Which parts list should I pick that will perform admirably in the future

I don't want to repeat any info:
http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-3686919/concept.html

But basically, I don't think the i5 8400 will be capable 3/4+ years down the line and will be unable to keep up with gpu tech. Although, I may be wrong, its currently in between the 8600k and i7 8700.

After reading through posts on this matter, some have suggested the 8600k while others have stated the i7 8700 as it has more threads and similiar performance without overclocking.

Am I making the right choice eliminating the i5 8400?

i7 8700:https://au.pcpartpicker.com/list/CmGNq4

i5 8600k:https://au.pcpartpicker.com/list/QyTq3b

I know you can't futureproof 100%, but there are people who are running older cpu's like the i7 4770k/4790k which are still great and viable today.

Which option would be the smart and right choice to make? (Granted a GPU upgrade will occur during this timeframe)
(There are so many different opinions and options, and frankly I'm slightly stressed out on which CPU to pick as it's my first build and I dont want to purchase something i'll regret)
4 answers Last reply
More about parts list pick perform admirably future
  1. Of course i7-8700 is a better option.
    though i don't like the storage options.
    you picked very old and slow models with not that great reliability. Using SSD as boot drive only is kinda thing of the past. like how often you boot your computer.
    so that would be a starting point https://au.pcpartpicker.com/product/NhgzK8/western-digital-blue-250gb-25-solid-state-drive-wds250g2b0a
    but honestly, i'd just ditch that 1TB HDD and go with 500GB SSD only https://au.pcpartpicker.com/product/ft8j4D/crucial-mx500-500gb-25-solid-state-drive-ct500mx500ssd1

    Also, this cooler is a bit better for the same price as the cryorig https://au.pcpartpicker.com/product/cwPzK8/be-quiet-cpu-cooler-bk009
  2. First, the i5-8400 is NOT in between those other CPU's.

    i5-8400 (6c/6t) Max Turbo 4.0GHz

    i5-8600K (6c/6t) OC up to 5GHz or so

    i7-8700 (6c/12t) Max Turbo 4.6GHz

    Price/value aside the i7-8700 is arguably the best CPU. I say arguably because you should be able to apply all cores (in BIOS) to the i7-8700 to hit 4.6GHz and if we assume you can manage 5GHz on the i5-8600K that means:

    i5-8600K is almost 9% faster per core... but you're probably encountering very few CPU bottleneck situations at this point so the i7-8700 could benefit in applications that utilize the hyperthreading.

    the i7-8700 can also get by with a cheaper processor as going from 4.6GHz to 5GHz changes the power draw significantly (mainly due to the voltage). The i7-8700 is roughly $60USD more expensive though.

    Frankly they are both great CPU's, but if we assume maybe $80 to $100USD for a top-end air cooler to hit 5GHz vs maybe $50 for the i7-8700 then the prices may end up SIMILAR for both solutions depending on what coolers you look at.

    *so i7-8700 is my recommend, tweak to all cores at max Turbo and choose a good AIR COOLER accordingly. Maybe a top-end Noctua or similar.
  3. My personal experience:
    While my i7-3770K (4c/8t OC 4.4GHz) with GTX1080 holds up great today, at the time (2012) I bought it people said "get an i5-3570 non-K as that's more than enough" well... I would have build a new system by now had I done that so I'm glad I did what I did.

    It's hard to predict how CPU usage will change however we've already seen suggestions that at least a few games will start to do things with AI etc that use more CPU cycles now that API's/games are allowing better threading of game code and that more people have 4+ core CPU's.

    *get a solid motherboard, 16GB (i.e. 2x8GB 3000MHz CL15 DDR4) and you should be great for possibly TEN YEARS. Yes, ten years. I mean that.
  4. I noticed you are looking at a 1920x1080, 24", 144Hz, TN panel monitor?

    144Hz to help with fast games, sure I get it. It's just a shame you have to sacrifice resolution (and thus size too due to pixel density).

    Anyway, Freesync is expensive (especially when AMD cards cost more than NVidia AFAIK right now) and GSYNC way more so.

    *You should at least understand how VSYNC ON/OFF, Adaptive VSYNC, and Adaptive VSYNC Half Refresh works.

    For example:
    Case 1: fast shooter you can maintain at least 144FPS 90% of the time
    - force on Adaptive VSYNC so your drops below 144FPS just cause some screen tear (VSYNC auto turned off) not added stuttering

    Case 2: slow game like Tomb Raider
    - turn VSYNC OFF in the game, and tweak settings to maintain about 50FPS average (optionally cap to 50FPS for more consistent experience in other tool like NVInspector)
    - above should have minimal screen tear (monitor updating almost 3x per new frame so less tears).. don't want VSYNC since you can't hit 144FPS

    Case 3: semi-slow game but screen tearing sucks
    - force on Adaptive VSync Half Refresh (that caps to 72FPS VSYNC ON since 144Hz monitor and if you can't maintain 72FPS it turns VSYNC OFF)
    - good balance with game tweaks is roughly 10% drops below 72FPS (more drops is more screen tear but better visual quality.. so it's a trade-off)

    Adaptive VSYNC (and half refresh variant) done by:
    a) start and close game, then
    b) NVidia CP-> manage 3d settings... add game.. (setting)-> save (confirm with fraps or Steam FPS indicator)

    Summary:
    Must understand the pros and cons to best understand how to optimize each game else you will get a substandard experience such as too much stuttering, lag, tears etc.
Ask a new question