recommend more because it’s easier to find a cooler that’ll fit and it’s better all around than a threadripper with usually takes a hit in gaming.

I would never suggest a 10900x, waste of money that can be obtained via overclocking the cpu it was supposed to replace.

but 10900X oc can reach some insane levels, almost stock 10980XE performance for gaming, according to the benchmarks in that video.

[xSOSxHawkens]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Kurumi Tokisaki:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από ЯΣП:

Out of practicality? 9900k

For a workstation I would actually recommend something like a 3950X or threadripper 3950x I recommend more because it’s easier to find a cooler that’ll fit and it’s better all around than a threadripper with usually takes a hit in gaming.

I would never suggest a 10900x, waste of money that can be obtained via overclocking the cpu it was supposed to replace.

but 10900X oc can reach some insane levels, almost stock 10980XE performance for gaming, according to the benchmarks in that video.

10900x is a *joke*

10c/20t @ $1,000+...

Meanwhile over in AMD land we have...

12c/24t @ $500 or less regularly (paid 470 for mine) via a 3900x...

For the same 1K from AMD you could get 16c/32t with *great* gaming speeds and workstation speeds *AND* still have $300 left over to put on a better GPU, RAM, SSD (hello PCIe 4.0) or motherboard...

[mimizukari]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από xSOSxHawkens:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Kurumi Tokisaki:

but 10900X oc can reach some insane levels, almost stock 10980XE performance for gaming, according to the benchmarks in that video.

10900x is a *joke*

10c/20t @ $1,000+...

Meanwhile over in AMD land we have...

12c/24t @ $500 or less regularly (paid 470 for mine) via a 3900x...

For the same 1K from AMD you could get 16c/32t with *great* gaming speeds and workstation speeds *AND* still have $300 left over to put on a better GPU, RAM, SSD (hello PCIe 4.0) or motherboard...

lol where are you getting it for $1000? they are only $600. also AMD ryzen 3950x does not perform as well in games as 9900k/10900X, AMD is not an option for serious gaming, only for workstations.

[Zireth]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Kurumi Tokisaki:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από ЯΣП:

Out of practicality? 9900k

For a workstation I would actually recommend something like a 3950X or threadripper 3950x I recommend more because it’s easier to find a cooler that’ll fit and it’s better all around than a threadripper with usually takes a hit in gaming.

I would never suggest a 10900x, waste of money that can be obtained via overclocking the cpu it was supposed to replace.

but 10900X oc can reach some insane levels, almost stock 10980XE performance for gaming, according to the benchmarks in that video.

Curious, can it hit something as high as 5ghz all core and not be able to work as a burner on an electric stove?

[Dr.Shadowds 🐉]

Intel wins in somethings due to the better IPC, which was the high clock speeds, and lower latency. Draw back is the price point.

Ryzen is pretty good, it has the edge in the price area since they're cheaper compare to the intel of things.

If you want to save I do also recommend AMD, but if want the best, which is just squeezing the lemon for all it's drops is going to be intel. Get what you want what you think best for you really, all games varies, and in some games AMD and intel can be neck to neck, or one has the lead over the other depending on the game.

[xSOSxHawkens]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Kurumi Tokisaki:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από xSOSxHawkens:

10900x is a *joke*

10c/20t @ $1,000+...

Meanwhile over in AMD land we have...

12c/24t @ $500 or less regularly (paid 470 for mine) via a 3900x...

For the same 1K from AMD you could get 16c/32t with *great* gaming speeds and workstation speeds *AND* still have $300 left over to put on a better GPU, RAM, SSD (hello PCIe 4.0) or motherboard...

lol where are you getting it for $1000? they are only $600. also AMD ryzen 3950x does not perform as well in games as 9900k/10900X, AMD is not an option for serious gaming, only for workstations.

First price...

https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i9-10900X-Desktop-Processor-Unlocked/dp/B07YP69HTM

Amazon, 2 new form 999 and up...

Now the performance part. Sorry, but your wrong. AMD/Intel gaming performance is so close now that in most titles its within margin of error. Yes, Intel does still generally take the top of that margin, but the difference in almost *all* titles in sub-5 FPS...

If you would rather spend $1,000 on a weaker CPU for "gaming" b/c it gets 5 frames more despite being masively underpowered and overpriced elsewise, well, that simply makes you the type of ignorant cow consumer that causes parts makers to slap "Gamer" on everytyhing, b/c you dont actually buy whats best, you buy the "gamers" option...

By all means, spend 1,000 (or 800) and get the extra 3-5fps (or less) while the rest of us actualy get more b/c we spent the aditional 200-500 bucks on a better GPU. Meanwhile when you are done gaming and want to edit/render that 4k footage enjoy the wait with less cores.