i7 7700k to i7 12700k worth it ?

Evil Scooter

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 22, 2000
Messages
5,873
At a minimum you'll need a new mobo and upgrade to Win 11 to make it run right. Are the games you are playing topping out the 7700k? I have one in my son's PC with a 2060 and it seems to support it w/o issues.

FWIW I passed on Alder lake and upgraded to the top of the line CPU for my current socked instead.
 

ng4ever

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
3,051
At a minimum you'll need a new mobo and upgrade to Win 11 to make it run right. Are the games you are playing topping out the 7700k? I have one in my son's PC with a 2060 and it seems to support it w/o issues.

FWIW I passed on Alder lake and upgraded to the top of the line CPU for my current socked instead.

Ek I don't want Windows 11. Hmmm

Can a i7 7700k be upgraded to anything better ?
 

Kiriakos-GR

Weaksauce
Joined
Nov 21, 2021
Messages
99
Ek I don't want Windows 11. Hmmm

Can a i7 7700k be upgraded to anything better ?
For gaming you will never need anything higher than eight cores CPU.
I would recommend CPU with identical clocks to 7 7700k, PLUS another four cores.
 

Thatguybil

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
155
100% don’t need windows 11 for 12th gen. It runs just fine on windows 10. Their are compatibility issues with some older denovo games. You can work around this with most motherboards by disabling E-cores.

Don’t need DDR5 either.
Buy a DDR4 board and an 12600k or 12700k if you want to stay with intel.

If you want a slightly slower system with no compatibility issues then a AMD 5800 can be found at prices that the 5600 was at until recently.
 

4saken

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 14, 2004
Messages
12,252
I just went from a 7700k to a 12900k, little diff, but massive improvement. I was running a 3080 on my 7700k and perf gains are ridiculous. DDR4 Asus board
 

evhvis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
362
As long as you have a good GPU (2080 or faster) then you should see a massive uplift when moving to any of the newer CPUs from either brand. With something slower like a 2060 or 1080 you will probably not gain that much. Would probably re-use DDR4 ram if you have something decent in the 3200mhz CL16 or faster. DDR5 isn't mature yet so you will overpay for a tiny performance difference.
 

AlexisRO

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 27, 2014
Messages
231
I just went from a 7700k to a 12900k, little diff, but massive improvement. I was running a 3080 on my 7700k and perf gains are ridiculous. DDR4 Asus board

Do you happen to have some numbers? It will put things into perspective.
Also what mobo are you using?
 

4saken

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 14, 2004
Messages
12,252
Do you happen to have some numbers? It will put things into perspective.
Also what mobo are you using?
ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4

Not much of a benchmark person, but my 3dmark on fire strike ultra went from 9800 on 7700k to 11700 all stock settings. I mostly only game, so can't speak for a lot of other perf, but I do triple screen game with surround at 1440p and def improvements and playability on titles.
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2019
Messages
701
Get yourself a good DDR4 board as others have said and you will notice a difference for sure in the smoothness and feel of your games. Your 1% lows will be higher and any stuttering you had in CPU limited situations will be gone. I'm not on Intel this time around, but I went from an overclocked 5960x (4.7Ghz, and I could beat a 7700k easily in benchmarks) to an AMD 5950X and the difference was night and day for gaming in CPU heavy games and Multiplayer games. The overall smoothness of games as greatly improved.

Whether you go AMD or Intel, you will not be disappointed. Any CPU from that era or earlier is getting long in the tooth. IPC and overall platform functionality has improved significantly the last couple years.
 

robbiekhan

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Messages
503
Ek I don't want Windows 11. Hmmm
Why exactly? To this day I have yet to read of a legit reason why someone does not want Win11 other than "don't like start menu lol" or something along those lines which is silly because StartAllBack etc exist for this very reason and give you more control back than even standard Windows 10 has at zero compromise to anything.

Plus with 11 you gain proper Direct Storage support and the latest CPU scheduler to make use of these new chips.
 

ng4ever

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
3,051
Thanks everyone.

Can't decide if I should do this or not? :(

What if I can only get the KF version is it still worth it ?

Thanks.
 

ng4ever

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
3,051
I wish I could find a YouTube video of performance on Planet Coaster with a i7 12700k at 2k or more resolution.
 

robbiekhan

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Messages
503
Thanks everyone.

