octane VI i9-9900k VS i7-9700k
- Thread starter slackWars
- Start date
- Status
I don't think there are any particular thermal issues with the Octane i9 systems to be honest. It's more the fact that they need to be held to 95w, for the most part, in order to curtail the temperatures. With that in mind I would love to see a comparison between the 9900k and 9700k in the Octane. I think there will be a slither between them.
If it were me, I would buy a system with the 9700k as I very much doubt there would be enough in it to tip the value scale to the 9900k.
If it were me, I would buy a system with the 9700k as I very much doubt there would be enough in it to tip the value scale to the 9900k.
superswirl
Bronze Level Poster
If you want slightly better clock speed for single threaded performance you might be able to squeeze out more frequency out of the 9700k as you want be as thermally restricted which helps a bit in a laptop. If you need more threads the 9900k even at lower clocks will out perform the 9700k.
For me id go with a 9700k because games favor higher clock speed and you still have 8 cores to feed multi threaded apps, and you save some cash to put towards GPU, SSD, etc...
For me id go with a 9700k because games favor higher clock speed and you still have 8 cores to feed multi threaded apps, and you save some cash to put towards GPU, SSD, etc...
Are you certain the 9900k will out perform the 9700k in multi-thread? I know that without limitations there will be a significant difference but I'm curious as to how much difference there will be with both chips limited to 95w.
I'm a software developer,
I will work with machine virtualization and many background process.
Are the additional threads not limited by the power limitation though?
I searched around for 95w benchmarks earlier and from what I could tell the 9900k and 9700k both managed similar throughput. If you think about it, in order for the 9900k to fair better, it would need to be more efficient. I'm not sure that more threads = more efficiency, they still need to be powered somehow at the detriment of something else.
Oussebon
Multiverse Poster
But it's not cinebench, it depends on the workloads and how/whether the OP is assigning cores.
And even if it were, the 9900k at 95W trades blows with the 'unrestricted', as it were, 9700k. Which afaics uses more than 95W
https://www.anandtech.com/show/13591/the-intel-core-i9-9900k-at-95w-fixing-the-power-for-sff/5
https://www.techspot.com/review/1744-core-i9-9900k-round-two/ (no 9700k but check out the 8700k power consumptions).
I'm not saying for sure it's better or that it's better enough to be worth the cash, but that there could be an argument. Perhaps someone who knows about running VMs more will comment (Tony1044 for instance).
And even if it were, the 9900k at 95W trades blows with the 'unrestricted', as it were, 9700k. Which afaics uses more than 95W
https://www.anandtech.com/show/13591/the-intel-core-i9-9900k-at-95w-fixing-the-power-for-sff/5
https://www.techspot.com/review/1744-core-i9-9900k-round-two/ (no 9700k but check out the 8700k power consumptions).
I'm not saying for sure it's better or that it's better enough to be worth the cash, but that there could be an argument. Perhaps someone who knows about running VMs more will comment (Tony1044 for instance).
superswirl
Bronze Level Poster
If you doing Virtualization I think more threads would be handy. SO 9900k or even 8700k or non k with 12 threads. might as well get an 8700(k) over the 9700k as its cheaper and runs cooler with more threads
The 8700k may have limitations also, again due to the 95w limitation.
The 9700k and the 9900k, I believe, are more efficient at 95w than the 8700k is. That means that you will get more throughput from both than the latter.
All that's left between the 9700k and 9900k is to determine if, firstly, the 9900k is more efficient at 95w (It may well be due to being better silicone selection) and, if they are both the same, if the 9900k makes better use of the 95w towards VM due to having hyperthreading.
It's definitely interesting and an incredibly complex scenario.
The 9700k and the 9900k, I believe, are more efficient at 95w than the 8700k is. That means that you will get more throughput from both than the latter.
All that's left between the 9700k and 9900k is to determine if, firstly, the 9900k is more efficient at 95w (It may well be due to being better silicone selection) and, if they are both the same, if the 9900k makes better use of the 95w towards VM due to having hyperthreading.
It's definitely interesting and an incredibly complex scenario.
FWIW, the i9-9900K in an Octane VI is capped at 65W / 83W short boost. This is a BIOS-level limitation, but it's something you have access to change (either in the BIOS or via XTU).
I don't know what the BIOS values are for the other chips they offer.
Really? Where is that from? Did you purchase one?
Yeah, look at their review
Oussebon: Review? where where where?
Oussebon
Multiverse Poster
Here: https://www.pcspecialist.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?62011-Octane-VI-17-3-quot-review
If you left click a user's name it brings up options including viewing their forum posts, so you can see it in Retron's posting history
If you left click a user's name it brings up options including viewing their forum posts, so you can see it in Retron's posting history
That's going to absolutely cripple the 9900k. Makes it even less worthwhile in my opinion.
I have to say, my 6700k isn't held to such restrictions in my Octane III so I'm not sure what I've done differently. It has always maxed out at 95w with a 105w boost. It even has these values in the default Clevo Control Center.
I have to say, my 6700k isn't held to such restrictions in my Octane III so I'm not sure what I've done differently. It has always maxed out at 95w with a 105w boost. It even has these values in the default Clevo Control Center.
- Status