Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
if your going non K for a 9900 go for amd it will be faster. where the magic starts with intel is the overclocking that's when you start seeing that single core edge really kick in. don't waste your time otherwise
Get the 9900 non K. If you aren't happy with it, I'd buy from you for $220.So I can buy a 9900 non K for 220 bucks. I actually would prefer AMD but I need strong single core performance for 3D vision games. What should I do
Get the 9900 non K. If you aren't happy with it, I'd buy from you for $220.
I say get the i9-9900 and be happy with it. It's a huge jump over your i7-930, and you don't want to be forever chasing the upgrade fairy, as there is always a better processor/tech coming out soon.
That's a great deal. Well worth the $220. Buy it.
Or should I want for Zen 3? Whenever that is? Hopefully this year?
You're getting an eight core high-end CPU for $220. That's kinda hard to beat. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth.
You're getting an eight core high-end CPU for $220. That's kinda hard to beat. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth.
If you want an AMD rig instead you should buy a 3600 and save some cash. The 3600X is a waste of money compared to the non-X. However, you are going to get two less cores and four less threads. If that isn't an issue then go for it. Also, you should buy the 9900 anyway and resell it for a nice profit.
Still wondering where the link is to buy this for $220.
He's an Intel intern. Employee pricing.
This whole thread is absurd.
Basically it's: talk me out of buying this really great discounted processor. I really want this other AMD thing.
...Okay? So buy the other thing?
You're pretty set on what you want, I'm not sure what's the point in hearing any form of advice especially when anyone says contrary to what you want, you've revealed that you've done research to cement your position.
It's your money, go do whatever you want with it.
UnknownSouljer I don;t know where you got the idea that i just want AMD. Re read my comment. I am simply just trying to make the best decision without having my Intel discount blinders on
So I can buy a 9900 non K for 220 bucks. I actually would prefer AMD but I need strong single core performance for 3D vision games. What should I do
I mean, it's not hard to see why people think you want AMD as you literally said you would prefer AMD.
But back to your question:
The Intel discount skews the price/performance strongly to Intel. I mean you're essentially getting a processor for ~60% of it's retail price. The closest AMD comparison is probably the 3700x at ~$280.
However, the Intel 300 series boards are dead ends at this point while AMD will get one more product refresh in AM4 which very well could end up being a substantial improvement over the 9900. Hard to say at this point as it hasn't been released. As pointed out, you could get a 3600 now and then drop in a Zen3 product of your choosing later. With Intel 300 boards, you don't have that option.
But the price/performance of the 9900 at $220 is too high. There's no downside to buying it as you could probably make $80 selling it outright even if you went AMD. Besides, it's not like the 10900k/10700k are anything different. It's all the same core (starting at near double the price and up from there). The closest new Intel comparison is the 10700 (non-k), and you're essentially getting one of those that's slightly faster with higher boosting for 2/3 of the price of that CPU.
No reason to not get the 9900. If you find something else you can sell it for the same as what you bought it for or more. Heck, 7700's are still going for $200 on the used market.
I appreciate the advise I will hold on to it for now till Zen 3 and figure out the final plan. The overclock.net guys were so against me getting a 9900. Hell I was convinced it was a terrible processor by the way they were talking about it
I mean, I like AMD and all and would recommend it, but I'm not a fan boi to the point I think Intel are POS. They make good chips depending on your needs they can make sense. At $220, it was a great deal for what you're getting. It does a good amount better than a 3600x in gaming, but still falls short in highly threaded tasks (depending on what/how many you use). You said you needed strong single core performance for some 3D games, which points straight to Intel. If you do a bunch of other thing, or just like something new, zen3 is coming soon but we have no clue how much single thread gap it will close yet. If you have patience, zen3 should at least be announced by the end of year with limited supply possibly. I have a B450/1600 in my ITX desktop, just put together a B550 + 3700x for my son this past Monday, and the other 3 desktops are all Intel machines (6600k, and 2 G4560's for my daughters). I'm curious to see what zen3 has to offer as I almost got 2x 3700x (one for my son and one for mine) but figured I'd hold off and see what's on offer at the end of the year.I appreciate the advise I will hold on to it for now till Zen 3 and figure out the final plan. The overclock.net guys were so against me getting a 9900. Hell I was convinced it was a terrible processor by the way they were talking about it
I had to opposite, I had some quirky issues with my 6600k that were completely solved when I switched to the 3700x. We would get stuttering in games running 90fps. Swapped the 3700x and it is completely smoothed out. My 1600 has been rock solid too. Just some people have good/bad luck or some quirky software somewhere that causes stuff and gives them a bad taste in their mouth, which is understandable. I have had issues with both over time, but neither has been that much better/worse. Of my 5 main desktops (in use daily) 3 are Intel 2 are AMD.That 9900 is a no-brainer. Everyone is gaga over AMD these days, but for the things most people actually do with them, they're not really that much faster (if at all) than a competing Intel product, and you're certainly not going to get a faster AMD part that cheap.
Edit: Subjectively, I don't really like my 3600/B450 setup that much. I get some quirky behavior sometimes that I don't get on any of my various other (Intel) machines. I can't be sure it's the fault of the platform, but it feels like it is, and I don't think I'd buy another Ryzen setup, even if it's cheaper than Intel for similar performance.
It's sort of understandable that someone posting on overclock.net would poo-poo a CPU that isn't overclockable. If what they do is overclocking, then a CPU you can't overclock isn't very useful to them, is it? That said, my 9900K was an awesome CPU at the stock speed. I wish I had a second one, even if it's not overclockable.
I say get the 9900 and go play some games or whatever it is you intend to use it for. Life is too short for this sort of hand wringing.