There's nothing wrong with either of those CPUs, but unless you just want to future proof, I think the 12C/24T may be a bit pricey. It depends on what else you do with your machine. Do you stream? Do video editing? Use Virtual Machines? Personally, I don't think 5-boxing eats up too much CPU, even if you were to increase your resolution, however...Originally Posted by Rhand
My current gaming rig, 6700k (4/8) @ 4000Mhz with an GTX 980, is starting to feel it's age and it's about time for a rebuild. I max out at 5 clients, I'm not as crazy as some of you 10, 20, and even 30 boxersIn BFA on my current rig I'm hitting 90%+ on both my CPU and GPU pretty much full time, so it's time for both to go. I'm on the fence between the new i9-9900K on Z390 or the i9-9920X on X299, either way I'm likely going to a 1080Ti as I can't see the real benefit vs. $$$ for the 2080Ti.
My original thought was being able to dedicate 2 physical cores + 2 virtual cores per game instance, effectively giving each WoW client it's recommended dual core setup + some virtual core headroom. That lead me down the path of the i9-9920X, with 10 physical cores assigned to the game that leaves 2 physical + virtual left over for OS overhead, sounds simple, right?
It's not that WoW only uses a single thread, it's that a lot of what it does has to be put onto a single thread because it cannot be done in parallelization across multiple threads at the same time. WoW itself does benefit from using 3-4 cores/threads, and you can see in my latest video that, at any given time, my CPU usage is nice and low (although it'd likely be higher in a zone like Zuldazar, or, going back to the video you're referring to, Suramar). I currently use a custom CPU strategy where each game client is assigned to ~6 threads and they all overlap with each other somewhere within the overall core/thread assignment, with no perceivable penalty.
You have to think that if a background game client is only using 10% of a thread and it's the only game client dedicated to that thread, then 90% of it is being wasted. You could, instead, have three background game clients sharing that same thread, using 10% each, and still only be eating up 30% of that thread.
However, you can also look ahead to the DX12 multi-threading enhancements that are coming in patch 8.1. I haven't bothered to check out the PTR, but I'm assuming that, if enabled, they're going to eat through a bit more CPU to save (or assist) in the area of the GPU. But who knows... the multi-threaded enhancements may cause nothing but trouble when running multiple game clients, so, at the moment, it's hard to know.
Ultimately, you can choose to go the route you've laid out above with the 9920X (while it's a bit pricey, it's a nice platform), but it may not be necessary to do that. I think the 9900K is a nice CPU, and it gets a little nicer if you're willing to overclock it by a little bit. I know that not everyone wants to attempt that, so having more cores available may just be the simpler route.
And to be fair, if I had a 9960X 16C/32T chip, I would probably just assign each game client to their own six threads and just be done with it. So, if you want to go with the 9920X, I certainly can't blame you.
A whole terabyte is a lot for a system drive, and unless you expect to be loading it up with pictures or videos, I think it's going to be quite empty (or you can over provision the shit out of it). However, it's only ~$80 more to move from 512GB to 1TB, so... go for it.
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us