Support NeoGAF

[Bullet Club]

Rich takes a look at the latest Intel monster - the Core i9 10900K. It's the king of the hill for gaming, but is it actually that much faster than the i7 10700K and its last-gen equivalent, the Core i9 9900K? And what about Ryzen? All the info and opinion is right here.

 

[GHG]

Basically it depends.

If you are some e-sports gamer who plays at lowers resolution and/or lower settings at high refresh rates (above 144hz) and every frame time matters then yeh, go for it. But if you play at 1440p and above then you're better served saving money and getting a ryzen chip (or an i3/i5/i7 if you must stay with Intel) and then spending all the money you can on getting the best GPU possible.

This is a good video that demonstrates this:



And yes, dropping down to the 3300x is an extreme case but for most current games it's ok and then you have plenty of upgrade paths on the same motherboard for when you need to upgrade to a CPU with more cores and threads.

If you also do anything significant outside of gaming then there isn't even a discussion to be had as far as the top level chips go, get a ryzen.

 

[JareBear: Remastered]

Nice, watching the review now. Rich does great work.

I’m petty set on either a 3900x or a Zen 3 upgrade but it’s cool to see what Intel’s latest and greatest can do.

 

[Great Hair]

 

[nani17]

Looking forward to seeing how Ryzen 4000 matches up to this.

 

[kingbean]

I think I'm still okay with my 9700k.

Even though that motherfucker gets up to 90*C on a good heatsink.

 

[Senua]

Looking forward to seeing how Ryzen 4000 matches up to this.

Yea same, tho i'm most excited for 7nm intel, but i might be dead before that releases in 2050.

 

[nani17]

Yea same, tho i'm most excited for 7nm intel, but i might be dead before that releases in 2050.

No don't worry it'll be out 2033

 

[JohnnyFootball]

Nope, you shouldn't buy it. Yes, it may be tops of game performance and that really only matters if you're a competitive gamer at 1080p, but its too weak in other areas to justify the price premium over the 3900X.

If it's strictly about gaming the 10700K (and 10600K) is better, but that has to compete with the 3700X and the 3600.

 

[Leonidas]

Good to see a CPU gaming review which actually tests CPU gaming performance. 10-33% advantage to Intel in a number of cases.

Will AM4 ever reach Intel levels of gaming performance?

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

Good to see a CPU gaming review which actually tests CPU gaming performance. 10-33% advantage to Intel in a number of cases.

Will AM4 ever reach Intel levels of gaming performance?

Probably in a few months with Ryzen 4000. But as its 130fps vs 140fps at 1080p res, people stopped caring and started looking at Intel's alarming power draw and heat issues, lower multithreaded perf etc.

 

[kruis]

I wouldn't buy a CPU and motherboard without PCI-E 4.0 support. It is suggested that the new Z490 motherboards might support PCI-E 4.0 when Intel's gen 11 processors arrive, but that's not a 100% certainty. And who is going to buy Intel now knowing you'll have to replace that CPU so soon to get PCI-E 4.0? Much better to skip this new Intel platform and wait for what AMD's going to offer in Q3/Q4.

 

[GHG]

Review on the i7:



The takeaway I'm getting is that the 3300x kicks ass for the price.

Will be interesting to see how the new i3 stacks up.

 

[JareBear: Remastered]

Review on the i7:



The takeaway I'm getting is that the 3300x kicks ass for the price.

Will be interesting to see how the new i3 stacks up.

I watched this last night. I have reached an "indecision rut" in my build plan. I am starting to think I should just either waut for Zen 3 or get an Intel and return my x570 mobo

 

[DeepEnigma]

I won’t buy without PCIe 4.0 bare minimum. Especially with future games taking SSD speeds into account.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

I watched this last night. I have reached an "indecision rut" in my build plan. I am starting to think I should just either waut for Zen 3 or get an Intel and return my x570 mobo

I'd see what Zen 3 has to offer before I'd spend the extra money on an Intel. As I've been saying (and Leonidas ignores) that the gaming advantage of Intel is only really relevant at competitive 1080p in games with those who want the highest framerates. At resolutions like 1440p and 4K, that difference is negligible.

Lets take Far Cry New Dawn for instance, which is the game that has the biggest gap between Intel and AMD. This is the best case for Intel and worst case for AMD.

