Didn't buy it during the Black friday sale, but now the price is dropping down and going to pull the trigger on i9.
I'd rather pay $33 more for the 10850K
Better base frequency and overclocking potential.
agree, pay a bit more, do OC to 5.2~5.3GHz then can be close to 5800x's single core score and beat it at multi-core performance
OC to 5.2
OC to 5.2
You should be able to overclock the 10900F up to 5.2Ghz since that's the Turbo speed.
That'll be the single core turbo - All core is only ~4.5GHz.
10850K TDP - 125W while 10900F is 65W. Meaning it is better for the environment.
and by environment you mean wallet
also meaning the lower gaming FPS/waiting time of compiling source code
Wrong, 10850k is better than 10900k. Check the techpowerup review
@Dienk: 10850k isn't better than 10900k. It's got a better price to performance.
@tempestswitch: If you've noticed the Core i9-10850K clearly beating the Core i9-10900K in some of our tests, also make sure to read the page before this one, where I go into more detail on what happened and why. It opens up interesting conclusions, but either way, the performance difference between the i9-10850K and i9-10900K is almost negligible. If you don't need an i9-10900K for your ego, the i9-10850K will be just as good.
@Dienk: So you're assosiated with Techpowerup?
clearly beating the Core i9-10900K in some of our tests yeah by a few ms and fps. Honestly I'd say thats within margin of error considering they're just 100mhz different.
There' a lot of words that contradict what you say. You also said If you don't need an i9-10900K for your ego, the i9-10850K will be just as good. But you said 10850K is better? Now you say it's just as good
Where in the article does it say the 10850K is better than the 10900K? Even the 10700K beat the i9's in a few examples so does that mean I can say the 10700K is better than i9? No. The 10850K is better is some things, the 10900K is better in other things.
@tempestswitch: Clocks higher, it is cheaper with less heat and power consumption = better
If for you 2% better = better CPU overall..good on you.
Did I say the article claimed it was better? Just read that and get YOUR OWN conclusions. You shouldn't need someone telling you it is better.
You need to decide if you want to say they are the same (like your last line) or 10900k is better like the original post.
@Dienk: Well to be fair you said ** in some of our tests** which means you're associated/it's your review? Which means you saying it's better comes from your tests in the review. Somewhat bias.
You can't just say it's better without backing it up. I said the 10850K has a a better price to performance. You just plain said Wrong, 10850k is better than 10900k. Check the techpowerup review
I said what I wanted to say and I back that: The 10850K is better is some things, the 10900K is better in other things.
No wonder people downvoted your comment ¯_(ツ)_/¯
@tempestswitch: I copied and pasted the message from the review. I should have added " "
That's just the base TDP and not power consumption. The 10850k can consume about 300w when overclocked on all cores, and the 10900F still consumes about 224W at stock speeds on all cores.
Also this price at MSY. Question, are the two extra cores worth it over something like an i7 10700k?
MSY you get no service. People are so rude in the shop.
You don't go to MSY for service. You go in to get what you want quickly if it's in stock. No waiting times like Mwave, Umart, Scorptec etc..