Intel Core i7-9700K Review
| Category | Desktop | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
|---|---|---|
| Target | high-end | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Socket Compatibility | LGA1151 | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Integrated Graphics | Intel UHD Graphics 630 | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Cooler Included | No | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Overclock Potential | 2 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Year | 2018 Model | ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ |
| Price | 374 USD | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
| Number of Cores | 8 Cores | ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ |
| Number of Threads | 8 Threads | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Core Frequency | 3.6 GHz | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
| Boost Frequency | 4.9 GHz | ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ |
| Max Stable Overclock | 5 GHz | ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ |
| Power Consumption | 95 W | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Manufacturing Process | 14 nm | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB | ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ |
| Maximum Supported Memory | 128 GB | ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ |
| Price-Value Score | 66 % | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Speed Score | 74 % | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
| Productivity Score | 49 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Gaming Score | 92 % | ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ |
| Max 1080p Bottleneck | 12 % | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Max 1440p Bottleneck | 6 % | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
| Max 4K Bottleneck | 3 % | ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ |
| Overall Score | 50/100 | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
The Core i7-9700K is one of Intel's high-end Desktop processors. It was released in 2018 with 8 cores and 8 threads. With base clock at 3.6GHz, max speed at 4.9GHz, and a 95W power rating. The Core i7-9700K is based on the Coffee Lake Refresh 14nm family and is part of the Core i7 series.
Core i7-9700K is also the successor of Intel's last gen Core i7-8700K processor that was based on the Coffee Lake and 14nm process and was released in 2017.
The Intel Core i7-9700K was rolled out on Oct 2018 for $374, which puts it in the same general price range as the last-generation Core i7-8700K. This means that at least we're not seeing any considerable price jumps from generation to generation.
What this all means is that the Intel Core i7-9700K is an absolute beast when it comes to multi-threaded workloads, especially at this price point. If you're counting on doing some video editing or compiling one hell of an Excel spreadsheet, you're going to see firsthand a performance boost with the Core i7-9700K.
So which should you buy? Let's get that out of the way. Before this comparison review we updated our Best CPU feature and we said you should go with the Ryzen 7 3800X as it comes with a better stock cooler, can be overclocked, and the AM4 platform offers a significantly better upgrade path.
When it comes to gaming it’s fair to say there’s no wrong option here and the Ryzen 7 3800X and Core i7-9700K are evenly matched. The Core i7-9700K is at times faster thanks to better game support and lower latencies, but the Ryzen 7 3800X is often able to ensure smoother frame rates thanks to its support for twice as many threads.
For general computing the Ryzen 7 3800X can take advantage of multi-threading capabilities and will be considerably faster than the Core i7-9700K on heavy application workloads. Remember the Core i7-9700K is only marginally faster than the Core i7-8700K, so you can safely use the older model as a measuring stick. For rendering and encoding workloads the Ryzen 7 3800X can up to 42% faster.
If you're mostly playing games on your PC, you will be happy buying either processor. Both proved to be solid options and are evenly matched with a slight advantage to the AMD chip if you don't tune up the Ryzen 7 processor. The base performance we showed for the Core i7-9700K can be achieved with $90 memory, while the Ryzen 7 3800X will require $110 - $120 memory in order to enable the frame rates shown here. It’s not a big cost difference and right now with anything less than an RTX 2070 or Vega 64 you’ll more than likely become GPU limited.
Moving beyond games, it’s an easy win for the Ryzen 7 3800X. The Ryzen 7 upgrade path on A320, B350, B450, X370, X470, X570 motherboards, all support upcoming Zen 2 processors. So if you buy a nice A320, B350, B450, X370, X470, X570 board now with the Ryzen 7 3800X, you’ll be able to slap a Coffee Lake Refresh processor on there later in the year, or whenever you deem it necessary.
Now the biggest question is can Intel’s Core i7 processor play games? The answer is simply yes as it got a respectable gaming score of 92% in our benchmarks.
That said, to squeeze out all the potential of this surprisingly potent high-end chip, you’ll want (and need) to splurge on an enthusiast-grade Z270, Z370, Z390 motherboard.
Fresh from a successful roll-out of mainstream Core i7 CPUs, Intel's attack on AMD now extends down into the high-end with its Core i7-9700K processors, which the company is making available as of Oct 2018.
