Is it worth it, 9700 or 9900k

GameDad

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
1,576
i am going to upgrade soon, going from a dual core wolfdale to something modern, is the difference between the 9700 and the 9900 worth the difference in price?
i mostly game and surf the web, watch some shows, and do a little webmastering, my own private site for me and friends who game together in RL oldstyle.
i mean the price is about 40-50 percent more for a 9900k but the clock speed difference is minor and there are no extra cores, i just dont know if i should spend the extra
 

Outlaw85

Gawd
Joined
Feb 7, 2012
Messages
912
Intel comparison- https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/compare.html?productIds=186605,191792,186604
Newegg comparison- https://www.newegg.com/Product/Productcompare?CompareItemList=9SIA8N29P94378,19-117-958,19-117-957

9900k- $489 (newegg), 8 core / 16 thread. very slightly higher clock (3.6Ghz / 5.0Ghz) 95W
9700k- $365 (newegg), 8 core / 8 thread (3.6Ghz / 4.9Ghz) 95W
9700(non-K)- $370 (newegg), 8 core / 8 thread (3.0Ghz / 4.7Ghz) 65W

It's going to come down to: Do you need the extra threads? Is lower power a goal?

Realistically, the turbo GHz difference is not likely to be noticed unless you are benchmarking it, then it's still argued that it's not real-world..

I don't know if what programs you use can take advantage of the extra threads but I would at least consider the 9700k. Per Newegg, it's slightly cheaper for some reason and has near-identical speeds of the 9900k. The K series is usually for those looking to overclock since the chips are unlocked. You may have to list out some of the games and programs you use to get some more detailed feedback from those in the know. If I were buying for me, I would pick up the 9700k and call it a day. The extra threads are nice to have and maybe more beneficial down the road but for that $120, I can put that to some other parts, maybe extra ram, ssd capacity step up or a nicer motherboard, if you do decide to overclock in the future.
 

Denpepe

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 26, 2015
Messages
1,421
Depending on what games you play, I would advise you to also consider something like an AMD 3700X, granted they are a bit slower in clockspeed but depending on games, resolution and refresh rate you might never notice the difference and you can get 8c/16T for the same price as an 8c8T from intel.

Also note that if you intend to stick with intel that the 9th gen intel GPU-less CPU's are getting a (small) price cut of around 25$ if you don't need the iGPU.
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
10,232
i am going to upgrade soon, going from a dual core wolfdale to something modern, is the difference between the 9700 and the 9900 worth the difference in price?
i mostly game and surf the web, watch some shows, and do a little webmastering, my own private site for me and friends who game together in RL oldstyle.
i mean the price is about 40-50 percent more for a 9900k but the clock speed difference is minor and there are no extra cores, i just dont know if i should spend the extra
If gaming is your most consistently CPU taxing load (as it probably is for most people), then the 9700K is your best choice.
 

Bankie

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 27, 2004
Messages
1,658
ppl still buying intel? makes no sense at all.
At WORST an i5-9600k/9700k/9900k are going to be EQUAL in gaming performance to AMD's best CPUs. At BEST they'll be quite a bit AHEAD. Intel isn't even worse cost-wise; the 9600k is $200 and the 9700k is $300 if you have a MicroCenter nearby and they're both easily overclockable to 5Ghz which puts them ahead of anything that AMD has for gaming.
 
Joined
Jul 30, 2009
Messages
834
9700K is an awesome gaming chip if you don't need the extra threads. Mine will easily do 5.1 with a AIO cooler.

With Microcenter you can get the 9700K for $300 and a discount on the MB.

If your rig mixes gaming and a lot of productivity then look at the 3700X or 9900K.
 

Fremunaln

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 3, 2019
Messages
188
Simple question: Are you an avid overclocker who tinkers with things or are you the person who is buying a K cpu just cause your favorite reviewer in sandals and socks said so?
And how long do you intend to keep this system.

If you are a fanboy whose buying things to increase his or her epeen, and realistically will purchase a new setup in 5 years or less, then save the cash and buy either a 9700 non K and enjoy. Any 9 series CPU is basically gonna be outdated in less then a year.

If you are keeping this long haul, I mean until the proverbial wheels fall off on this setup, then by all means pick up a 9900k, and enjoy. Run it stock, and when things slow down, bump that puppy up.


Dont care if you prefer AMD or Intel, the same holds for any brand,
 

Dayaks

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
7,689
Almost cyber monday, might be worth it to wait a bit. Last month the 9900KF was only $420. Since you seem to rarely upgrade I would spend the extra few bucks for a 9900KF (it's a 9900K without the iGPU, I am assuming you use a discrete GPU).