Even in this worst case for AMD, is there really a noticeable difference between 108 fps and 125 fps at 1440p? The much easier choice is to go with an AMD and put the money savings toward a better GPU.

 

[GHG]

I won’t buy without PCIe 4.0 bare minimum. Especially with future games taking SSD speeds into account.

Yep.

If the 10 series had Pcie 4 support then I could have been swayed since the price difference isn't all that much where I am and I'll be buying an AIO cooler regardless. But with no PCIe 4 support on most Z490 motherboards along with the fact that Intel haven't even promised 4.0 support for the 11 series it's all far too uncertain.

I don't want to have to replace my motherboard for at least the next 3-4 years. If you get a x570 or b550 board now you are in a good position, regardless of whether you get a 3300x or go all out and get a 3950x.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

Yep.

If the 10 series had Pcie 4 support then I could have been swayed since the price difference isn't all that much where I am and I'll be buying an AIO cooler regardless. But with no PCIe 4 support on most Z490 motherboards along with the fact that Intel haven't even promised 4.0 support for the 11 series it's all far too uncertain.

I don't want to have to replace my motherboard for at least the next 3-4 years. If you get a x570 or b550 board now you are in a good position, regardless of whether you get a 3300x or go all out and get a 3950x.

There is no reason to get an X570 with a 3300X. That would be one of the most absurdly dumb purchases imaginable. In fact, I wouldn't even consider purchasing an X570 until the 4000 series comes out and pair it with one of those.

 

[GHG]

There is no reason to get an X570 with a 3300X. That would be one of the most absurdly dumb purchases imaginable. In fact, I wouldn't even consider purchasing an X570 until the 4000 series comes out and pair it with one of those.

Depends in my opinion.

Most people don't want to have to swap out their motherboard, it's a ball ache. If you need to buy something now and the ultimate goal is to hop on to the 4000 CPU's then at 130 USD the x3300 represents the best value "hold me over" CPU you could wish for.

If you can wait then the b550 or x670 motherboards will of course be better. But even still, you're buying an end if line AM4 motherboard with no upgrade path beyond the 4000 series.

IMO there's no downside to getting a decent x570 board now if you need it. They have pcie 4.0 support along with full 4000 series support so in theory it's a platform that should stand the test of time.

Buying an x470 or b450 board now makes no sense to me.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

Depends in my opinion.

Most people don't want to have to swap out their motherboard, it's a ball ache. If you need to buy something now and the ultimate goal is to hop on to the 4000 CPU's then at 130 USD the x3300 represents the best value "hold me over" CPU you could wish for.

If you can wait then the b550 or x670 motherboards will of course be better. But even still, you're buying an end if line AM4 motherboard with no upgrade path beyond the 4000 series.

IMO there's no downside to getting a decent x570 board now if you need it. They have pcie 4.0 support along with full 4000 series support so in theory it's a platform that should stand the test of time.

Buying an x470 or b450 board now makes no sense to me.

There is no "depends" unless your current PC/Mac is trashed/no longer works and you must have a working PC right now, then OK maybe.

in any other scenario, buying a 3300X as a "hold me over" is absolutely stupid. We are pretty close to 4000 series release, just stick with what you have and buy then. At worst the 4000 release will make 3000 CPUs drastically cheaper.

 

[martino]

Probably in a few months with Ryzen 4000. But as its 130fps vs 140fps at 1080p res, people stopped caring and started looking at Intel's alarming power draw and heat issues, lower multithreaded perf etc.

they will cry when games will be made with ryzen mobile in mind.

 

[GHG]

There is no "depends" unless your current PC/Mac is trashed/no longer works and you must have a working PC right now, then OK maybe.

That happens.

Also only the 4900 and above is likely to release this year according to a few of the leaks.

If you're getting an AMD build now, even if it's based around a 3300x, you shouldn't really be locking yourself into anything older than a x570 board.

 

[Leonidas]

That happens.

Also only the 4900 and above is likely to release this year according to a few of the leaks.

If you're getting an AMD build now, even if it's based around a 3300x, you shouldn't really be locking yourself into anything older than a x570 board.

