Is it worth it to upgrade from 7700k to 9700k for gaming?

C

celpas

n00b
Joined
Jun 6, 2017
Messages
15
I just bought an RTX 2080 and so far the only games I have played on it are Assassins creed odyssey,origins and Battlefield V. At 1440P resolution, although my FPS stays above 50, I have a 144hz monitor and my GPU utilisation is rarely at 99% like my old GTX 970. It’s always fluctuating between 78-90%. In Alexandria city in origins, the bottleneck is horrible as my GPU utilisation is 60% with 52 fps. Should I upgrade to 9700k? Will it solve this issue? My use case is only gaming.

I bought the 7700k last year and am surprised it’s become this weak for gaming in just 1 year.
 
Some games will definitely see a performance increase if they utilize more cores. However in most games clock speed and single thread IPC are king and an OC 7700k will perform the same as an OC 9700k. If you stream or do encoding then it's worth it otherwise no.
 
Overall, you're looking at $400 for the CPU and another ~$200 for a new motherboard and you might pick up a few extra FPS in some games. I don't know what your personal upgrade cycle is though. Maybe OC your 7700k a little further (if you haven't done so already).
 
If I remember right AC Origins hit most cpus hard. See

You've also picked 3 games that seem to favor 6+ cores to some degree. Might try some different graphics settings. Overall, not worth the cost.
 
Since you need a new motherboard, no.


If your 7700K can already hit 5 ghz, you might as well grab an 8700K if you need 2 more cores and 4 more threads, keep the same motherboard and keep your costs down. The 8086K is higher binned than the 8700K but you pay for that (guaranteed 5 ghz on all cores at <1.350v).

and the 8700K vs 9700K is a sidegrade (you gain like 50 points in cinebench for having the 2 extra cores vs vs the 4 extra logical threads).

The 7700K, 8086K and 9700K all have the exact same IPC because it's the same basic arch.
Either go balls deep for double the cores (9900K which means new motherboard) or just get the 8700K.

The 9700K and 9900K are huge upgrades for people on Sandy or older.
 
My opinion at this point is gaming consumers should be buying 8 core chips. Rumor is confirmed the new Xbox and PS5 will be using 8 core Ryzens.

Since games and game engines are often developed for console and ported over to PC, why have lesser core count than the next gen of consoles if the price difference is negligable. You might be right back where you are now in a year or two if you go to a six core. Frankly with the Intel prices currently - I’d wait till your 7700k poses a real problem and Intel offers a cheaper 8 core chip, or buy a gsync monitor so that 50hz still feels buttery smooth, or switch to AMD with a 2700 or 2700x chip. You might want to see the newest adoredtv leak which suggests AMD will be releasing ~5ghz boostclock 12 core /24 thread consumer chips for $330 and ~ 5ghz boostclock 16 core /32 thread chips for $500 in May 2019. That’s a heck of a lot of CPU for the money, and Intel has no immediate answer for that.

Timestamp 13:37
 
Last edited:
Falkentyne said:
Since you need a new motherboard, no.


If your 7700K can already hit 5 ghz, you might as well grab an 8700K if you need 2 more cores and 4 more threads, keep the same motherboard and keep your costs down. The 8086K is higher binned than the 8700K but you pay for that (guaranteed 5 ghz on all cores at <1.350v).

and the 8700K vs 9700K is a sidegrade (you gain like 50 points in cinebench for having the 2 extra cores vs vs the 4 extra logical threads).

The 7700K, 8086K and 9700K all have the exact same IPC because it's the same basic arch.
Either go balls deep for double the cores (9900K which means new motherboard) or just get the 8700K.

The 9700K and 9900K are huge upgrades for people on Sandy or older.
Click to expand...
You can't run an 8700k in a 7700k motherboard. 7700k is 100/200 series chipsets, 8700k/9700k are 300 series chipsets.
 
Archaea said:
You might want to see the newest adoredtv leak which suggests AMD will be releasing ~5ghz boostclock 12 core /24 thread consumer chips for $330 and ~ 5ghz boostclock 16 core /32 thread chips for $500 in May 2019. That’s a heck of a lot of CPU for the money, and Intel has no immediate answer for that.
Click to expand...

Intel has no immediate answer for... an AMD leak about a future product release?

So we just need to fabricate something realistic enough for WCCFTech to 'publish' implicating an Intel release?

Being realistic, for stuff that that does not make good use of >8 threads, AMD doesn't have an answer for a 5GHz 7700K, right now.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
Intel has no immediate answer for... an AMD leak about a future product release?

So we just need to fabricate something realistic enough for WCCFTech to 'publish' implicating an Intel release?

Being realistic, for stuff that that does not make good use of >8 threads, AMD doesn't have an answer for a 5GHz 7700K, right now.
Click to expand...


Let’s talk again in six months.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
The OP is asking about today, so no.
Click to expand...

Well, he already has a 7700K so why would we bother with today then? 6 months from now is the best option. Oh, and he did not list his motherboard, ram type and speed, overclock and of course, there is all those spectre and meltdown fixes to slow things down on the Intel side.
 
No. Keep money for a video card upgrade or dinner at a restaurant... the former is the bottleneck most of the times... I went from 5930K (@4.2GHZ) to 9700K and no impact was noticeable (this was not planned as my motherboard died) ... I went from 1080 ti to 2080 ti and noticed significant impact
 
mdzcpa said:
Depends on the games. Higher thread counts seem to be on the rise.
Click to expand...

I'm kinda wondering what exactly is maxing out four 4 to 5GHz cores in a game that makes it worth it to move to 6 or 8 threads.
 
Ryom said:
I'm kinda wondering what exactly is maxing out four 4 to 5GHz cores in a game that makes it worth it to move to 6 or 8 threads.
Click to expand...

BF5 alone stresses all the 16 threads on my 9900k, so it is the game its self, the higher graphic fidelity the more cpu power it needs to push that data alongside with the people you are playing with inside a server.

for single player mode the 4 core cpu is completely still fine for most games today, things change once inside a server to play a multiplayer game.

I went from a 4/8 core cpu to 8/16 core cpu and difference is mind boggling in latest multiplayer games.
 
Ranulfo said:
If I remember right AC Origins hit most cpus hard. See

You've also picked 3 games that seem to favor 6+ cores to some degree. Might try some different graphics settings. Overall, not worth the cost.
Click to expand...


meaningless cpu benchmark that is, static single player loops with nothing going on, that is good to benchmark gpu's.

that is not how you benchmark CPU's, lol.

there was a video I saw not too long ago, it was bf5 multiplayer game, it showed intense fight on the map that has that collapsed bridge, the fps difference between a 4 core cpu and 8 core cpu at some spots showed 55fps difference. It also showed sudden and huge fps drops, sometimes in 40's and 50's just by looking at a different direction in the game due to the bridge with the 4 core cpu.
 
OP - you could easily last another year and by then the 9700K if it's still a "wish list" item will be going for less $$.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top