Which GPU to Pick for Intel Core i7-9700K
Below is a comparison of all graphics cards average FPS performance (using an average of 80+ games at ultra quality settings), combined with the Intel Core i7-9700K.
| Graphics Card | Price | Cost Per Frame | Avg 1080p | Avg 1440p | Avg 4K |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 24GB | $ 1,599 | $ 4.6 | 348.2 FPS
|
284.6 FPS
|
186.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Ti 20GB | $ 799 | $ 2.5 | 324.9 FPS
|
265.6 FPS
|
173.7 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX 24GB | $ 999 | $ 3.2 | 314.3 FPS
|
252.1 FPS
|
150.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16GB | $ 1,199 | $ 4 | 301.7 FPS
|
246.5 FPS
|
161.2 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti 12GB | $ 799 | $ 2.8 | 289.9 FPS
|
236.8 FPS
|
154.8 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT 20GB | $ 899 | $ 3.1 | 285.7 FPS
|
229.3 FPS
|
136.3 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 24GB | $ 1,499 | $ 5.5 | 271.2 FPS
|
213.8 FPS
|
131.6 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT 16GB | $ 1,099 | $ 4.2 | 259.6 FPS
|
208.4 FPS
|
123.9 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti 24GB | $ 1,999 | $ 7.8 | 255.3 FPS
|
208.6 FPS
|
136.4 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT 16GB | $ 999 | $ 3.9 | 254.2 FPS
|
201.6 FPS
|
122 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT 16GB | $ 649 | $ 2.7 | 239.4 FPS
|
189.8 FPS
|
114.9 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti 20GB | $ 799 | $ 3.4 | 236.4 FPS
|
190.1 FPS
|
121.4 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 10GB | $ 699 | $ 3 | 236.3 FPS
|
186.3 FPS
|
114.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 12GB | $ 599 | $ 2.6 | 228.2 FPS
|
181.8 FPS
|
117.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti 10GB | $ 599 | $ 3 | 202.8 FPS
|
161.2 FPS
|
101 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6800 16GB | $ 579 | $ 3.1 | 189.6 FPS
|
150.3 FPS
|
91 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 8GB | $ 499 | $ 2.8 | 180.8 FPS
|
142.6 FPS
|
87.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA TITAN RTX 24GB | $ 2,499 | $ 15.1 | 166 FPS
|
135.2 FPS
|
83.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti 11GB | $ 1,299 | $ 8 | 161.6 FPS
|
131.6 FPS
|
81.5 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT 12GB | $ 479 | $ 3 | 159.6 FPS
|
127.4 FPS
|
76.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB 8GB | $ 399 | $ 2.5 | 156.9 FPS
|
126.7 FPS
|
80.4 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti 8GB | $ 399 | $ 2.7 | 148.1 FPS
|
119.9 FPS
|
75.2 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER 8GB | $ 699 | $ 4.8 | 146.7 FPS
|
118.2 FPS
|
72.9 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT 8GB | $ 399 | $ 2.8 | 141.5 FPS
|
113.5 FPS
|
69.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA TITAN V 12GB | $ 2,999 | $ 21.3 | 140.6 FPS
|
114.5 FPS
|
72.3 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 8GB | $ 299 | $ 2.1 | 140.5 FPS
|
114.1 FPS
|
72.3 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 7600 8GB | $ 269 | $ 1.9 | 140.4 FPS
|
112.8 FPS
|
68.4 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 8GB | $ 699 | $ 5 | 138.6 FPS
|
110.6 FPS
|
67.6 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT 8GB | $ 379 | $ 2.9 | 132.8 FPS
|
106 FPS
|
64.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GB | $ 759 | $ 5.8 | 129.9 FPS
|
105.5 FPS
|
65 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER 8GB | $ 499 | $ 3.9 | 129.2 FPS
|
101.8 FPS
|
62.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA TITAN Xp 12GB | $ 1,199 | $ 9.4 | 127.4 FPS
|
101.8 FPS
|
64.1 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon VII 16GB | $ 699 | $ 5.5 | 127.4 FPS
|
101.1 FPS
|
61.2 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB | $ 399 | $ 3.2 | 124.1 FPS
|
98.4 FPS
|
59.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 8GB | $ 499 | $ 4.1 | 122.4 FPS
|
95.1 FPS
|
59.3 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 8GB | $ 200 | $ 1.6 | 122.4 FPS
|
98.4 FPS
|