Can't decide if I should do this or not? :(

What if I can only get the KF version is it still worth it ?

Thanks.
What are the chances you will ever need an iGP? If you've not used onboard gfx in the past the chances of needing it in future are just as remote. There is no other everyday use or gaming difference between K and KF otherwise. And it's not like the iGP is any good either so only really useful if you have a sub optimal GPU and needs to use QuickSync for video encoding and only then in specific apps like Premiere Pro.

I have a KF for example but did an 8 minute 1080p video encode the other day using GPU acceleration (RTX 2070 SUPER) and it took 22 seconds to encode in Premiere Rush which uses the GPU not iGP based QuickSync to put things into perspective.
 

LucasG

Gawd
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Messages
675
So moving from an i7 9700K to an i7 12700K with DDR4 is a massive improvement? Using RTX 3070 Ti.

This video kind of says otherwise:
 
Last edited:

robbiekhan

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Messages
503
So moving from an i7 9700K to an i7 12700K with DDR4 is a massive improvement? Using GTX 3070 Ti.
Are you sure? because there is no such card as a GTX 3070 Ti lol.

As for the 9700K to 12700K... yes, a big jump in both multi and single threaded workloads.
 

Aireoth

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
6,000
Why exactly? To this day I have yet to read of a legit reason why someone does not want Win11 other than "don't like start menu lol" or something along those lines which is silly because StartAllBack etc exist for this very reason and give you more control back than even standard Windows 10 has at zero compromise to anything.

Plus with 11 you gain proper Direct Storage support and the latest CPU scheduler to make use of these new chips.

Want a legit reason? How about the entire fucking history of Windows launches going from broken to fixed or plain just dropped entirely?

Just because this might be a decent OS doesn't mean people don't remember history or that they want to be a beta tester for microsoft.

I'll get windows 11 about 12 months after launch, same with my office. last thing I want is more bugs to deal with.
 

4saken

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 14, 2004
Messages
12,252
Thanks everyone.

Can't decide if I should do this or not? :(

What if I can only get the KF version is it still worth it ?

Thanks.
yes, unless you need the intel graphics, might as well save a little bit and go KF imo.
 

Kiriakos-GR

Weaksauce
Joined
Nov 21, 2021
Messages
99
I think this topic worth a RE-BOOT.
Decisions relative to OS and of what this supports they are irrelevant.
The topic starter, he should write openly and clearly of what he felt as performance impact that he should improve.
Extremely smooth gaming this is relative to the quality of internet connection (Networking), internet provider (Quality of international networking), and of distance from game servers (Neither RTX 5000 this can help there).
 

Evil Scooter

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 22, 2000
Messages
5,873
^^ I skipped... if I was needing to upgrade right now I'd go AMD to avoid having to do WIN11 with the new intel processors.

The AMD 9xxx processors are quite potent.

If you need the extra horsepower for productivity I'd understand the reason for the Intel decision.

But for gaming... my old 8086k and the 9900kf that replaced it seem to push this 3080ti just fine.

My2c
 

isp

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 15, 2002
Messages
3,070
^^ I skipped... if I was needing to upgrade right now I'd go AMD to avoid having to do WIN11 with the new intel processors.

The AMD 9xxx processors are quite potent.

If you need the extra horsepower for productivity I'd understand the reason for the Intel decision.

But for gaming... my old 8086k and the 9900kf that replaced it seem to push this 3080ti just fine.

My2c
please stop pushing false information. you don't need win 11 to see gains from alder lake
 
Joined
Jul 24, 2021
Messages
802
I just went from a 7700k to a 12900k, little diff, but massive improvement. I was running a 3080 on my 7700k and perf gains are ridiculous. DDR4 Asus board
I'm on a 6900k with a 3080Ti & i have yet to see the cpu bottleneck on any game. I was considering upgrading to the 12700k but I am honestly scared of not getting any gains at all because I play at 4k.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
61,204
100% don’t need windows 11 for 12th gen. It runs just fine on windows 10. Their are compatibility issues with some older denovo games. You can work around this with most motherboards by disabling E-cores.
The compatibility issues are why I've stuck with Windows 10 for now. I also use my rig for work and until I'm sure the move won't cause me any headaches, I'll stick with 10 for a few more months before making the plunge.
Don’t need DDR5 either.
Buy a DDR4 board and an 12600k or 12700k if you want to stay with intel.
Unfortunately, all the nicer boards are DDR5 based.
 