There is no reason to buy anything over the 400 series on AMD right now for gamers. PCIe Gen4 is useless in games unless you buy a gimped x8 Gen4 GPU. PCIe Gen4 SSD is future proofing, which makes no sense with Gen5 coming soon and the fact that PC games don't even use Gen3 yet. Console needs Gen4 because of all the other things it has to do in the background. PC does not need it, my PC for instance has OS on one drive, games on another and another for recording games. Console has to do all that on one drive, and XSX SSD runs at Gen3 speeds...

Gen4 is overhyped on this forum.

 

[JareBear: Remastered]

Yep.

If the 10 series had Pcie 4 support then I could have been swayed since the price difference isn't all that much where I am and I'll be buying an AIO cooler regardless. But with no PCIe 4 support on most Z490 motherboards along with the fact that Intel haven't even promised 4.0 support for the 11 series it's all far too uncertain.

I don't want to have to replace my motherboard for at least the next 3-4 years. If you get a x570 or b550 board now you are in a good position, regardless of whether you get a 3300x or go all out and get a 3950x.

This makes a lot of sense, you made me feel a lot better. I was looking at z490 boards and confused by the lack of PCIe 4.0 mentions anywhere, now I get it.

I won’t buy without PCIe 4.0 bare minimum. Especially with future games taking SSD speeds into account.

That happens.

Also only the 4900 and above is likely to release this year according to a few of the leaks.

If you're getting an AMD build now, even if it's based around a 3300x, you shouldn't really be locking yourself into anything older than a x570 board.

So now I am sitting here pretty confident I made a wise MOBO purchase, definitely happy with the DDR4 RAM I bought, as far as the CPU, would it be wise for me to wait a month to see what happens with this rumored refresh? Either snag one of the refresh chips or one of the 3X00x chips when they get discounted after the refreshes hit?

 

[DeepEnigma]

This makes a lot of sense, you made me feel a lot better. I was looking at z490 boards and confused by the lack of PCIe 4.0 mentions anywhere, now I get it.




So now I am sitting here pretty confident I made a wise MOBO purchase, definitely happy with the DDR4 RAM I bought, as far as the CPU, would it be wise for me to wait a month to see what happens with this rumored refresh? Either snag one of the refresh chips or one of the 3X00x chips when they get discounted after the refreshes hit?

Wait a month to see, personally.

 

[Kenpachii]

Man AMD is a rollercoaaster of performance in those games. Thought they ironed that out by now. Guess not.

 

[Armorian]

Man AMD is a rollercoaaster of performance in those games. Thought they ironed that out by now. Guess not.

Based on what I have seen biggest offenders are SWJ and FC5 (and ND), I think FC5 uses one thread to for the most part and SWJ hammers 4 threads:

In more multithreaded engines differences are within 10% usually.

Results with 2080 (non ti)

Intel Core i9-10900K i Core i5-10600K – test dwóch procesorów z rodziny Comet Lake S

Intel oferuje już szóstą rodzinę procesorów do domowych komputerów wykonaną w procesie technologicznym klasy 14 nm: po Broadwell, Skylake, Kaby Lake, Coffee Lake i Coffee Lake Refresh nadchodzi Comet Lake. Oczywiście 14 nm to nazwa marketingowa, która nie określa istotnych cech tej techniki...

pclab.pl

 

[LordOfChaos]

 

[Vlaphor]

Looking at the initial benchmarks makes Intel look a lot better in gaming, except that I game in 4k, so my 3900x is just about as good, plus if AMD releases something better this year or the next that I have to have, I don't have to replace the mobo.

 

[Matsuchezz]

I was watching the graphics on all those games, that were tested on the DF video, and even though they are running on high end PCs, i noticed a lot of pop up on almost everything, I thought that owning a powerful and expensive PC would get rid of all that, but it seems it doesn't. Yes the Frame rates are way higher and the texture quality and effects are topnotch, but that is distracting as fuck, very disappointing really. I will probably end up buying a PC, I was going to buy an XsX but I rather spend my money on a more powerful PC.

 

[JareBear: Remastered]

I was watching the graphics on all those games, that were tested on the DF video, and even though they are running on high end PCs, i noticed a lot of pop up on almost everything, I thought that owning a powerful and expensive PC would get rid of all that, but it seems it doesn't. Yes the Frame rates are way higher and the texture quality and effects are topnotch, but that is distracting as fuck, very disappointing really. I will probably end up buying a PC, I was going to buy an XsX but I rather spend my money on a more powerful PC.

