- Joined
- Jan 4, 2024
- Location
- Indiana
The cpu I am getting is 14gen i7-14000k what I would like to know what gpu would perform best with the i7-14000k?
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
i7-14000k & either a 4070 super or 4070 ti?
- Thread starter Flamethrower1972
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2002
- Location
- Nashville
why 14th gen? it has the same performance as 13th gen but extra "new" cost?
Also, what will you use this computer for most? Intel is not the clear winner depending on use case.
Also, what will you use this computer for most? Intel is not the clear winner depending on use case.
The chip he chose happens to be the only one that saw a core/thread count increase, FYI. So, yes, but in this case, that's arguably the best one of the bunch.
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2002
- Location
- Nashville
honest question, do you count e-cores as coresThe chip he chose happens to be the only one that saw a core/thread count increase, FYI. So, yes, but in this case, that's arguably the best one of the bunch.
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2002
- Location
- Nashville
lol well its a good choice if you dont count the e cores as full cores. 7800x3d beats the pants off everything intel in gaming, but it only gives you 8c/16t so same as the number of Performance cores on the 14700k.I would disagree!! For gamming and I am intel all the way.
so yeah, at around $5 less than the AMD and "free" 12 e cores. I just prefer the platform longevity of the AM4/5 solutions. I was able to upgrade my CPU 3 times without replacing my motherboard on AM4, and my next upgrade will probably be to AM5 once zen 5 hits.
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2002
- Location
- Nashville
Im onboard for the best value/fit regardless of brand. Currently AMD has the gaming crown, but Intel still has some great CPU's I really love the lower power T series, killer core/threads per watt value for micro servers and things.I am not onboard with amd stats or not.
Adding, while upgradablity is not as good as AMD, the functional quality of Intel cant be denied. I still have an i5 4970k that one of my kids uses for gaming. That system has been rock solid and its still rocking DDR3. He will be the next upgrade but im sure that CPU will find another home.
Upgrades are only a myth that people share on the web. In most cases, you leave with an "old" motherboard without support as nearly every manufacturer won't release anything other than basic updates with a new microcode after 6-8 of a motherboard release and focus on new models. We've seen it in every generation in the past. Most people skip upgrade options and move to the next socket. Some are forced to switch motherboards anyway.
If you have something like Gigabyte, then expect 2-5 PCB revisions in 1-2 years. Once any revision is released, they don't release any other BIOS updates for older ones, other than new CPU support, but it's not even tuned. There is no brand that cares about less popular motherboards or cheap series. ASUS keeps longer support only for their high ROG series (not even some Strix models).
Many people say that AMD uses sockets for longer, and in theory it could work this way, but motherboard manufacturers move on and focus on new models, so the reality is different.
If you have something like Gigabyte, then expect 2-5 PCB revisions in 1-2 years. Once any revision is released, they don't release any other BIOS updates for older ones, other than new CPU support, but it's not even tuned. There is no brand that cares about less popular motherboards or cheap series. ASUS keeps longer support only for their high ROG series (not even some Strix models).
Many people say that AMD uses sockets for longer, and in theory it could work this way, but motherboard manufacturers move on and focus on new models, so the reality is different.
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2002
- Location
- Nashville
I will soundly disagree as my Gigabyte X470 Ultra Gaming is still getting updates for AM4 CPUs, last update was December 25th 2023
X470 AORUS ULTRA GAMING (rev. 1.0) Support | Motherboard - GIGABYTE Global
Lasting Quality from GIGABYTE.GIGABYTE Ultra Durable™ motherboards bring together a unique blend of features and technologies that offer users the absolute ...
This motherboard started with a Ryzen 2600x went to a 3600x then to a 5600x.
My Gigabyte X570 Elite also got a bios update from the same release https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/X570-AORUS-ELITE-rev-10/support#support-dl-bios
This is the update that every AMD mobo gets. It's an important security fix ... the previous BIOS for X470 was nearly two years ago, and for X570 over a year ago. This is what I'm talking about, critical updates only, if they even care. The BIOS tuning and optimization period for most motherboards is up to 3-4 months after release; after that time, good luck as the most important updates were introduced, and if something still doesn't work, then they don't care. Your mobos are higher series, so they had support for longer. Most cheaper models are left without updates. Gigabyte is known for releasing multiple PCB revisions instead of fixing issues. B650E motherboards are already in 3 revisions, different audio, LAN, power design, and some more. My B650E Master is officially problem-free. In reality, some batches are crashing when AVX instructions are in use. Gigabyte doesn't care; they just released a new batch and assume that the problem is solved.