4saken

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 14, 2004
Messages
12,252
I'm on a 6900k with a 3080Ti & i have yet to see the cpu bottleneck on any game. I was considering upgrading to the 12700k but I am honestly scared of not getting any gains at all because I play at 4k.
I play at 3440x1440 and 10320x1440 and def have a significant gain in playable FPS in high/ultra gfx settings with nvidia surround now. I'm not a numbers guy but I'm holding much higher Framerates at higher fidelity settings.
 

Koldur

Weaksauce
Joined
Mar 4, 2021
Messages
70
The compatibility issues are why I've stuck with Windows 10 for now. I also use my rig for work and until I'm sure the move won't cause me any headaches, I'll stick with 10 for a few more months before making the plunge.

Unfortunately, all the nicer boards are DDR5 based.
All the best DDR4 boards offer everything anyone needs. Even the least expensive DDR4 boards are more than sufficient for 99,9999% of people buying it. The other people will be having their needs filled with the more expensive DDR4 boards.

The even higher end boards offer nothing more than sentimental needs.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
61,204
All the best DDR4 boards offer everything anyone needs. Even the least expensive DDR4 boards are more than sufficient for 99,9999% of people buying it. The other people will be having their needs filled with the more expensive DDR4 boards.

The even higher end boards offer nothing more than sentimental needs.
Thinking you know what everyone needs and to decree that DDR4 boards are good enough for everyone is not only myopic, but probably the most arrogant thing I've read on this forum in a very long time.
 

kirbyrj

Fully [H]
Joined
Feb 1, 2005
Messages
30,100
Thinking you know what everyone needs and to decree that DDR4 boards are good enough for everyone is not only myopic, but probably the most arrogant thing I've read on this forum in a very long time.

Personally, I have zero need of a 10GbE or Wifi6E over regular Wifi6, or more than 4 NVMe drives. I don't feel like I'm missing out on what Alder Lake has to offer by sticking with the Asus ROG Strix Z690-A D4 board which is on the higher end of DDR4 motherboards. It's plenty "nice" for me. I don't have any need of a Z690 Extreme or Godlike board. I also build something different at least once a year, so it's not like this is a long term solution for me either.

Yes, what he said is extreme, and I wouldn't use 99.9999%, but probably 90-95%. That same 90-95% probably would be fine with a B660 board when they release. DDR4 boards are definitely good enough for most, but obviously not everyone.
 

Koldur

Weaksauce
Joined
Mar 4, 2021
Messages
70
Thinking you know what everyone needs and to decree that DDR4 boards are good enough for everyone is not only myopic, but probably the most arrogant thing I've read on this forum in a very long time.
You have good insights (like with the remark on the Gear 1 issues that it can also be the motherboard which I realized later is not only MC related), but sometimes you are not being realistic and responding out of proportion. In this case you stoop to a very offensive way of responding without going into why I am incorrect even on one base concretely. Would be nice to keep it more civil. What you are doing here is the pot calling the kettle black here, and that fully unsubstantiated.

All the higher end DDR5 boards are just for showing off and looks. Only LN2 overclocking could be helped by the even more capable VRMs already offered on the less high end DDR4/DDR5 boards and those cases are not for daily use.

There are no low end Z690 boards, only concrete differences which the DDR4 boards do not have are: No split PCIe 5.0 8x/8x slots, 10GbE and Thunderbolt ports. Only issue there is the PCIe 5.0 slots, the other two points are solved by using an add in card if needed.

As kirbyrj said, maybe 99,9999 is a bit high, but still, a DDR4 board should be able to do everything the highest end boards can with the exception of DDR5 (which isn't offering enough of a bump in speed) and the dual PCIe 8x slots. The dual PCIe would only be useful if you want to go the dual NVMe PCIe 5.0 SSD way.
The other things can all be added at the same functionality as with DDR5 boards.

Sure, the other boards may look nicer and be a bit less of a hassle, though the price difference is just absurd on those boards. That is more for the people that do not mind overpaying (which I do not have anything against, just stating the fact that those boards are exponentially more expensive without good reason) for the best tier. Which is a sentimental reason. Practically and functionally, no real difference, except for the double PCIe 5.0 8x slot possibility.
 

