First Intel Core i7-9700K Review Surfaces

[Octopuss]

The world's first gaming 8 core CPU. Thanks Intel!

Why hasn't this troll been banned yet? Just look at his postings.

 

[Deleted member 178884]

Why hasn't this troll been banned yet? Just look at his postings.

Exactly
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/members/dwade.106554/
Sneekypeet removed my post criticising him and ignored him - what a joke.

 

[Vanzetti]

One of the worst tech web pages here in Spain, and this "review" is an example of that.

 

[Parn]

will be good however for lowering the prices for both cpu makers

Wish this is true, but the reality is much worse.

 

[efikkan]

90-95% of the FPS in games is from the GPU,

intel having 5-10% more FPS I barely noticeable at best... I mean sure it's up to 10% but if you're doing literally anything else than gaming on your computer AMD crushes Intel in pretty much every professional use.

It depends on what you are comparing. If you're comparing a budget CPU vs. the top mainstream CPU with a fixed GPU in a budget gaming build, then yes, paying e.g. $100 extra for 5% performance is a waste, money which could have been put into a better GPU.

But when you're comparing similarly priced CPUs and one gives more performance, you go for the best performing one.

Also Memory speed has little to no effect on Intel CPU, you can be having 2600Mhz or 4266Mhz you gain what ... 5%

Well, gains beyond 2666 MHz DDR4 in gaming are more like 1-2%, well within the margin of error, except for a few edge cases. It's simply pointless.

But more importantly, running memory at higher speeds depends on both motherboard support and the die quality of the CPU. Even if you buy a kit with a high rated speed and a motherboard which supports it, there is no guarantee you will be able to run in. And even if you do so, it will probably not be stable for years of load. High speed memory is probably the primary thing gamers waste money on.

Now Ryzen 7nm is on the horizon, probably going to support ddr5 at some point, which will Obviously boost even more its perf if Intel doesn't changes its Arch

Ryzen on 7nm (Zen 2) is still far away, and it will primarily compete with Intel's Ice Lake.

Wait until the next major architecture (what is it, Cascade Lake now?), which should be on 10nm, to see what they can really do...

HEDT: Skylake-X/SP -> Cascade Lake-X/SP(14nm 2018) -> Cooper Lake-X/SP (14nm 2019) -> Ice Lake-X/SP(10nm 2020)
Mainstream: Coffee Lake/Cannon Lake/Whiskey Lake -> Ice Lake (10nm 2019) -> Tiger Lake (?) -> Sapphire Rapids (?)

 

[TheOne]

Not that I've seen. What games?

Like every graphic's card the 1070 is hit hard by Gameworks.

 

[lexluthermiester]

One of the worst tech web pages here in Spain, and this "review" is an example of that.

You joined up just to say that? Why bother? Do you think you're going to effect anyone here? Go away and crawl back under whatever rock you came from..

 

[Melvis]

Not really surprising, its what I was expecting really, its nothing new just a better binned 8700k.

The 8 core CPU's will be fast for sure and will beat out the 2700X purely because of clock speeds.

Intel is better at gaming because ring bus and 10yrs of better support most likely

 

[londiste]

Not really surprising, its what I was expecting really, its nothing new just a better binned 8700k.

The 8 core CPU's will be fast for sure and will beat out the 2700X purely because of clock speeds.

You do realize i7-9700K is an 8-core CPU, right?

 

[GoldenX]

It's another 14nm Intel CPU with an extra tweak in turbo frequencies.
I hope they can solve their 10nm problems, this is getting boring and repetitive.

 

[Vanzetti]

You joined up just to say that? Why bother? Do you think you're going to effect anyone here? Go away and crawl back under whatever rock you came from..

Do you think I joined yesterday or something? I don't care what you think, oh holy lord of what can be said and not. I say what I want when I want ,with respect and without insulting or trying to give my point of view. Don't you like it? Ok I don't care.

Maybe you think I am insulting this webpage or something, but the truth is you don't know what you are talking about, you don't know that webpage, you don't know how bad their "reviews" are, you don't know anything about it, so shut up and go to cry elsewhere.

 

[las]

I'd still go for 8700K instead, rather have 12 threads with 6 cores than 8 threads with 8 cores.

I won't. Especially not with HT bug aka Foreshadow.
Also 8700K is using pigeon poop.

8700K has worse gaming performance with HT enabled. 9700K is going to be an insane gaming chip, easily beating the 8700K here.

It will also beat the 8700K in content creation. Real cores >>> HT/SMT any day.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Do you think I joined yesterday or something? I don't care what you think, oh holy lord of what can be said and not. I say what I want when I want ,with respect and without insulting or trying to give my point of view. Don't you like it? Ok I don't care.

Maybe you think I am insulting this webpage or something, but the truth is you don't know what you are talking about, you don't know that webpage, you don't know how bad their "reviews" are, you don't know anything about it, so shut up and go to cry elsewhere.

LOL! Tantrum much?

 

[Melvis]

You do realize i7-9700K is an 8-core CPU, right?

Ummm no? isnt the 9900/k the 8 core chips? and the 9700K is just a refresh of the 8700K? or did I miss something here?

 

[hat]

Pretty sure he was talking about the source page, not TPU... heh

 

[lexluthermiester]

Pretty sure he was talking about the source page, not TPU... heh

Does it matter? Whether or not they're smearing the review site, they are trash talking TPU for referencing the review. That makes their above comment contextually condescending and worthless, thus my comment.

Ummm no? isnt the 9900/k the 8 core chips? and the 9700K is just a refresh of the 8700K? or did I miss something here?

Both are 8 core. The 9900k has HT, the other does not.

 

[Tomorrow]

Ummm no? isnt the 9900/k the 8 core chips? and the 9700K is just a refresh of the 8700K? or did I miss something here?

9600K is 6c/12t refresh of 8700K. 9700K is 8c/8t and step up.

 

[londiste]

9600K is 6c/12t refresh of 8700K. 9700K is 8c/8t and step up.

9600K is 6c/6t

 

[Tomorrow]

9600K is 6c/6t

My bad. I did not realize Intel had HT only on 9900K.

 

[Melvis]

Both are 8 core. The 9900k has HT, the other does not.

Thats what I mean, but isnt the 9700K a 6c12t CPU?

 

[GlacierNine]

Thats what I mean, but isnt the 9700K a 6c12t CPU?

Please read the first four words of the post you just replied to.

 

[Melvis]

ok well damn if indeed thats a 8core CPU then thats very under welling, im surprised honestly.

Good for gaming which I was thinking it would be, but multi tasking is down alot more then I would of expected.

 

[londiste]

On par with 8700K and within striking distance of 2700X is not an easy feat. 8c8t vs 6c12t and 8c16t.

 

[John Naylor]

Pre -release "reviews are just a waste of people's time ... why argue about what any chips is onna do ... this always turns out embarrassingly bad... wait till it's actually out.

As far as Intel "competing" ... with 79.3% market share and on an upswing over the last year, seems they doing just fine. OTOH, AMD has dropped from 22.3% in Q3 2017 to 20.7 in Q3 2018.... holding their own and still up from Q3 2016 but not exactly "nailing it"

 

[R-T-B]

You joined up just to say that? Why bother? Do you think you're going to effect anyone here? Go away and crawl back under whatever rock you came from..

WTF man? Maybe he's from Spain and has some input we might not otherwise know? Why the vehement response?

Does it matter? Whether or not they're smearing the review site, they are trash talking TPU for referencing the review.

Maybe, maybe not? I did not read his initial post that way.

So yeah, it kinda does.