is it worth upgrading from i5 9600k to i7 9700k

[seouilms109]

my brother bought a new pc and gave me his 2080ti, im thinking if i should get i7 9700k for it, i know there is no big difference between cpus but i play on 900p 75hz monitor plus the bottlenecks with 9600k i thought getting a new cpu would help and i7 9700k is the only choice since my motherboard is 9th gen
my current gpu is 1070ti

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Not worth it.

Better to keep this as is and then save up the money for whole new modern day specs build. You can easily get a Motherboard + 12th gen i7 or i9 and 32gb ddr4 for cheap nowa days

[Rumpelcrutchskin]

9700K doesn`t have hyperthreading so it doesn`t make much difference anyway.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

9900K maybe, if it's cheap enough but you also wouldn't want to stick any i7 or i9 on a cheap motherboard but not sure what board you have.

How much RAM?
Hopefully have a couple sata ssds.
Could do a clean install of Win10 64bit 22H2

[Illusion of Progress]

On Intel platforms, since they only support two generations which aren't far apart in performance, it's almost never worth doing an in-platform upgrade. This becomes more true as the platform ages and has become relatively slower versus what has released since.

An exception is if your starting point if something like a Core i3. The reason it might be worth it then is because the Core i5s are often cheap while being a nice performance uplift. Contrast that to the Core i7s (and Core i9s where applicable) which sometimes only gained Hyper-threading (and thus offered nothing for stuff that isn't thread limited) and cost a lot more. So basically when it comes to those older Intel platforms, my opinion is that going from a Core i5 to something more is almost never worth it because the highest performers on a platform hold too much value so you're just spending too much on the CPU for the performance it offers. Even if you don't need to change the motherboard and/or RAM, spending almost as much for a very old and used CPU compared to a new and much faster one is... pretty hard to justify in my mind because that's an awful cost/performance proposition, even if the absolute cost is lower. The only reason to go that route in my mind is if you have zero/very limited consistent income or something. I've been there before when I was younger, so I get it.

The saying "it's expensive to be poor" comes to mind. The example idea is that someone might buy a pair of $40 shoes but have to replace them multiple times in a given number of years whereas the $100 shoes last five years and come out ahead. Of course, that's something that wears out as opposed to getting slower but the concept is the same; sometimes it's worth saving up more up front and getting the better price/performance to save you in the long run. Taking the cheapest thing up front can often lead you to needing to spend more (or leaving you with slow stuff all the time). Sinking money into aged platforms for upgrades that aren't much of upgrades is an analogy to that.

And in your example, the Core i7 9700 gets you two extra real cores but lacks Hyper-threading so it sort of isn't even a clear upgrade over the Core i5 9600 anyway. I was mistaken; the 9th generation Core i5 is a 6 core/6 thread part, not a 6 core/12 thread part.

With a 1070 Ti I definitely wouldn't worry about it anyway. Not unless your primary issue is very CPU reliant stuff (like Minecraft or something, and even for games like that, a gen-to-same-gen change won't help as those game needs more per core performance most).

TL;DR: Unless your income is limited and it's either this or nothing, there's zero places where I'd find this worth it, and even then I'd say go with nothing and staying on what you have, because in that case you're better off saving what little money you are getting versus wasting it on a side-grade.

[smokerob79]

if it was me i would just drop in the 2080 and ride until you have about 400 to 500 bucks to get a new CPU, mother and memory combo.....

and then I would buy AMD as they keep writing love letters to gamers with new CPU releases for dead sockets.....going AMD on the upgrade means you will have new CPU options for years as they are still releasing CPU's for the AM4 socket that was released in 2016!!!.....you already know intel will not give you upgrade options for 8 years like AMD has always done and to get close to the best gaming option in intel its twice the price of the best gaming CPU the 7800x3d......

the kicker.....if you can drive to a micro center store and pick it up you can get a motherboard, 7800x3d and a 32gb memory kit for 500 bucks any day of the week....but you have to go to the store....they wont online order the set for anything other then in store pick up.....

in short its not worth the upgrade.....at best regardless of GPU used you will get a 4% increase in gaming performance going from a 9600k to a 9700k......

the best gaming CPU you can get for most games
https://www.microcenter.com/product/5006709/amd-ryzen-7-7800x3d,-asus-b650-e-tuf-gaming,-gskill-flare-x5-series-32gb-ddr5-6000-kit,-computer-build-bundle

[Iron Knights]

Absolutely waste of money, see what other CPUs your MB can accommodate, you will see no performance difference in this "upgrade". i9-9900KF may look tempting but even then the gains maybe marginal for the money.
You may want to invest in a 1920x1080@144hz monitor (24" is common now and you can find them relatively cheap). Instead of the CPU swap.