62.4 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 12GB | $ 329 | $ 2.7 | 121.5 FPS
|
96.1 FPS
|
59.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER 8GB | $ 400 | $ 3.5 | 115.9 FPS
|
88.6 FPS
|
54.2 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5700 8GB | $ 349 | $ 3.1 | 113.7 FPS
|
90.2 FPS
|
54.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 8GB | $ 499 | $ 4.5 | 110.4 FPS
|
86.3 FPS
|
52.3 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 6GB | $ 350 | $ 3.2 | 109 FPS
|
81.5 FPS
|
48.9 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT 6GB | $ 279 | $ 2.6 | 107.3 FPS
|
84.4 FPS
|
50.9 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 295X2 4GB | $ 1,499 | $ 14.5 | 103.4 FPS
|
79.7 FPS
|
51.4 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB | $ 499 | $ 4.8 | 103.2 FPS
|
81.9 FPS
|
49.4 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti 8GB | $ 409 | $ 4 | 102.3 FPS
|
79.9 FPS
|
48.3 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti 6GB | $ 249 | $ 2.5 | 100 FPS
|
77.6 FPS
|
47.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X 12GB | $ 999 | $ 10.1 | 99.4 FPS
|
76.8 FPS
|
46.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB | $ 279 | $ 2.9 | 97.3 FPS
|
76 FPS
|
45.9 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB | $ 399 | $ 4.1 | 96.7 FPS
|
76.6 FPS
|
46.2 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 8GB | $ 399 | $ 4.2 | 94.2 FPS
|
72.9 FPS
|
43.8 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER 6GB | $ 229 | $ 2.5 | 91.7 FPS
|
71.8 FPS
|
43.4 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti 6GB | $ 649 | $ 7.5 | 86.5 FPS
|
67.3 FPS
|
40.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 6GB | $ 220 | $ 2.5 | 86.3 FPS
|
67.5 FPS
|
40.7 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 590 8GB | $ 279 | $ 3.4 | 81.9 FPS
|
62.1 FPS
|
36.8 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB | $ 649 | $ 8.3 | 78.6 FPS
|
63.9 FPS
|
39.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER 4GB | $ 160 | $ 2.1 | 75.2 FPS
|
58.6 FPS
|
35.4 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 8GB 8GB | $ 199 | $ 2.7 | 74.5 FPS
|
56.5 FPS
|
33.3 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 4GB | $ 549 | $ 7.4 | 74.2 FPS
|
57 FPS
|
34.7 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 580 8GB | $ 229 | $ 3.2 | 72.6 FPS
|
55 FPS
|
32.3 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 Nano 4GB | $ 649 | $ 9.1 | 71.5 FPS
|
57.1 FPS
|
35.2 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK 6GB | $ 999 | $ 14.4 | 69.3 FPS
|
52.8 FPS
|
33.5 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 FURY 4GB | $ 549 | $ 8.1 | 67.6 FPS
|
53.8 FPS
|
32.8 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB 6GB | $ 254 | $ 3.8 | 67.4 FPS
|
51.5 FPS
|
31.1 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB 4GB | $ 169 | $ 2.5 | 66.8 FPS
|
50.8 FPS
|
29.9 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 390X 8GB | $ 429 | $ 6.6 | 65 FPS
|
51.6 FPS
|
31.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3GB 3GB | $ 170 | $ 2.7 | 63.9 FPS
|
49 FPS
|
29.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 4GB | $ 329 | $ 5.2 | 62.9 FPS
|
47.6 FPS
|
30 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 480 8GB | $ 400 | $ 6.5 | 61.1 FPS
|
48 FPS
|
29.7 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 390 8GB | $ 329 | $ 5.4 | 60.7 FPS
|
47.1 FPS
|
27.2 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 570 4GB | $ 169 | $ 2.8 | 59.9 FPS
|
46.5 FPS
|
27.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 4GB | $ 149 | $ 2.6 | 57.3 FPS
|
44.4 FPS
|
26.7 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 470 4GB | $ 179 | $ 3.3 | 53.5 FPS
|
41.7 FPS
|
25.1 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 380X 4GB | $ 229 | $ 5.1 | 45 FPS
|
34.7 FPS
|
21.3 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 285 2GB | $ 249 | $ 6.2 | 40.4 FPS
|
31.2 FPS
|
18.1 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 380 2GB | $ 199 | $ 5 | 40.1 FPS
|
30.9 FPS
|
18.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti 4GB | $ 169 | $ 4.3 | 39.5 FPS
|
30.6 FPS
|