The pop-in is more of a game engine problem, just having a nice PC alone can’t fix a gimped engine.

Some people find ways to improve pop-in with mods or .ini tweaks tho

 

[Matsuchezz]

The pop-in is more of a game engine problem, just having a nice PC alone can’t fix a gimped engine.
Some people find ways to improve pop-in with mods or .ini tweaks tho

Yes, I assumed that too, but almost all the games shown displayed that pop in, it was distracting, I will save some money for a good GPU and CPU, I currently own a Mac Book Pro, but that is not good for gaming, I will take a look at those threads that teach you how to build a good PC.

 

[MightySquirrel]

I was watching the graphics on all those games, that were tested on the DF video, and even though they are running on high end PCs, i noticed a lot of pop up on almost everything, I thought that owning a powerful and expensive PC would get rid of all that, but it seems it doesn't. Yes the Frame rates are way higher and the texture quality and effects are topnotch, but that is distracting as fuck, very disappointing really. I will probably end up buying a PC, I was going to buy an XsX but I rather spend my money on a more powerful PC.

I was replaying RDR2 on PC lately and tried those so called XB1X settings [from digital foundry site] and it looked so horrendously bad in motion and especially when looking at a distance, that I could hardly believe it, so restarted game multiple times just to be sure. Sometimes we just don't appreciate the graphics difference, before we get a chance to compare.

 

[Jigsaah]

14nm = insta-nope.

EDIT while watching video....no PCie 4.0 either? Double nope

 

[BusierDonkey]

PCIe 4.0 should be standard on any new mobo purchase. That alone would steer me away from an Intel system right now. There's no guarantee game engines moving forward will benefit greatly from PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD speeds just like they really didn't outside load times with PCIe 3.0 NVMe SSD speeds. That said, I'd rather not get a brand new PCIe 3.0 setup and then be left holding my dick if games do start benefiting from PCIe 4.0 speeds.

The heat issues in the 10900K I could care less about, I have that more than covered. For people with smaller cases or restricted airflow, it might be an issue, though from anything I've seen AMD chips tend to run pretty hot too.

Hopefully Intel gets something figured out because if not, I have no affinity to their product and will happily buy from AMD if they can offer a better product. I've gotten my money's worth out of my 5820K with a big OC but it's replacement has to have the same longevity and ability to keep up with newer GPUs as I replace them.

 

[JareBear: Remastered]

PCIe 4.0 should be standard on any new mobo purchase. That alone would steer me away from an Intel system right now. There's no guarantee game engines moving forward will benefit greatly from PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD speeds just like they really didn't outside load times with PCIe 3.0 NVMe SSD speeds. That said, I'd rather not get a brand new PCIe 3.0 setup and then be left holding my dick if games do start benefiting from PCIe 4.0 speeds.

The heat issues in the 10900K I could care less about, I have that more than covered. For people with smaller cases or restricted airflow, it might be an issue, though from anything I've seen AMD chips tend to run pretty hot too.

Hopefully Intel gets something figured out because if not, I have no affinity to their product and will happily buy from AMD if they can offer a better product. I've gotten my money's worth out of my 5820K with a big OC but it's replacement has to have the same longevity and ability to keep up with newer GPUs as I replace them.

Which AMD chip would you recommend now? or would you wait?

 

[Kenpachii]

Based on what I have seen biggest offenders are SWJ and FC5 (and ND), I think FC5 uses one thread to for the most part and SWJ hammers 4 threads:

In more multithreaded engines differences are within 10% usually.

Results with 2080 (non ti)

Intel Core i9-10900K i Core i5-10600K – test dwóch procesorów z rodziny Comet Lake S

Intel oferuje już szóstą rodzinę procesorów do domowych komputerów wykonaną w procesie technologicznym klasy 14 nm: po Broadwell, Skylake, Kaby Lake, Coffee Lake i Coffee Lake Refresh nadchodzi Comet Lake. Oczywiście 14 nm to nazwa marketingowa, która nie określa istotnych cech tej techniki...

pclab.pl

Ultra ultra ultra, no oc on the cores and no CPU benchmarking was found that day.. I wonder why all the results are almost identical. Also good luck running 70-80 fps minimums on ultra with a 9900k in odyssey with not even a OC and ultra with that. Yea i don't think so buddy.

