Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
My opinion stay away from E cores, AMD will be power hungry for a good upgrade which will be more heat also.
If you think I'm an Intel fan your wrong, built my 1st gaming PC in 1999 with AMD chip. Used AMD until I downgraded to a I3 12100F 3 years ago. Still does everything I want to do.
Intel...hahahahahaha
If the 9700k is just about equivalent to a 12400, which just about makes sense then I'd suggest he doesn't actually need a new C.P.U. He can just drop in the graphics card into the existing rig. Plus, unlike a 12400, a 9700k can be overclocked a bit to bring it over the hump. if it's just not quite good enough.
I do remember the RTX 2080 ti bottlenecked the 9700k in the G.N. review of the 3600[gamersnexus.net], so there's definitely an amount of untapped potential in this processor. We're looking at a 2080 ti being roughly equivalent to a 6800xt. The 6800 xt is just a little worse than the 7800 xt on average, which is roughly equivalent to rtx 4070. A 4070 super is the smallest upgrade you can make from the RTX 4070.
My advice is to just upgrade the G.P.U. with no change to the C.P.U. Tessrana would need to buy a new motherboard to get much better anyway.
It'd be somewhat of a shame to have bought a roughly top of the line processor and never having taken full advantage of it.
The absolute worst case scenario is that even an overclocked 9700k isn't quite enough, but in that case it's basically free to keep using the hardware you already have.
Edit: (or is it the 6700 xt that's equivalent to the 2080 ti? I forgot).
Game performance: While a CPU running at 5GHz might provide a theoretical performance boost, it may not necessarily translate to improved gaming performance. In fact, some users have reported that their CPUs, even when overclocked to 5GHz, do not demonstrate significant gains in gaming benchmarks.
Power settings: Misconfigured Windows power settings, such as running in high-performance mode with minimum CPU speed set to 100%, can exacerbate issues with CPUs running at 5GHz.
Conclusion
CPU issues over 5GHz with games seem to be related to stability, voltage limitations, and potential misconfigurations. While a CPU running at 5GHz might provide some theoretical performance benefits, it may not necessarily translate to improved gaming performance. It’s essential to ensure proper power settings and voltage configurations to optimize CPU performance and minimize potential issues.
He did mention gaming for DD 2 which I'm not sure about, but I do know DD:DA does not like 5 or more on clock speeds.
Seeing that I never ever have come across a broken CPU, I would assume you cannot brake them until you either fry it or it get damaged by a lightning strike. or you acidentally bent the pins of it.
If an AMD CPU breaks on itself I would never even consider buying a CPU from them again.
Thats interesting. The RTX 20 series was the most recent line at that time and i came from a gtx 660, so it was a huge improvement anyhow.. (The 30 series released literally two months later) I assumed, they were on par, but it seems i cannot trust bottleneck calculators any more.
I would like to stay away from overcloking because potential thermal problems and because I rather not touch that stuff. The CPU however has a turbo mode to 4.1Ghz and loves to make use of it at any time.
So I come to the conclusion that I just should get the new graphics card and a new board. and maybe new RAM with it, right? My RAM is DDR4, the speed I cannot say at the moment.
Is there any board you have good experience with? Ideally it would come with WiFi ability, I did not think I would have the need to use it but than I had internet problems, needed to go over my smartphone as a hotspot and had to lend a wifi-stick because I did not think I would need it so I brought Asus ROG Strix Z390-F.
The RAM are DDR4-2666 K2 DIMM
You don't even know if you have faulty hardware, and you're going to replace hardware at the first sign of an issue?
Intel's 13th and 14th generation CPUs are prone to doing just that.
While the 12th generation is fine, it does not compete with the performance of current AMD offerings, and since your platform isn't that old and displaced in performance yet either, then it wouldn't make sense to replace it with anything but the more current and faster stuff (as i said initially, you might not even need to replace it at all).
Your current RAM would be too slow for any of the current DDR4 platforms anyway. LGA 1700 CPUs are already slower with DDR4, but they're at least decent with 3,200 MHz/3,600 MHz.
It is not as I did not attempt any troubleshooting.
My PCs for some reason do never tell me what the problem exactly is and I am tired of ruling everything out, especially since I have no spare parts lying around.