[seouilms109]

Originally posted by Bad 💀 Motha:

9900K maybe, if it's cheap enough but you also wouldn't want to stick any i7 or i9 on a cheap motherboard but not sure what board you have.

How much RAM?
Hopefully have a couple sata ssds.
Could do a clean install of Win10 64bit 22H2

z390 asus tuf
gskill trident z 8x2, i have 2 ssds

[_I_]

you gain 2 cores and higher boost

for games alone, it wont make much of a difference

[Iron Knights]

You don't want integrated graphics, thus I suggested the KF version.
1600x900 is a resolution even laptops don't use anymore, your monitor is the bigger trash.

[Illusion of Progress]

Oh, I was wrong in my above post so I'll edit that. I thought the 9600 was 6 cores/12 threads for some reason so I thought the 9700 being an 8 core/8 thread might sometimes be a loss. That doesn't change my opinion on it not being worth it, however.

Originally posted by smokerob79:

the kicker.....if you can drive to a micro center store and pick it up you can get a motherboard, 7800x3d and a 32gb memory kit for 500 bucks any day of the week....but you have to go to the store....they wont online order the set for anything other then in store pick up.....

If Micro Center is on the table (and I'm not sure if it is for the thread starter), then there's often even cheaper options, too, on stuff that isn't terribly slower.

You used to be able to find a 12600K based platform for $250 and a 5800X3D based platform for $300. Albeit the Intel one was DDR4, but still. These came with surprisingly fair motherboards (Zx90 for Intel, B550 for AMD) and 16 GB of fair RAM speeds too (3200 MHz for Intel [this is typically the gear one 1:1 limit for Alder Lake on DDR4 which may be why], and 3,600 MHz for AMD which is similarly around the 1:1 limits of the IF for it).

Albeit you'll still want (or possibly even need) a CPU cooler with some of these, they are insane values.

Edit: The 12600K bundle is still available for $250 (well $260) but the 5800X3D is $350 now, with the 7600X replacing it as the $300 option. Considering that bundle was ever $300 though, when I spend that on the CPU alone just over a year ago, was insanely good for what you get. And that 12600K bundle is probably the price/performance winner right now.

Unfortunately, the majority don't have a Micro Center nearby.

[A&A]

i5 12400F would be a better upgrade than getting the same old gen with 2 cores on top because you'll get hyper-threading which makes the CPU 30-40% faster in multi-tasking and the 12th gen architecture is generally 20-25% faster than 11 gen. So you get a CPU that should outperform the i7 9700K and the i9 9900K.

[morrisseyshair]

You're not going to notice that kind of performance. I went from i7-7700K to i7-13700K. That's noticeable.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Originally posted by seouilms109:

Originally posted by Bad 💀 Motha:

9900K maybe, if it's cheap enough but you also wouldn't want to stick any i7 or i9 on a cheap motherboard but not sure what board you have.

How much RAM?
Hopefully have a couple sata ssds.
Could do a clean install of Win10 64bit 22H2

z390 asus tuf
gskill trident z 8x2, i have 2 ssds

I would...

Keep that Motherboard + 9600K and use as-is
or
Sell that Motherboard + CPU and buy something better.

9900K used cpu is nearly $200

But you can buy a modern Z790 motherboard with WIFI-6 and 12th Gen 12700K combo for around $380 or less. All this would need is DDR5 RAM

[Bing Chilling]

not event remotely.
it's not even worth from an i5 8600k to a 9700k
if anything the i9 9900k "might" be worth doing at a low price
ebay's pricing is alright right now but i still wouldn't do it personally.

time for a mobo and possible ram upgrade my guy.

or of course, keep the cpu you have now, it's decent enough for games

i actually have a very similar system
i5 8600k
gtx 1070
16gb ddr4 3200
and imo the cpu well good enough for possibly a 4060/4060ti upgrade
before a cpu one.

my two cents.

[[☥] - CJ -]

2 extra cores and threads and a slightly higher boost clock, depending on your usage it might make a difference. i recently went from a 2500k to a 3770k, the extra threads and HT gave me more of a boost than i expected just from the extra threads alone, along with going from PCIE 2.0 to PCIE 3.0 as my board supports it and going to the 3770k enabled it.

Now obvious performance differences between our systems aside, i do think it would make enough of a difference so that you could hold off doing a major upgrade for a few more years.

So if the CPU is at a good price i see no reason not to grab it, i got mine from an ebay auction i won for $47, now while the 9700k would likely never be that low, might be worth a look.