Upgrade to an i5 9400f

[rezo]

I currently have an i5 2500k after my i5 4690k died along with the maximus vii hero due to a faulty psu. What are your opinions on the i5 9400f? It costs around £160 and I just play games.

1440p 144hz, RX 590, (going to get) 16GB ram

[_I_]

too slow base clock

get a i5/i7 k or ryzen 5/7

[nullable]

Seems fine, with decent cooling it should run at the turbo frequency under load most of the time anyway...

[Snow]

It was just now when I realized Intel really payed attention to that used Xeon stuff. If you can't beat them - join them, right?
CPU's pretty fine, and is a nice thing to get for your high refresh demands. R5 2600 might be a better price/value if you're planning to play all kinds of modern games, yet neither i5 9400f nor the R5 2600 are meant for 144HZ gaming. RX 590 will also struggle to deliver 144FPS@1440p unless it's some e-sports title. What games are you planning to play, anyway?

[rezo]

I plan on playing csgo and apex, both games which I easily hit 150 FPS on anyways so a faster cpu would help even further. Ryzen cpus are slower for gaming so I don’t see how that would be a better option compared to the 9400f

I have a 240mm Corsair aio so cooling will be fine and a i5 k series would be an extra £100 for not many more frames so I don’t see how that would be beneficial

[rezo]

the ryzen 2600 is slower than the 9400f in all games and is basically the same price so that wouldn’t be a suitable option

[_I_]

non k and ryzen have similar core performance
ryzen will get more threads

k can oc farther than ryzen for better core performance

[hawkeye]

If you have a 2500k then you have a mobo and ddr3 memory, so an i7-2xxx or i7-3xxx would be a cheap improvement, depending what ebay prices are like.

Going to a 9400f means new mobo and memory, so for 100 quid extra you could also get a 9600k.

[Snow]

rezo님이 먼저 게시:

I plan on playing csgo and apex, both games which I easily hit 150 FPS on anyways so a faster cpu would help even further.

With those games in mind - definitely go Intel, e-sports games prefer higher per-core performance as they have no need for a lot of threads/cores. Tho to hit 144 FPS in Apex you might want something stronger than i5-9400F.

rezo님이 먼저 게시:

Ryzen cpus are slower for gaming so I don’t see how that would be a better option compared to the 9400f

Not really. Depending on the game, Ryzen can deliver better gaming performance for the same money.

rezo님이 먼저 게시:

the ryzen 2600 is slower than the 9400f in all games and is basically the same price so that wouldn’t be a suitable option

Stock R5 2600 is slower than stock 9400f in games that have no use of number of threads R5 2600 has, and got comparable/better performance with slight overclock 9400f is not capable of. I clearly see R5 2600 performing better in SOTTR market benchmark, with tons of objects and NPCs, not to mention 9400f drops below 60 fps there what is unacceptable IMO. In my local store R5 2600 costs 25 pounds less than 9400f. That said, and considering new generation of consoles also made using AMD hardware is around the corner, with cores clocked way higher than before, with new games to come likely to have more use for multiple threads of Ryzen, in my case it's a no-brainer - R5 2600 is where I'd put my money. Tho depending on your gaming preferences (which is, as we now know, e-sports), and you local prices, 9400F might end up being a better purchase for your build.

[rezo]

Snow님이 먼저 게시:

rezo님이 먼저 게시:

I plan on playing csgo and apex, both games which I easily hit 150 FPS on anyways so a faster cpu would help even further.

With those games in mind - definitely go Intel, e-sports games prefer higher per-core performance as they have no need for a lot of threads/cores. Tho to hit 144 FPS in Apex you might want something stronger than i5-9400F.

I already hit 150+ fps in 1440p on apex, in 1080p I hit 200 fps even and thats only with my 2500k and RX 590.

hawkeye님이 먼저 게시:

If you have a 2500k then you have a mobo and ddr3 memory, so an i7-2xxx or i7-3xxx would be a cheap improvement, depending what ebay prices are like.

Going to a 9400f means new mobo and memory, so for 100 quid extra you could also get a 9600k.

Theres no reason for me to keep going on a (very) old chipset and generation when I can easily afford something newer like a 9400f. Money isnt an issue, I just dont see the point in getting anything faster.

However an extra £100 is another 30% more I have to spend for a very little improvement over a 9400f.

Other reasons for upgrading is because there arent any suitable motherboards for my 2500k, im using some cheap £40 non-brand one I found on amazon as a temp replacement. It has awful onboard sound and as its an matx board I cant plug in my soundcard and wifi card at the same time and the onboard ethernet is limited to 60 mbps or something stupidly slow. It also only has 4 SATA slots, 2 being blocked by my GPU so I can only use 2 drives. It also only has 2 ram slots so im limited to 4x2 atm. Plus boottime times are horrible

So the reason why I'll happily spend £300-400 on this compared to a cheap £150 on a new i7 27xx or whatever is because I want a new fast motherboard and more ram


Ill consider the R5 2600x but seeming I mainly play source games and a few AAA titles I think the 9400f would be better

[Snow]

rezo님이 먼저 게시:

I already hit 150+ fps in 1440p on apex, in 1080p I hit 200 fps even and thats only with my 2500k and RX 590.

Wait, but if your FPS already exceeds your refresh rate - why would you bother with an upgrade at this point?