If you're not a high refresh user (90 Hz minimums +), AMD basically does the same thing for less with something like a 3700x. Intel only shines in the high refresh area.
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
10,232
9700K is an awesome gaming chip if you don't need the extra threads. Mine will easily do 5.1 with a AIO cooler.

With Microcenter you can get the 9700K for $300 and a discount on the MB.

If your rig mixes gaming and a lot of productivity then look at the 3700X or 9900K.
Even if you do a lot of Productivity, you would be hard pressed to notice an advantage for the 3700x, or 9900K. They will pretty much only pull ahead in extreme parallel functions like 3D Rendering (which almost no one does, and is done better by GPU anyway) or Video Encoding, which ISN'T a real time activity anyway. Who cares if an hour of encoding takes ten minutes longer. You aren't going to sit there watching it encode.
 

RPGWiZaRD

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 24, 2009
Messages
1,084
Intel announced slight price drop on the 9700KF (MSRP $349) so that would be my pick in your useage scenario. I might swap my poorly overclocking 8600K for 9700kf myself, come Black Friday, at ~$329 I'm willing to bite. :)

Edit: I'm from Finland so it costs right now 389€ incl 24% VAT but the KF variant is 399€ and above which should be like $25 cheaper according to "price guidelines" (whatever that plays any role these days.)
 
Last edited:

wantapple

Gawd
Joined
Jan 8, 2012
Messages
606
At WORST an i5-9600k/9700k/9900k are going to be EQUAL in gaming performance to AMD's best CPUs. At BEST they'll be quite a bit AHEAD. Intel isn't even worse cost-wise; the 9600k is $200 and the 9700k is $300 if you have a MicroCenter nearby and they're both easily overclockable to 5Ghz which puts them ahead of anything that AMD has for gaming.
security flaws = NO-GO
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nenu
like this

dave343

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 17, 2000
Messages
1,680
security flaws = NO-GO
While it's true Intel is more susceptible to the security flaws Meltdown & Spectra, the performance impact is mainly if not entirely affected during certain applications, eg; Virtual Machines. Gaming performance on Intel processors dropped by 3-4% on average, 5% at most.
 

Keljian

Gawd
Joined
Nov 7, 2006
Messages
836
Having had two of the CPUs in question (9700k and 9900k) My advice is either get an 8700k or a 9900k, skip the 9700k

I found the 9700k with Windows scheduler and background tasks to cause issues with games in the form of stuttering, and it is well behind in productivity than either of the other chips.

if you multitask at all, either the 8700k or the 9900k are better chips than the 9700k
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
10,232
Having had two of the CPUs in question (9700k and 9900k) My advice is either get an 8700k or a 9900k, skip the 9700k

I found the 9700k with Windows scheduler and background tasks to cause issues with games in the form of stuttering, and it is well behind in productivity than either of the other chips.

if you multitask at all, either the 8700k or the 9900k are better chips than the 9700k
Gamers Nexus tests for this pretty heavily and they didn't have any issues with 9700K, neither did any of the other pro reviews I read.

So I think your problem with the 9700K, was unique to you.
 

Keljian

Gawd
Joined
Nov 7, 2006
Messages
836
Gamers Nexus tests for this pretty heavily and they didn't have any issues with 9700K, neither did any of the other pro reviews I read.

So I think your problem with the 9700K, was unique to you.
I must be a special snowflake. How come all of those issues disappeared when I replaced the 9700 with the 9900?

I think half the problem was the scheduler, half the problem was things like slack.
 
Joined
Jul 30, 2009
Messages
834
I haven't seen any stuttering, even when streaming or running numerous background apps for VR, but everyone's setup is different.

I have read on numerous forums that Slack can cause stuttering on rigs. Don't know why and never replicated it but a simple internet search will bring up posts.
 

Falkentyne

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 19, 2000
Messages
1,610
I must be a special snowflake. How come all of those issues disappeared when I replaced the 9700 with the 9900?

I think half the problem was the scheduler, half the problem was things like slack.
This problem is either a buggy Bios, buggy 9700k microcode, a buggy windows update (yeah!) or in some rare cases, a defective chip (IMC, etc) in which case the problem is the chip sample, not the chips in general.
I've seen people complain about lag like that when overclocking their RAM too far.

I never had any issues when I disabled hyperthreading on my 9900k. And I'm sure forums and reddit would be exploding if this were a thing. I mean, why don't we see people saving 8600Ks and 9600K's are not usable?
 