18.4 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 280 3GB | $ 279 | $ 7.1 | 39.1 FPS
|
30.5 FPS
|
17.4 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 2GB | $ 199 | $ 5.2 | 38.6 FPS
|
29.7 FPS
|
17.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | $ 169 | $ 5 | 33.6 FPS
|
25.8 FPS
|
15.3 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 560 4GB | $ 99 | $ 3.2 | 31.1 FPS
|
23.6 FPS
|
14 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 2GB | $ 159 | $ 5.2 | 30.5 FPS
|
23.1 FPS
|
14.2 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R7 370 2GB | $ 149 | $ 5 | 29.9 FPS
|
21.7 FPS
|
13.5 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R7 265 2GB | $ 149 | $ 5 | 29.7 FPS
|
21 FPS
|
13 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 460 4GB | $ 140 | $ 5.1 | 27.5 FPS
|
20.9 FPS
|
12.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti 2GB | $ 149 | $ 5.6 | 26.5 FPS
|
18 FPS
|
11.2 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 550 2GB | $ 79 | $ 3.6 | 21.7 FPS
|
16.6 FPS
|
9.8 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 2GB | $ 79 | $ 3.8 | 20.7 FPS
|
15.8 FPS
|
9.1 FPS
|
Related Discussions and Issues
If the radiator isn't getting hot that might indicate the pump isn't working.
I thought that also but when I check the rpms on it in bios it’s running about 2000rpm, the hoses and radiator are warm but not hot.
At what temp would the fail safe kick in the shut my PC off? I thought it was 105C but the temp reading hit 115C last night.
Yes I know. This just started 2 days ago and it happened all of a sudden so idk what the problem is
It takes about 3 hours of gaming for it to start getting above 80c but once it hits 80c it’ll go to 100c pretty quickly.
No but I ordered another aio liquid cooler that’ll be here Friday. I probably just won’t mess with it until then
It was just barely bumping my RAM so I sent it back. I guess I could go from 4 4gb stick to 2 8 gb and make one fit though.
Pump failure?
Can't happen to me, even people downstairs hear the small CPU fan on my Ryujin loud and clear.
That’s what I’m asking dude. Are my temps reading wrong or do I have a real issue. No need to be a prick.
I tried a Noctua 15 and it wouldn’t fit with my ram so I went back to aio liquid.
Help me get my 9700k to 5.0
Hi I'm getting into pc building and got my rig over here with a z390 phantom gaming 4ib motherboard and a 9700k I tried searching in youtube a simple guide to overclock with this specific motherboard but didn't find any so im asking the community for help I have no knowledge of OC but realized that it could be beneficial since I have a castle 360 liquid cooler running stock speeds please help
Here’s a pretty good tutorial. Follow the flow chart to get it to where your system can run stable: https://www.tweaktown.com/guides/9225/intel-core-i9-9900k-kf-overclocking-guide/amp.html
Well I managed to leave it at 5.1 with 1.27v is that good?
Was able to OC 9700k to 5ghz , thanks for all your help ! Wanted you opinions and One last question about degradation.
You were all so good about helping me on this Reddit that I wanted to report : That I was able to get stable at 5ghz all cores with a voltage of 1.350 ( I think last time I may have used 1.305v 🤦♂️) or it’s possible I’m stable Because I turned LCC from turbo to medium. Also my avx offset is 0 and all speed states / power settings are on. After 10mins of OCCT there was no errors and temps reaching 60c ,and also no errors in prime 95 but after about 15 minutes temps did spike to the highest of 87c in core #2 and the other cores maxing in 80’s for a few minutes but no as high and dropping back down after a few minutes to Average temps that where throughout the test low 60c’s. I’m ready to call this a win and pack it in. With out trying again with lower voltages ( since I’ve been doing this for 3 days ) if we’re in agreement 1.350v shouldn’t hurt anything overtime ? Reading about degradation is scary and I guess from what I understand can happen at any voltage over stock but I’m hoping I am in what’s considered safe zone? Again you have all been great, thanks for all your help !
