Intel Core i9-11900K ES and Core i7-11700 ES prices leaked in china

If the 11700K handily outperforms the 5800X and supports PCIe 4.0, I might switch to Intel for the first time in nearly 20 years. But, if AMD drops the price of the 5800X to something more competitive and has a lower overall wattage, I think I'll get that instead. I care more about efficiency than total performance.

 

Right now difference is huge in terms performance/watt in AMD favour , 11th gen won't change that , that is why they are max 8 core.

 

Will it be on 10nm? Because if it is, that could possibly turn the efficiency in Intel's favor.

 

Can't wait for Rocket Lake, I hope that prices will be decent

 

Sadly no , again 14nm++++ backport. Don't expect miracles , it's stop gap gen. Still good for the competition , Intel will put agressive pricing.

 

Me too, just updated to new SAM bios today, it's out of beta now. Nice work msi!

But yeah, looks like I will need new gpu for it

 

Not bad, although 14nm is really dated by now and power hungry as hell. Considering the gap in power efficiency, Intel will have to do really well within the constraints of this old process.

 

I´m the other way around. I´m with an Intel system right now (7600K) but my next system is probably going to be from AMD, not because of performance or price but because of the lame stunt Intel pulled with the socket to prevent Z170/Z270 owners from upgrading to newer CPUS. And i always wanted to try AMD.
The question now is if i go with the 5600x, that seems a little gem, or if i try to stretch the budget to a 5800x. Or maybe something comes along...

 

I used to care about the idea of a long-lived socket with the chance for a good upgrade path, but, not only has that not worked in my favor (X370 isn't compatible with Zen3) but even if it did, I keep my hardware long enough that I'd rather just do a major overhaul. That being said, I'm not happy with how Intel artificially cripples backward compatibility, but, whatever CPU I get is likely the only one that I'll ever install in the mobo anyway.

If I were you, I'd wait for the 5700X, assuming it will exist. The 5800X is, IMO, too expensive for what it is and is the primary reason why I'm seriously considering Intel. I feel the 5600X is the best all-around CPU today but when it comes to gaming, I think it's on the brink of obsolescence. That being said, I also will be waiting for a 5700X.

 

for gaming 10700KF > 5600X,faster and cheaper,more cores,higher OC headroom+better memory OC headroom.
if amd priced their 5000 series on par with 3000 or at least with intel's 10th gen they would've wiped the floor with CML-S,but damn,they went cuckoo with $450 for an 8/16

 

How did you get that 10nm?

Except for the cores, it's a "no" for every aspect. And if you take it into account that you NEED to buy a Z series mobo in order to be able to use memory over 2666 MHz, it makes the Intel system more expensive, which is a shame considering it's slower, more power hungry and exposed to vulnaribilities.

 

Ah right I forgot about the KF.

 

If those are the rumours I expect it to be 0% faster, and I assume we're talking about traditional gaming which is stupidly low thread bound. If those are words from Intel I expect it to somehow be slower.

To the real point: Who gives a flying frack? It's not enough of a difference to warrant an upgrade or anything that will actually affect your gaming experience, even artificially considering how ultra hardcore we're GPU bound right now. Take that from a guy using an RTX 3080 @ 2.1GHz with an R9 3900X.

Everyone's shitting themselves that Intel are supposedly poised for a non-negligible generation to generation increase for once now that there is a single competitor. Not being in a hardcore monopoly and being in a duopoly is great isn't it?

 

Depends on the game. I've strictly been playing Star Citizen for the past few months with a bunch of friends - the game is massively single thread bound due to the renderer only using one thread (for now) + there is some other weird thing going on.. two people I play with have 5800x's and their performance nearly doubled going from 3700x. Not sure what the game does that makes the gap so big on Ryzen 5000 - but newer Intel CPUs see similar gains. Makes the game go from ~35-40fps on a 3080 to ~60-70fps on a 3080.

Now, eventually they are porting the renderer to Vulkan which should just eliminate the bottleneck -- but given the development of the game, who knows when that's going to happen, if ever. My point though is that I'm literally looking to upgrade my CPU specifically to play that game and if I can't get a 5900x in the next several months, I might actually go back to Intel.

 

here we see the little 5600x
https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/5573485

Ι have also seen the 5800x running 5.2ghz, most likely they are equivalent
surely the next upgrades to the Amd microcode will bring additional performance increases, so let's see what we can see

 

F is even better for a value purchase.
10900F costs 1800pln here vs 5600x for 1600
you're geting 10 cores and a 4.6G allcore boost

 

In the bizarro cases where the CPU usage makes no sense / is completely FUBAR like Star Citizen or Japanese games there's pretty much no hope IMO, but if you want to upgrade just for such a specific scenario go for it. I'm just saying the vast majority of users wouldn't go that route/it wouldn't matter to them.

In the case of your friends it sounds like there's something else going on, but I wouldn't put it past just Star Citizen being that broken.

 

Will never understand why folks would want to go out and buy a product that is outdated at release due to its specification a new CPU on 14nm++++++++ which will need a new motherboard to run at maximum speed, will probably consume a shitload of power to get to and maintain its boost and is pushed out by a company that for the last 10 years has frankly stuffed its customers stupid without lube!
Why?

 

Says the guy with the 3090