D-EJ915

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
1,134
Usually weird problems are caused by HT not by removing it that is a bit odd.
 

RPGWiZaRD

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 24, 2009
Messages
1,084
The only cases I can think of for typical useage scenarios is if person is rendering videos, Intel and non HT is usually not the best scenario to go if you want to render and for example play some pc game meanwhile, it'll lag be choppy like hell, only very basic games or such is okay, I'm talking it with personal experience with my 8600K. Even such basic stuff as watching Twitch meanwhile rendering and utilizing all cores, it'll start lag the stream but I can free one core or switch to software rendering for the browser and it typically works fine.
 

crazycrave

Gawd
Joined
Mar 31, 2016
Messages
704
Why post this?! Yes, people (ppl) are still buying Intel as it's still a solid product. AMD is making terrific strides as well, but not everyone wants to make the change.

OP: In hindsite I should've just ordered the 9700K and saved the coin. My 2 bits..
He is coming from a Wolfdale dual core and the Ryzen 5 3600 would smoke his mind for a $200 cpu and no reason to make him spend more money with little gain .
 

GameDad

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
1,576
ok, here is my build, https://pcpartpicker.com/list/f77zMc:
Intel Core i9-9900K 3.6 GHz 8-Core Processor
Noctua NH-D15 82.5 CFM CPU Cooler
Asus PRIME Z390-A ATX LGA1151 Motherboard
ADATA XPG SPECTRIX D41 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3600 Memory
Intel 660p Series 512 GB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive
Asus GeForce RTX 2070 8 GB DUAL OC Video Card
Corsair Air 540 ATX Mid Tower Case

i am still iffy on the processor.
i already have:
Noctua NH-D15 82.5 CFM CPU Cooler
Asus GeForce RTX 2070 8 GB DUAL OC Video Card
Corsair Air 540 ATX Mid Tower Case


i am going to try and hold out to look at deals for black friday

my usual pattern of upgrading is 2-3 years, but getting money and the fact that my current setup has weathered quite well over the past several years means i have put it off.
and it is now starting to become an issue in the some of the latest games, so i think i want to get top product
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
10,232
Intel 660p Series 512 GB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive
This is one spot I would never cheap out on. QLC I would avoid for a main NVME drive and get something a bit more durable.

I would only consider QLC for a bulk Media drive, where it would be closer to write once, read many.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nenu
like this

Dermen

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 10, 2017
Messages
358
The Intel 660p is overpriced. You can find the HP EX920 for similar price with better performance and better durability.

QLC is supposed to bring us cheap capacity with lower performance and durability but so far the cheaper part isn't there.
 

Jandor

Gawd
Joined
Dec 30, 2018
Messages
533
At WORST an i5-9600k/9700k/9900k are going to be EQUAL in gaming performance to AMD's best CPUs. At BEST they'll be quite a bit AHEAD. Intel isn't even worse cost-wise; the 9600k is $200 and the 9700k is $300 if you have a MicroCenter nearby and they're both easily overclockable to 5Ghz which puts them ahead of anything that AMD has for gaming.
I was thinking the same and was even thinking that for heavy duty desktop the new HEDT price of the 18 cores Intel 10980Xe was great compared to AMD, but then here is what happened :
you can get Ryzen 2700 8 core 16 threads for 1500 euros in France VAT included which makes it at some 140$. That same AM4 platform can be upgraded up to a 3950X 16 core 32 threads.
And the thing is on 3Dmark the 3950X beats the 10980XE by 25%, so the whole Intel HEDT line has lost all its interest and you stay with no upgrade path on your Intel Desktop while it's cheaper and better on all cases on AMD. Also mind that AMD will trounce all the CPU line from Intel with yet to be announced Threadripper. I'm really sad for Intel and the competition, because Intel is now in a worse technological position than AMD ever used to be.
So you can get your Intel CPU but conscious that it will underscore the value of anything you will buy from AMD.
Also, Intel used to be better in gaming with less cores, but it is now old deprecated news with Zen 2 and Ryzen 3000 line, And also everything that quits some older gaming, not multithreaded, will run much better for the same cost on AMD option. However, I'm not against supporting Intel for the sake of maintaining competition if you don't care having a little more expensive investment with limited future proof.
 

somebrains

Gawd
Joined
Nov 10, 2013
Messages
896
i am going to upgrade soon, going from a dual core wolfdale to something modern, is the difference between the 9700 and the 9900 worth the difference in price?
i mostly game and surf the web, watch some shows, and do a little webmastering, my own private site for me and friends who game together in RL oldstyle.
i mean the price is about 40-50 percent more for a 9900k but the clock speed difference is minor and there are no extra cores, i just dont know if i should spend the extra
No, this doesn’t make any sense.