Aint going to rewatch that DF video again but half the games runned at far below fps then those intel cpu's did. Only in some they could equal or get close towards it and those chips are not even oced yet on top of it.

It's a rollercoaster of performance a complete shit fest.

Good for DF to finally start to use there IQ and not follow the youtube tech expert diarree that honestly have no clue what the fuck they are doing.

If that guy from DF still reads these topics, good job on your new test methodes. Could still improve a bit with anno / and more rts like games.

 

[Armorian]

Ultra ultra ultra, no oc on the cores and no CPU benchmarking was found that day.. I wonder why all the results are almost identical. Also good luck running 70-80 fps minimums on ultra with a 9900k in odyssey with not even a OC. Yea i don't think so buddy.

You buy 2080 class GPU and high end CPU to play on medium? And that's in 1080p, 1440p is the common resolution now. In case of Odyssey ultra high clouds kills GPU with no visible impact so they should turned down to high but aside that's how PC master race always rolled no? Give me ultra 60fps or nothing.

 

[Closer]

Seriously, who in this world buys a 10900K and plays games at 1080p resolution? I'd guess people that spend that much on a CPU would have at least a 4K panel. Like, if you need "the best CPU", they for sure need the best GPU, the best panel, the best everything. Doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Zero707]

Blue Always wins baby let's go

 

[Vlaphor]

Seriously, who in this world buys a 10900K and plays games at 1080p resolution? I'd guess people that spend that much on a CPU would have at least a 4K panel. Like, if you need "the best CPU", they for sure need the best GPU, the best panel, the best everything. Doesn't make sense to me.

If you're trying to rock ultra high fps, then a powerful cpu will help. If you got a monitor that does 240, then it probably does it at 1080

My LG Oled can do actual 120 at 1080, but I only ever put Overwatch on that. Everything else I do at 4k.

 

[Senua]

Seriously, who in this world buys a 10900K and plays games at 1080p resolution? I'd guess people that spend that much on a CPU would have at least a 4K panel. Like, if you need "the best CPU", they for sure need the best GPU, the best panel, the best everything. Doesn't make sense to me.

High framrate gaming is a thing. 240hhz 1080p monitors and all that jazz.

 

[BusierDonkey]

Which AMD chip would you recommend now? or would you wait?

That's a question of budget and intended use and I honestly am not well versed enough in AMD's offerings to recommend anything. If I was building something I want to last 5 years, I would be looking at the Ryzen 3900X right now. If intel offers PCIe 4.0 compatibility before I upgrade I'll probably stick with them assuming pricing is in line since my PC is a gaming machine first. The 3900X is not cheap though and I have no idea what the current mobo situation is with current Ryzen cpus. I ran a single mobo and cpu for over 4 years, and had always planned on swapping the entire works, but one appealing aspect of AMD's offerings was the ability to move up in cpu without scrapping the mobo.

I hate telling anyone to wait for things too, because if you do wait there will still be another better thing right around the corner. I never wait, except when I do . I've been sitting on my hands replacing the 5820K, but I jumped on the first decently priced 2080ti I saw and will likely do so again when the 3080ti ships. If games start using cpu more in the coming years I'll probably start replacing cpus at the same rate.

Personally, I think if you've got a system that works decently and you think it can tide you over I would wait and see what releases before 2021 or at least what is announced during the summer. Waiting ges easier the closer you are to the new shit. Also pricing right now sucks ass thanks to chicken little finally getting an audience. Some things should be way cheaper than they currently are and hopefully by the end of the year things level out.

 

[Honey Bunny]

Even in this worst case for AMD, is there really a noticeable difference between 108 fps and 125 fps at 1440p? The much easier choice is to go with an AMD and put the money savings toward a better GPU.

I mean yeh dude, 17fps difference is a big deal in a CPU comparison.

 

[GHG]

I mean yeh dude, 17fps difference is a big deal in a CPU comparison.

You can notice the difference between 108 and 125fps?

The best my display can do is 120hz and anything above ~80fps looks and feels very similar to me. As long as it's stable and it's not jumping around between 60 to 125 and then back to 60 then I doubt many people would be able to look and/or play both side by side and say which is which.

 

[Shodan09]

Hah. AMD. Never again. That said, I cant tell the difference between 60 fps and 120 fps so what does it matter?