You can easily push 1.4v+ on 14nm Intel parts provided temps are good and you aren't pulling a shit ton of current. Many times you'll run into thermal issues well before you're hitting dangerous voltages.
Well done! My 9700K is at 5.1Ghz AVX-0 at 1.380V. I think anything under 1.4V is completely safe for 24/7. I recently swapped to an 850W Gold PSU and I’m not sure if it’s just in my head but my computer seems much happier compared to my 650W.
I must be lucky, I get 5.1ghz @ 1.25v, 5.2 @ 1.30v. It runs hot and loud fans at though at 5.2, so use 5.1 as daily driver
Yeah, I’m new but from what I read that’s Considered a golden chip
I’ve been running 5.1ghz on my 9700k at 1.36V for almost a year now with no degradation whatsoever. As others have said: Don’t go above 1.4V 24/7 and you’re golden.
5GHz @ 1.33v (1.28 under load, medium LLC for a lil droop and lower spikes) here with a D15 Aircooler.
1.35v looks pretty solid to me and those temps are nice too, Prime 95 thermal soaks my D15 in the low 90C.
Need help stabilizing both CPU and RAM overclock - they are stable separately (9700K, 4400 CL19)
MB: MSI Z390 Gaming Edge ACCPU: i7 9700KRAM: Patriot Viper Steel 4400 MHz CL19 (2x8 GB)
-
I managed to OC my CPU @ 5 GHz (-2 AVX), tested stability with Prime95, OCCT (Small and Large data set) and games with RAM at 2133 MHz and auto settings.
-
Then I "OCed" RAM to 4000 MHz 16-16-16-34 and tested stability with TM5, memtest and OCCT (Large data set) with CPU at stock.*
But I can't get it to work together. I get errors in OCCT Large data set in time under 1 hour.
\* - neither of XMP profiles are willing to work on my MOBO. First one at 4400 MHz won't POST, but I guess that's normal, according to official MSI info on this board and memory compatibility table https://www.msi.com//Motherboard/support/MPG-Z390-GAMING-EDGE-AC#support-mem-3 (PVS416G440C9K) max listed is 4266 MHz.But second profile at 4266 Mhz will only boot to Windows but any memtest will yield errors very fast. Event at 4133 same story. 4000 is highest I can run it.
CPU needs more vcore when you have faster RAM. A quick way to test it is to drop the CPU speed by a multiplier, but I'd just raise the voltage by 20mV.
Antzuuu appears to have the right answer.
By the way, what voltage did you give your 9700k?
When OCed without RAM I run it at Offset -0.25V or Override 1.35V (Intel C-states, etc. disabled).
The RAM alone was set to 4 GHz 16-16-16-34, 1.45V, but VCCIO and VCCSA have be bit high at 1.3V. But checking this kit reviews and YT (like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtucSUA5TOI ) this seems rather normal for it.
Both OC combined give errors.
Right now I'm testing with RAM at 3866 MHz 15-15-15-32 and it seems ok. Latency is 0.25 us better compared to 4000 so I'll most likely stick with it.
Getting 10 FPS on minecraft in my i7 9700k / RTX 2080 Super PC. Help please
I can play GTA V 1440p +100 FPS but Im getting 10 FPS on minecraft. Not even using max settings, adn my chunk render distance is set to 9. Also asked on r/Minecraft but nobody answers. Please help
Not totally sure if this is the solution, but maybe MineCraft is using the wrong GPU. Mine was using my Intel integrated graphics before I switched it to my main GPU. You can check by pressing f3 in game, and on the right hand side of the screen, it should list the GPU used under the memory usage.
It says that its using the GPU, but shows 512 mb of memory limit. Idk how to change it
Are you running modded? If so did you give more memory to java?
No mods, just installed it. Been looking for almost an hour how to give more memory to java but I cant find it
Intel Vs AMD: Which CPU is Best?
Jul 12, 2020 - A rivalry for the ages, and a question often asked and wondered about. Whenever you want to build or upgrade your PC, you have to make a decision: Buy an Intel or AMD processor?
Impact of RAM Size and Speed on Gaming Benchmarks
Jul 5, 2020 - Does RAM size and speed affect your gaming performance? should you invest in a high performance RAM kit? Find out here.