It started with a boot-loop 3 times, then ended in a POST error saying something about fan speed error and forced me to get into BIOS. Eerything was fine there and I could start normaly with just exiting it. Then despite the cooler running like it should, my CPU shot up to 94°C, 24 more than normal.
Chnged thermal paste and brought new cooler because the old one was an intel stock cooler which was around 8 years old and I thought I should get a decent one.
It fixed the issue, but the boot problem happened again, this time with the error "after setting up intel optane memory or the raid configuration was built sata mode selection must be changed to RAID mode to avoid unknown issues"
I never used RAID nor did I even know what Intel R Optane memory is at that point.
(Actually I never changed anything in the BIOS)
Forum threads suggested CMOS battery, so I changed that (let the BIOS reset in the process).
The error came again when booting the pc up afterwards. It could be gone now after I set up time and date in the BIOS and saved the settings, but in case the problem persist I can just presiume the Mainboard is breaking because I can start from the bios no problem and there are no problems in the usage of the system. That means, It could be that the PC could just suddenly stop POSTing entirely and never tell me what is wrong. That already happened to me a decade ago.
It seems like keeping my current CPU would be a good idea, do you think I should change my RAM regardless?
EDIT I now read many threads where the i7-9700k is definitely too weak for the 4070 S.
I am confused.
Usually, failing to POST three times might be RAM related, because most motherboards by default will try and stabilize the RAM three times before giving up.
If it said something about the CPU fan, then disconnect and reconnect the fan. My previous motherboard had two fan headers, and I did run into one instance where it threw an error about no fan being detected, despite the fan being plugged in and operating...
I didn't want to disable the warning, so I just swapped it from the primary to optional header and that did the trick (I initially tried reseating it on the primary, but it still gave the error). On a much later date, it worked again on the primary header.
Point is, those can be finicky, even if the fan is working.
So 94C is warm, but not necessarily alarming. Modern CPUs run warm, and more recent ones than yours might run even warmer. Modern CPUs will simply boost if they have headroom, and be more conservative at the limit to prevent themselves from frying. Unless you have a very catastrophic cooling issue, or unless it's like redlining to TjMax all the time doing the lightest of tasks, I wouldn't worry. Yes, it's different than the early 2010s days where a temperature of 60C and lower would be normal, but these temperatures have always been safe for them.
That being said, if you're using a stock Intel cooler from 8 years ago on that CPU, then yes, I'd replace it.
As for this...
It fixed the issue, but the boot problem happened again, this time with the error "after setting up intel optane memory or the raid configuration was built sata mode selection must be changed to RAID mode to avoid unknown issues"
...I'm not familiar with Optane so I'll let someone who knows more answer, but I did replace the HDD in my sister's OEM PC a number of years back. The BIOS was similarly saying something about Optane, so I went into the BIOS and disabled it (it didn't seem to let me proceed with it enabled?), and then reinstalled the OS. You may need to enable or disable this because it might need to be set the same way as it was when the OS was installed. I'm wondering if your BIOS reset itself, perhaps due to a dying CMOS battery (so I see why others gave you that suggestion).
I'm not going to push you to keep the CPU nor to replace it. that's your choice to make. If you can't figure something out and nobody else can help you figure it out, and you're just tired of it, that's your call. I just wanted to see what these strange errors were because everyone jumped on suggesting new hardware without even trying. I was like... "let's at least try and see if this is salvageable?"
If you stick with your current system, I'd just keep the RAM you have now. Yeah, a 9th generation platform would probably want something like 3,200 MHz+ RAM to make the most of it, but since you already have 2,666 MHz stuff, it's not worth replacing the RAM alone for that difference.
And I wouldn't have serious reservations against trying to run a 4070 Super on a 9700K. Sure, you won't get the same performance a faster CPU would, but that's a "water is wet" scenario. You can at least try it, and then if you decide you want more performance, then upgrade the CPU. That's the beauty of PCs. You can choose to upgrade it only if you want more performance. If you're satisfied with performance, there's no need to upgrade for the sake of it. You don't have to upgrade just because you're making another part change elsewhere. Perfect balance is impossible to achieve, and a bottleneck will always exist on every single system. So the key is to focus not on if they exist, but if you're getting the performance you want. And if you are, then... it answers it itself.