You could get a 9400f, a Lian li o11 air, u12s, 970 eco and 970 pro, 2080ti.
Max out a z390 of your choice.
 

brachy33

Gawd
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Messages
552
I would just like pause a moment to thank all the fanboys in the channel for the entertainment.
There are no fanboys, only decent people responding to the OP's question about which Intel (not AMD) chip is best for him. Lets pause for the AMD fanboys that can't mentally comprehend that and help with the question at hand. Give me a break...
 
Last edited:

Ranulfo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
1,825
ok, here is my build, https://pcpartpicker.com/list/f77zMc:
Intel Core i9-9900K 3.6 GHz 8-Core Processor
Noctua NH-D15 82.5 CFM CPU Cooler
Asus PRIME Z390-A ATX LGA1151 Motherboard
ADATA XPG SPECTRIX D41 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3600 Memory
Intel 660p Series 512 GB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive
Asus GeForce RTX 2070 8 GB DUAL OC Video Card
Corsair Air 540 ATX Mid Tower Case

i am still iffy on the processor.
i already have:
Noctua NH-D15 82.5 CFM CPU Cooler
Asus GeForce RTX 2070 8 GB DUAL OC Video Card
Corsair Air 540 ATX Mid Tower Case


i am going to try and hold out to look at deals for black friday

my usual pattern of upgrading is 2-3 years, but getting money and the fact that my current setup has weathered quite well over the past several years means i have put it off.
and it is now starting to become an issue in the some of the latest games, so i think i want to get top product
Heh, weathered well indeed. You had a wolfdale right? 8500? That thing is at last 8 years old. If you're going to want the new rig to last that long, just buy a 9900k. They're overpriced as all heck but it sounds like you'll make it last the next 5 years minimum. In no way would I recommend the 9700k for long term use, hyperthreading is far too important these days. Its the old i5 vs i7 argument from the 2500k era onward. The chips with hyperthreading just last longer. If you don't want to spend 9900k prices, go 8700k or the AMD route.

If you can though, wait and see what black friday deals bring in.
 

Organik

Weaksauce
Joined
Aug 28, 2018
Messages
85
i am going to upgrade soon, going from a dual core wolfdale to something modern, is the difference between the 9700 and the 9900 worth the difference in price?
i mostly game and surf the web, watch some shows, and do a little webmastering, my own private site for me and friends who game together in RL oldstyle.
i mean the price is about 40-50 percent more for a 9900k but the clock speed difference is minor and there are no extra cores, i just dont know if i should spend the extra
Grab the 9700k if you want maximum gaming performance. The 9900k might be 5 fps more or something. Also it will be a good CPU for general stuff. If your work load is video editing and rendering then opt for the 9900k. But as long as its not your job to use these HT apps the 9700k would do just fine with all yoru computing needs especially gaming and what not.
 

somebrains

Gawd
Joined
Nov 10, 2013
Messages
896
Heh, weathered well indeed. You had a wolfdale right? 8500? That thing is at last 8 years old. If you're going to want the new rig to last that long, just buy a 9900k. They're overpriced as all heck but it sounds like you'll make it last the next 5 years minimum. In no way would I recommend the 9700k for long term use, hyperthreading is far too important these days. Its the old i5 vs i7 argument from the 2500k era onward. The chips with hyperthreading just last longer. If you don't want to spend 9900k prices, go 8700k or the AMD route.

If you can though, wait and see what black friday deals bring in.
I like the synergy of the OP going from the old 8500 to a new i5-8500 and rocking that for a decade.
 

somebrains

Gawd
Joined
Nov 10, 2013
Messages
896
If next i5 is 6c/12t the 9700k won't look like that great a buy.

I picked up a $100 8400 today bc I needed a Linux box up for a side project.

8700k will forever in my heart be better than the 8400 or 9700k in real world gaming, but not 3x better than a lowly 6c junker in the GPU bound games I play at 1440p.

For me, I needed a cheapie air cooled box that could drive a pair of monitors without my 1080ti. Does it fine.

It also plays Blackout and MW totally fine when I cheated for 4 hours tonight.
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
10,232
8700k will forever in my heart be better than the 8400 or 9700k in real world gaming, .
Don't conflate totally different things. Obviously the the 8700K is much better than the 8400.

The 9700K OTOH is better than the 8700K.
 
Top