 

[Rikkori]

Sounds more like DF being DF and less an AMD sucks issue:

 

[Armorian]

Sounds more like DF being DF and less an AMD sucks issue:

Difference is there but I wonder how Intel performs in same spots in both apis. I'm downloading Exodus now to check myself.

 

[Kenpachii]

You buy 2080 class GPU and high end CPU to play on medium? And that's in 1080p, 1440p is the common resolution now. In case of Odyssey ultra high clouds kills GPU with no visible impact so they should turned down to high but aside that's how PC master race always rolled no? Give me ultra 60fps or nothing.

People buy hardware for the performance they wanna get. Everybody has different standards. There are people that buy 2x titan rtx cards for 4k 120 fps gaming. Others have 2080ti's that up the settings until it crumbles even under the 60 fps at 1080p resolutions. There is no one single person that does something in the PC department.

High clouds and GPU settings have nothing to do with CPU performance. And this is exactly the thinking what makes most benchmarks dog shit. Because they fail to actually benchmark CPU's itself.

What u call 60 fps ultra master race, others in the PC space find that peasant settings and performance.

The most common resolution and screens that are sold for PC are 1080p screens. Reasons for that high hz, requires less gpu performance and esports.

Also i got a 9900k 5.1ghz 32gb of 3600mhz ram and 1080ti 2050mhz and game at 1080p with reduced settings all day long to get stable 90+ fps. Everything under it feels janky.

You can notice the difference between 108 and 125fps?

The best my display can do is 120hz and anything above ~80fps looks and feels very similar to me. As long as it's stable and it's not jumping around between 60 to 125 and then back to 60 then I doubt many people would be able to look and/or play both side by side and say which is which.

Many people don't even know what a CPU is. Let alone what it does. That doesn't eliminate the fact that CPU performance is crucial towards stable performance. U can sit at 120 fps outside a city perfectly fine and then when u enter a city boom 50 fps. why? cpu bottleneck.

U should look at those ac origin and oc odyssey benchmarks ( i think df also did it ) with 1000 series ryzens and say well it needs to be optimized still a bit more because stutters and not being able to get 60 fps minimums.

Yea that's exactly what they told me 2009 when u shouldn't invest into a doulbe core / thread cpu because performance at the time was the same in every title, yet a year or two later more and more games didn't optimize for there 2 cores anymore and it was obviously clear they never would yet the higher core count had no issue's blasting through the content without effort. See how that works?

Want to see a 9900k get murdered?

Go play anno 1800 with a big city 30 fps lows
Play they are billions final wave at hardest difficulty 35 fps
Play any rts for that matter and make huge army's
play final fantasy 14 and walk into the biggest city area and see your frames disappear like thin air.
Go play ac odyssey, walk into a city after u roamed outside at 90+ fps u will see jumps straight back to low 60's.
Go play conan u will be lucky to hit a stable 30 fps at the end of a map.
Go play divinity 2 and start to rain some magic skills that deletes your CPU in seconds.
Play BDO and move into the main city.
etc etc.

See how those 150+ fps benchmarks are suddenly starting to look ridiculous.

Yet what are those benchmark clowns testing, metro exodus with raytracing on at 1440p ( look guys all cpu's are equal as fast ), then the next benchmark showcase you counterstrike at 400 fps vs 410 fps, see again guys no difference. Then lets make a average of 2 games benchmark, look 1 fps difference guys.. Because for some reason that makes total sense guys.

It's fucking laughable. Atleast DF tries now to actually move into the right direction with there testing. Even while there is still lots of improvement to be done with it.

Sounds more like DF being DF and less an AMD sucks issue:

Yea totally DF's fault that AMD hardware performs like a rollercoaster on different settings. Maybe AMD should get into contact with metro devs and iron those issue's out? oh wait they are already busy releasing their next product, get hyped guys. but what about my zen 1 cpu? what's zen 1 guys? did you know u could now buy zen 3 guys its totally awsome!!!!

DF picks dx12 because DX11 isnt'going to work well for them in comparisons vs intel. I would have benched that game on DX12 also to make a comprison between the two. So honestly hardly DF's fault.

 

[small_law]

I'd sell my 9900k and MOBO easily enough, but I'm not upgrading until Intel supports PCIe 4.0 or 5.0. If you have new-ish hardware, best wait.