AlexisRO

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 27, 2014
Messages
231
Think this whole discussion revolves around 'need vs want' and this is shifting for each individual.

For instance in my case if i were to go Alder Lake, i'd go with a DDR4 board (for me DDR5 makes no sense at current prices, that is if you can find one in the first place) and i'd want one that has a thermal sensor, debug led, some start, reset buttons, wifi. Basically at least what my current board provides.
And quite frankly this combination doesn't exist at the moment. The closes boards that reach my wants are the Asus Strix Z690A and a GB Aorus Pro. The second one is none existent in Europe, and the first is around 400euros. That's a lot of money vs a MSI Pro A (~220e), for very few extra features. Also considering i payed around 300e for a x299 a few years ago it's not really appealing in the grand scheme of things....
 

Bigjohns97

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 18, 2000
Messages
1,245
I would wait for ddr5 pricing to come down as well as some more pci-e gen 5 stuff to come out and then make your purchase.

I only recommend this since you seem like a 5 year builder (7700k) and if you are looking for future proof you are going to want this new technologies, it's just that they are hot off the press and aren't really well supported right now.
 

StormNobleheart

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 12, 2017
Messages
188
If you want to build something that will last for about five years, go for the latest even if you may need to wait a little. I have not seen any DDR4 motherboards that have the same features as my current Z590 motherboard. I just enter Newegg Shuffles with a set of DDR5 I want with a 12700K or 12900K CPU.
 

4saken

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 14, 2004
Messages
12,252
You have good insights (like with the remark on the Gear 1 issues that it can also be the motherboard which I realized later is not only MC related), but sometimes you are not being realistic and responding out of proportion. In this case you stoop to a very offensive way of responding without going into why I am incorrect even on one base concretely. Would be nice to keep it more civil. What you are doing here is the pot calling the kettle black here, and that fully unsubstantiated.

All the higher end DDR5 boards are just for showing off and looks. Only LN2 overclocking could be helped by the even more capable VRMs already offered on the less high end DDR4/DDR5 boards and those cases are not for daily use.

There are no low end Z690 boards, only concrete differences which the DDR4 boards do not have are: No split PCIe 5.0 8x/8x slots, 10GbE and Thunderbolt ports. Only issue there is the PCIe 5.0 slots, the other two points are solved by using an add in card if needed.

As kirbyrj said, maybe 99,9999 is a bit high, but still, a DDR4 board should be able to do everything the highest end boards can with the exception of DDR5 (which isn't offering enough of a bump in speed) and the dual PCIe 8x slots. The dual PCIe would only be useful if you want to go the dual NVMe PCIe 5.0 SSD way.
The other things can all be added at the same functionality as with DDR5 boards.

Sure, the other boards may look nicer and be a bit less of a hassle, though the price difference is just absurd on those boards. That is more for the people that do not mind overpaying (which I do not have anything against, just stating the fact that those boards are exponentially more expensive without good reason) for the best tier. Which is a sentimental reason. Practically and functionally, no real difference, except for the double PCIe 5.0 8x slot possibility.
Yup my "low end" rog strix z690 DDR4 board is missing nothing from the DDR5 that I could care about. I had the DDR5 board in hand as well, but with the price of DDR5 i just sent it back.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
61,204
Think this whole discussion revolves around 'need vs want' and this is shifting for each individual.

For instance in my case if i were to go Alder Lake, i'd go with a DDR4 board (for me DDR5 makes no sense at current prices, that is if you can find one in the first place) and i'd want one that has a thermal sensor, debug led, some start, reset buttons, wifi. Basically at least what my current board provides.
And quite frankly this combination doesn't exist at the moment. The closes boards that reach my wants are the Asus Strix Z690A and a GB Aorus Pro. The second one is none existent in Europe, and the first is around 400euros. That's a lot of money vs a MSI Pro A (~220e), for very few extra features. Also considering i payed around 300e for a x299 a few years ago it's not really appealing in the grand scheme of things....
For the most part, I'd agree with you. However, it's more complicated than that. A lot of the features on the higher end DDR5 boards are things you want and not having them could be deal breakers for some individuals. I need the 10GbE NIC and I don't know of any DDR4 boards that have one. Yeah, I could use an add-in board but I wanted to do a vertical GPU mount which precludes the use of an add-in board. I also use custom watercooling, so temperature sensors and the thermal probes are attractive features and you don't get this stuff on lower end boards.