I don't know if you noticed, but we are beta testers for every new generation/chipset. For the first 1-2 months, there are multiple beta BIOS releases based on what the manufacturer finds and users' feedback/RMA. The same story is after every new CPU release on sockets that are used for longer. Look at Z790 motherboards. Once the 14th gen was released, then on various motherboards were stability or compatibility issues. Barely anyone says that, as most people didn't upgrade the CPU from the 13th to 14th gen as they're about the same (with few exceptions). ASUS APEX required 5 BIOS updates to fix 7600+ RAM stability with 14th gen CPUs. Now, think that with lower series ASUS or MSI motherboards, it was the same problem a couple of years ago, but they didn't fix the issue, just patched stability at a rated (and lowered) specs.
There are other cases, like power delivery, as some models are not designed for future series at a higher TDP. We don't know what will be with AM5 mobos. Hopefully the story won't repeat like with every previous AMD gen. I doubt that we will see more than 16 cores for AM5, so the TDP should be reasonable and supported by all current motherboards.
I really wish that motherboards were not released so often and that support was for longer. Right now, you can count on better support only with top motherboards and not even all. Look at MSI, they don't care to update BIOS for Z790 Ace MAX, even though it's their second most expensive motherboard. There was 1 BIOS update since release. ASUS, on the other hand, has a large BIOS team, and the highest mobos get multiple beta BIOS versions with various patches for long months. At least when you pay a lot then they provide something later.
I don't know if you noticed, but we are beta testers for every new generation/chipset. For the first 1-2 months, there are multiple beta BIOS releases based on what the manufacturer finds and users' feedback/RMA. The same story is after every new CPU release on sockets that are used for longer. Look at Z790 motherboards. Once the 14th gen was released, then on various motherboards were stability or compatibility issues. Barely anyone says that, as most people didn't upgrade the CPU from the 13th to 14th gen as they're about the same (with few exceptions). ASUS APEX required 5 BIOS updates to fix 7600+ RAM stability with 14th gen CPUs. Now, think that with lower series ASUS or MSI motherboards, it was the same problem a couple of years ago, but they didn't fix the issue, just patched stability at a rated (and lowered) specs.
There are other cases, like power delivery, as some models are not designed for future series at a higher TDP. We don't know what will be with AM5 mobos. Hopefully the story won't repeat like with every previous AMD gen. I doubt that we will see more than 16 cores for AM5, so the TDP should be reasonable and supported by all current motherboards.
I really wish that motherboards were not released so often and that support was for longer. Right now, you can count on better support only with top motherboards and not even all. Look at MSI, they don't care to update BIOS for Z790 Ace MAX, even though it's their second most expensive motherboard. There was 1 BIOS update since release. ASUS, on the other hand, has a large BIOS team, and the highest mobos get multiple beta BIOS versions with various patches for long months. At least when you pay a lot then they provide something later.
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2002
- Location
- Nashville
This is a very very reasonable concern, and is true of many mid spec, to low spec motherboards.
The longevity of the platform depends on the user, really, and what, if anything, you miss or need that comes out across that time. While platform updates are certainly worth a talking point, I'm not sure it's realistic, even from an enthusiast perspective, to support that number of boards for that long (true support). I also think there are WAY too many SKUs available from most of the motherboard partners.
From power concerns in the mid-range and down to Wi-Fi 6E (7), PCIe 5.0, DDR5 (fwiw), USB speeds (and port count), a lot can pass you by holding on to a platform for 3+ CPU generations. And by year 6/7/8, even the last gen supported CPU puts a glass ceiling on the latest and greatest (as it always does). Right... isn't 'the bar' the latest and greatest? So there are some performance sacrifices that come along with holding onto hardware past a couple of generations too.