So it mostly comes down to whether you can figure these issues out and how tired you are of them.
Though RISC-V might make things interesting if it gets general-purpose widespread adoption.
I only mention that because overclocking it's an option. You wouldn't have to. It's not like you have a warranty to support, and you're considering replacing the chip anyway, so if you wanted to experiment on the system this would just be around the right time to do it. Something about your system is preventing it from reaching its full potential though, because it should be able to turnbo up to 4.9 gigahertz. I suspect the power phase delivery on your motherboard isn't up to the task of cooling your 9700k, since the Darkrock cooler's cooling capabillity exceeds the T.D.P. of the chip.
Bottleneck calculators are a bit unreliable, yes. They're a tool meant to give you a rough estimate for an otherwise difficult to address topic, but it's just that. An estimate based upon some calculation metric.
Motherboards aren't my forte. I can vaguely tell you that counting the chokes on a motherboard (they're usually square components next to the processor sockt) and seeing if there's a heatsink covering the mofsets or chokes can give you a rough idea of how good a motherboard 's power phase delivery is relative to other motherboards on the same socket, and that higher grade enthusiast chipsets tend to be designed with better power phrase delivery. However that's just about the extent of it.
If your 9700k only reaches 4.1 gigahertz, something is causing it to throttle. The official spec. is 4.9 gigahertz. Either the power phase delivery of your chip is insufficient, which is a matter I do not have the knowledge to help with, or the cooler is insufficient, but that doesn't make sense because your cooler handles a T.D.P. in excess of your processor's rating (the 9700k is a 95 watt T.D.P. processor, whereas the darkrock cooler should handle up to a 130 T.D.P.), so I'd at least expect it to hit 4.9 gigahertz if not only momentarily.
Differences in R.A.M. speed aren't so significant that I'd necessarily change my R.A.M. from lower speed to higher speed on the same spec. You're maybe looking at a 10% perf. difference at the very most extreme ends of the spectrum, and it's usually better to look at a higher end chip.
If you stay with the 9700k, then you'd change out nothing except the graphics card.
I didn't even notice the part about the post errors to be honest, but the 9th generation chips are 5 years old by now. The upgrade cycle used to be 3 or 4 years to the best of my recollection, then it increased to 5 or 6 by 2016[www.pcworld.com]
We're maybe looking at a six-and-a-half average now.[www.statista.com]
Business insider suggests that a P.C. should last you at least 3 years, but might last up to eight.[www.businessnewsdaily.com]
Post is an acronym for Power On Self Test, so post errors are unlikely to be a software issue and with the hardware being past, near or at its expiration date anyways, performing an upgrade just for the sake of a performance uplift justified at this point anyway.
It's not necessarily even worth trying to troubleshoot the system and replace the component, especially since you need a supply of spare parts just to test
One might wait until november black friday sales if applicable, especially since there are rumors of new hardware being released potentially as soon as mid-october, which is only a month away at this point.
I mean you have a point. I do think it's worth looking into what the post code is to see which component is giving trouble, to see what can be carried over and if it's a cheap fix to just replace a faulty stick of R.A.M. However, to play the devil's advocate, one might argue it's not worth looking into how to fix a system on its last legs over just restarting from scratch.
I been on intel since 1986, tried ryzen (r5 3600) and was floored at how better it was to a i5 3600... more cores, less heat, better price, and better performance..
46 year old pc techy... I'l never buy another intel cpu again.
I'm on a ryzen9 3950X with 36 gigs of ram now instead of a crap i7 with 16 gigs because of how expensive intel has become :-\
I'd try one
This maybe sounds dumb now but where do I find this setting? I looked around and typed the various words in search but I could not find it.
Another thing I like to mention is, that the appearence of those errors are also random, which I dont think would point towards a setting being really wrong. And I think the BIOS did not really reset itself, because the clock had no abnormalities.
Interesting, I knew of Ryzens as the ones who need more power (well, this I already could disconfirm since the rough equivalent of my i7 takes 30W less power) and more heat generation.
I especially read that the cpu you have now runs very hot and AMD apparently even recommends water cooling it, so it would be nothing i could use, even though it would definitely be an upgrade.