Who Is Lilith and What Terrifies Us About This Diablo Demon?
Jul 24, 2023 No evil entity is more scary than Lilith herself, shrouded in darkness.
Why You Should Always Buy a Mid-to-High-Range Gaming PC?
Jun 23, 2020 - Mid- and high-range builds perform very well for their price, and are better than the entry-level in terms of power, longevity, and reliability, and they offer more bang for your buck especially when looking at their price-by-year advantage.
Should you buy a Pre-Built PC or a Custom PC?
Jun 11, 2020 - Pre-built systems are an attractive option for those who are less concerned with the minute details of every component in their build. Building your own PC is the best solution for those who want full control over every aspect of their build. It provides the most thorough customization options, from the CPU to the fans and lighting.
How to use CPUAgent To Find The Right CPU
Jun 2, 2020 - How to find the Right CPU? Whether you’re building or upgrading a PC, the processor matters a lot. CPUAgent is the right tool to help you find and choose the right CPU for your needs.
RTX 3070 with 10600k vs 3700x Bottleneck Comparison
Sep 03, 2020 - Save your CPU money and invest it in a powerful GPU instead. So, which affordable yet powerfulrt CPU strikes the best performance-price balance with the NVIDIA RTX 3070?
10600K vs 3600X: Battle of the mid-range CPUs
May 23, 2020 - The best performance to price value mid-range cpus are here. Find out more in this comprehensive review and summary of the Core i5-10600K vs Ryzen 5 3600X's capabilities.
10700K vs 3700X: Specs, 80+ Game Benchmarks, Bottleneck, and Streaming Analysis
May 22, 2020 - Which one is worth it, Core i7-10700K or Ryzen 7 3700X? Find out in this comprehensive review and summary of the Core i7-10700K vs Ryzen 7 3700X's capabilities.
13900K vs 3900X: Specs, 80+ Game Benchmarks, Bottleneck, and Streaming Analysis
May 21, 2020 - 10 cores vs 12 cores. Top-of-the-line very high-end cpus duke it out.
2500K vs 3570K vs 4670K vs 6600K vs 7600K vs 8600K vs 9600K vs 10600K: Should you consider upgrading?
May 21, 2020 - In this massive comparison across 8 generations of Intel Core i5 series CPUs, we explore the performance improvements by generation and whether it is reasonable or not to upgrade to Intel's latest.
Critics Reviews
The Intel Core i7-10700K also has a rated base clock of 3.8GHz compared to 3.6GHz on the Intel Core i7-9700K. Both processors can boost one core using Intel’s Turbo Boost technology, with the i7 ...
The $385 Core i7-9700K lands between the $500+ Core i9-9900K and the $263 Core i5-9600K in Intel's line-up. Like all new K-series processors, the -9700K is manufactured on Intel's 14nm++ process.
The Bottom Line. Intel's Core i7-9700K is a proficient mainstream CPU for gaming enthusiasts, but AMD's Ryzen 7 3700X offers better value and better performance on many computing tasks.
Product Store Price; Intel Core i7-9700K Desktop Processor 8 ... Intel Core i7-9700K Desktop Processor 8 Cores up to 4.9 GHz Turbo unlocked LGA1151 300 Series 95W
The Intel Core i7-9700K is a proficient mainstream CPU for gaming enthusiasts, but AMD's Ryzen 7 3700X offers better value and better performance on many computing tasks.
My Core i7-9700K testbed is the same as for the Core i9-9900K. It includes the latest Nvidia's 416.34 drivers for the GTX 1080 Ti Founders Edition, all the current versions of the games, and ...
Intel Core i7 9700K specs. Intel has yet again refused to cede any ground to AMD in the great CPU struggle unfolding over these last few years. The i7 9700K marks Intel’s response to the Ryzen 7 ...
The Core i7-9700K packs the same eight cores but can only process 8 simultaneous threads. It comes clocked at the same 3.6 GHz base frequency while the all-core and single-core clock speeds ...
Core i7-9700K doesn't use as much power as the Core i9-9900K. It even draws less power overclocked than a stock Core i9-9900K in both non-AVX and AVX stress tests. Bear in mind that the ...
HELP!!!! i7 9700k msi afterburner and HEinfo says its hitting 115c when gaming but neither the radiator or pump on the aio cooler are hot?