And yes, there are low end DDR4 boards. Some may not think so due to current prices but that doesn't mean that the hardware in question is high end. The Biostar Z690 GTA is not high end. It only has three M.2 slots compared to five on a higher end board. It's using the last generation Realtek ALC1220 CODEC that the high end boards have gotten away from and it uses a Realtek 2.5GbE network controller. It may advertise as having "17-phases" but phase count alone doesn't make for a high end board. The quality of the implementation is what you have to look at. Especially since the marketing department for most motherboard manufacturers often lie about the VRM's or at least obfuscates the configuration as much as possible to make a board look better than it is.

Beyond that, cheaper boards tend to have more basic and less expensive voltage controllers which offer less granularity when it comes to tuning. That's why some UEFI's may not allow a voltage adjustment to be done in .05v or .1v increments and need to be to adjusted in .50v increments. No, this may not effect the vast majority of users. I've tested more than 200 hundred motherboards at this point and while I'd generally argue that you can achieve the same overclocks on both ends of the price spectrum it isn't always true. When there is a difference, it's usually around 100MHz or something like that but I have seen more egregious differences on occasion. That being said, those cheaper boards with 40a or 50a power stages aren't going to run efficiently with higher end processors being pushed like that. That does shorten component life and by itself can effect your overclock as it brings up temps in side the machine.

As an example: The MSI X570-A Pro was notorious for having VRM's that ran too hot to really be used with 3900X and 3950X CPU's. Technically they are supported, but they are less than ideal. VRM temps look like thermal camera images of an active volcano and over the long run, could be problematic. I've actually tested this board and found that you can probably handle a stock 3900X on that board in a case with really good airflow and decent ambient temperatures. Past that, you are asking a lot from a board that can't really handle it. It takes more than the use of a high end chipset to make a motherboard high end. Even if the board has solid VRM's, I still wouldn't regard a board with Realtek networking and an outdated audio implementation, limited M.2 slots and otherwise stripped down feature sets as being "high end".

I'd further add that unless you use your machine in a professional capacity all this is academic. It's never about "need" it's always about "want". I don't need to play games. It's not my job. Motherboards like the GIGABYTE Z690 Aorus Xtreme, MSI MEG Z690 GODLIKE and the ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme aren't boards that make sense from a cost standpoint. They aren't supposed to. They are halo products for enthusiasts who want more than a standard low end to mid-range Z690 board can offer. These boards are for enthusiasts. People who want the looks, the tuning capability, more integrated features, or whatever.

At some point, people on the [H]ardForum went fucking limp or something. I'm not sure why people here have this attitude that expensive motherboards are bad. I see it in virtually any motherboard related thread where anything over a certain price point gets shit on. The people bitching about DDR5 boards now are probably the same people who bitched about the high end X570 boards and recommended the MSI X570-A Pro or the ASRock X570 Phantom Gaming 4. These were right around $170 to $180 dollars. I often get these things for free and I wouldn't put them in my machine. I have an X570-A and a MEG X570 GODLIKE. They are polar opposites of the spectrum, and while my review of the former is far more positive than most, it's inferior to the latter in just about every way it could be. There is this idea that the expensive boards are expensive without justification and it's just not true. I'd agree that the prices on some boards are outrageous and some of that is artificial inflation or due to the times we are living in. But a 90A power stage is more expensive than a 40A or 50A one. It's just the way it is. Now, throw 18 of them on a board, add Thunderbolt, add IC's for OLED screens or whatever, fancy M.2 heat sinks, thicker PCB's, specialized IC's for measuring waterflow and temperatures, add in dual BIOS ROMs, onboard power and reset buttons, voltage monitoring points, etc. and the price goes up.

It's up to you to decide if these things are worth the cost. However, don't think for a second that a $160 is the same or just as good as a $500+ board. It just isn't. The thing is, your motherboard is the system at this point. It's what determines how many USB ports you have, what kind of connectivity and I/O options you have and the general feature set of the machine. Now, it's not the determining factor of game performance or anything, but it can and does impact the user experience a lot of the time. You go with cheaper boards, you get weird internal USB hubs to multi-plex the ports which creates certain issues. You go with cheaper boards, your VRM's may be as hot as the sun. Go with a cheap board and your more limited on storage options. Some people find these limitations somewhere between undesirable to entirely unacceptable and various degrees of in-between.