For me, two generations of CPU are good enough to warrant a platform's 'worth'. Three is gravy, but when the mashed are good enough for the user without..................
While many won't care, enthusiasts want the latest and greatest, and typically sooner than later. Budget also plays a big role in user's upgrade cycles. Typically, those stretching a platform out to 3 CPUs either don't want to spend or don't have the jack to throw down on a new platform every 4/5 years and want/need that 6-8 you can stretch out of others. I get it. I happen to be a reviewer so hardware obviously comes easier to me than most, but if I had the money to spend, it would be every few years, not several. FOMO, baby!
From power concerns in the mid-range and down to Wi-Fi 6E (7), PCIe 5.0, DDR5 (fwiw), USB speeds (and port count), a lot can pass you by holding on to a platform for 3+ CPU generations. And by year 6/7/8, even the last gen supported CPU puts a glass ceiling on the latest and greatest (as it always does). Right... isn't 'the bar' the latest and greatest? So there are some performance sacrifices that come along with holding onto hardware past a couple of generations too.
For me, two generations of CPU are good enough to warrant a platform's 'worth'. Three is gravy, but when the mashed are good enough for the user without..................
While many won't care, enthusiasts want the latest and greatest, and typically sooner than later. Budget also plays a big role in user's upgrade cycles. Typically, those stretching a platform out to 3 CPUs either don't want to spend or don't have the jack to throw down on a new platform every 4/5 years and want/need that 6-8 you can stretch out of others. I get it. I happen to be a reviewer so hardware obviously comes easier to me than most, but if I had the money to spend, it would be every few years, not several. FOMO, baby!
Most users replace PCs like TVs, washing machines, or refrigerators ... as long as it handles what they need, then it's fine. Those who care about upgrades (or even know there is a chance for that) are barely a few % of all users. I often hear at work that clients have to replace computers because they're slow ... in most cases, they just have a lot of garbage on the drive or still use HDDs. Office PCs are (if it hasn't changed in the last 2 years) about 60% of the whole PC market. Gaming and home PCs are maybe 15-20%. Then how many of those 15-20% actually know what they have inside their PC? Enthusiasts and overclockers are around 1%, if not less, as competitive overclocking is nearly dead.
PC manufacturers are only set to profit, so even if they can, they don't care to invest in old products. Old, like even 1 year+. Brands like ASRock don't even have large enough BIOS teams to support all motherboard models for more than what's required to keep it stable and meet the specifications.
In short, most users don't know or don't care about upgrades. Most manufacturers can't provide long enough support for most of their products or don't want that as buying a new product is their profit. Top products are to boost sales and reputation. The cheapest are to make money as they sell the best.
The typical life of a home PC is about 5 years, so upgrades are every second generation. A typical life of an office PC is longer unless it's a corporation that replaces hardware after the warranty expires, so then 3-5 years, depending on brand and warranty terms.
For me, it's easier and better to sell "old" hardware and buy new ones. It's because of additional tests and reviews. If not that, then I wouldn't upgrade CPUs so often as they barely give anything over a previous generation. It would be every, maybe, 3 generations or when something significant is introduced. Motherboards change more because of additional controllers, ports, and more. It still doesn't matter when you have everything you need.
PC manufacturers are only set to profit, so even if they can, they don't care to invest in old products. Old, like even 1 year+. Brands like ASRock don't even have large enough BIOS teams to support all motherboard models for more than what's required to keep it stable and meet the specifications.
In short, most users don't know or don't care about upgrades. Most manufacturers can't provide long enough support for most of their products or don't want that as buying a new product is their profit. Top products are to boost sales and reputation. The cheapest are to make money as they sell the best.
The typical life of a home PC is about 5 years, so upgrades are every second generation. A typical life of an office PC is longer unless it's a corporation that replaces hardware after the warranty expires, so then 3-5 years, depending on brand and warranty terms.
For me, it's easier and better to sell "old" hardware and buy new ones. It's because of additional tests and reviews. If not that, then I wouldn't upgrade CPUs so often as they barely give anything over a previous generation. It would be every, maybe, 3 generations or when something significant is introduced. Motherboards change more because of additional controllers, ports, and more. It still doesn't matter when you have everything you need.
Similar threads
