Instalar Steam
iniciar sesión
|
idioma
简体中文 (chino simplificado)
繁體中文 (chino tradicional)
日本語 (japonés)
한국어 (coreano)
ไทย (tailandés)
Български (búlgaro)
Čeština (checo)
Dansk (danés)
Deutsch (alemán)
English (inglés)
Español de Hispanoamérica
Ελληνικά (griego)
Français (francés)
Italiano
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesio)
Magyar (húngaro)
Nederlands (holandés)
Norsk (noruego)
Polski (polaco)
Português (Portugués de Portugal)
Português-Brasil (portugués de Brasil)
Română (rumano)
Русский (ruso)
Suomi (finés)
Svenska (sueco)
Türkçe (turco)
Tiếng Việt (vietnamita)
Українська (ucraniano)
Comunicar un error de traducción
but for this CPU, it needs new motherboard.
Or do I need to wait for the i9 11900K ?
You'll be getting 2c4t more, which games WON'T use. And the clockspeeds will remain the same.
So you're paying for a useless upgrade.
It's better to just overclock your CPU (if you haven't already), and save your money for a new GPU upgrade.
Then you'll see an improvement in performance.
The 10900K will need a new socket, so you would have to upgrade CPU.
It could potentially use DDR5, so that's another expense.
I personally wouldn't bother with a CPU upgrade, you've already got the best CPU on the market (for gaming.)
Why upgrade to anything for the next few years?
When your current CPU doesn't meet your performance needs and it is clearly the impediment to your performance goals. When will that be? Ask me when you get there.
Yeah I will wait for a new GPU first...but I think I wil upgrade with the i9 11900K.
No you don't. Highest possible framerate is a pointless want that you'll never reach, it's far from necessary, and that blind mindset is the type of mindset that anti-consumer corporations like Intel love.
Lower resolutions like 1080p allow for more FPS; if you wanted maximum FPS, you'd be at 1080p. 1440p and 4K are for quality, not raw performance.
By the way, the 9900K and 10900K don't appear to be directly compatible because it appears that 10 series CPUs (not HEDT, they remain compatible with X299 as they're not actually the same) use socket LGA1200, and not LGA1151 that current standard desktop CPUs from Intel use.
Surely, but it's not worth it because you'll have to change your motherboard in addition, it's not worth it. You already have one of the best CPUs available, leave it alone.
Intel claims big gains with this new architecture, but it's probably BS.
Expect 5%, 7% tops.
That's simply a pointless goal.
The only real FPS you need, before you start to lose the ability to see anymore, is about ~200FPS.
And that's possible on the i9-9900k already.
The limit would be the GPU, not being able to render enough frames.
Keep in mind, they're going to do 14nm++++(+++++++) again this year, for the 10th gen. So you'd see a very slight improvement, just like all their other processors.
https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i9-9900K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-6700K/4028vs3502
Look at their 'overclocked bench' (Both CPUs being around ~5ghz area) - ~8% improvement for 3 generations on single core performance.
That's tragic.
I don't expect that much of an improvement.
Though, acording to GN, they're going to be much cooler. Because the thermal interfaces are going to be MUCH thinner, again, I doubt it'd have much impact, but it's nothing to upgrade for.