People have different hang ups about board layout, feature sets, and will disregard a board for a variety of edge cases or personal hang ups. I see it all the time in comments related to reviews I've done. It's often strange to me what criteria people have for discounting a motherboard. Sure, price is often a determining factor, but I've seen people snub their nose at fantastic boards because of one PCIe slot and where it gets placed or for any number of things that wouldn't matter to very many other people. There are a lot of people who justify HEDT rigs for a variety of these reasons. Often simply over having more PCIe lanes for XYZ device they want to use or need for work. There is no one size fits all motherboard. It doesn't exist anymore than these things exist for the firearms or auto markets.

I said it before, and I'll say it again. A lot of people who buy the latest GPU's and CPU's or spend $2,000 GPU's and $500+ motherboards aren't going to be happy with some mid-range DDR4 motherboard. It's not always the solution no matter how much people say it in various motherboard threads. It doesn't really matter if its a need or want. And sometimes, people just don't give a shit about how much something costs. People buy exotic cars or gold plated 1911's in presentation cases even when these things rarely make sense. Not understanding or agreeing with their reasoning doesn't make it wrong.

The hardest part is putting yourself into other people's shoes. If you only play World of Warcraft for six hours a week and use Excel the rest of the time a high end DDR5 board doesn't make sense. However, if you tend to keep your machines for 3-5 years and you run it hard with video editing and heavy gaming, I'm going to tell you to get a DDR5 board as soon as the availability improves. Why? Well, in a couple of years you'll probably upgrade to extend the life of the machine a bit before your ready to drop $3k+ on a new rig. In that case, DDR5 will probably be cheaper than DDR4 and just as available, if not more so. If you are going to keep the rig longer, I think its beneficial to go with something that's more feature rich and higher end now, as it will be less painful to use it or upgrade it down the road. Not only that, but overbuilt VRM's will run cooler and more efficiently than overworked 40A or 50A phases on a $200 DDR4 board. Thus, making it more likely that the board will last until its time to upgrade or replace the system after years of hard use and abuse.

Obviously, I like expensive hardware. But, it's not for everyone and it's not appropriate for everyone's needs. I don't recommend my friends buy the same stuff I do when they can't build machines themselves. I build them. Similarly, being told that a DDR4 board is just as good and fit everyone's needs is simply untrue. It's technically inaccurate even if it is reasonably good advice for the vast majority of end users.
 
Last edited:

Elios

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 12, 2004
Messages
7,286
YES DO IT. i just got my 12900k up and running and came from a 9700K @ 5Ghz and this thing is over 2x faster at everything single thread and multi thread. I can HIGHLY recomend the MSI Z690 DDR4 boards
 

atp1916

[H]ard|DCoTM x1
Joined
Jun 18, 2004
Messages
4,847
This time around, the platform advances alone are worth over anything 7th gen Intel.
 

LukeTbk

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 10, 2020
Messages
3,013
If you want to build something that will last for about five years, go for the latest even if you may need to wait a little. I have not seen any DDR4 motherboards that have the same features as my current Z590 motherboard. I just enter Newegg Shuffles with a set of DDR5 I want with a 12700K or 12900K CPU.
It is not obvious at all than even in 4-5 year's, DDR5 will be worth going for over DDR4 even more so on a current platform.

You save so much money going DDR4, that in 5 years using that money saved now+the cost of upgrading your z690DDR5 board of 2022 in 2027 will not be worth it versus what new mid range on the latest platform do.

That pure guess too, but often the dilemma is not perfectly asked, it is not does going top end now mean that in 5 year,s the machine will be significantly better than a mid range one even if there is no difference now for what I do ? It need to be compared cost performance wise with mid range now and mid range in 4/5 year's.
 
Last edited:

Mad Maxx

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 12, 2016
Messages
6,466
I've got everything I need for my i7-12700k build except the mobo. I'm thinking it might be better to give it a few months to see what the Z790 boards bring to the table. I'm not in any rush to build a new PC, so don't mind waiting.
 
Top