Add item to cart to see discount applied at checkout
10% off All CPU's (Intel Core i7-11700KF CPU $449, Intel Core i7-11700K $467 + Delivery) @ Shopping Express
490
nocure on 15/07/2021 - 13:06 shoppingexpress.com.au (948 clicks)
Last edited 15/07/2021 - 13:13 by 1 other user
Last edited 15/07/2021 - 13:13 by 1 other user
Related Stores
closed Comments
nice picked up a tray Ryzen 5 3600 for $247.79 (delivery was $12.24)
Setting up a mining rig so might as well get this to mine monero since i have free electricity.
Lend me some of this free electricity please 😉
You'd be lucky to make $1 day mining monero
its not mainly to mine monero.
It was meant for the cpu of a rig to run in parallel with the gpus. So yeah if u have free/cheap electricity, might as well run it. Assuming free power costs, it can pull in $160/year.
Just a hobby mining project/ free heater.
Too much effort for too little reward. with electricity costs included, id barely make $1 a day on 16cores
@BargainKen: I'm not an expert. People normally do a dedicated rig with a cheap board and celeron chip that doesn't do anything.
So might as well chuck a chip that can make a return.
Mining monero alone is not worth. Gpu mining is pulling in about $5 a day per card.
After a year or less it will be free gear.
All these people talk about free heating from mining obviously don't live anywhere proper cold!!
Running 10 cards in the ACT and makes maybe 1 degree difference in the immediate vicinity :p
But should scale easily right. 1000 PC should net $1000 dollars a day.
don't buy 11 gen desktop, wait for 12 gen or buy AMD.
why not 13 gen or 14 gen?
AMD options with built in graphics are very limited at the moment and when 5600g and 5700g come, probably overpriced.
11400 is pretty good cost wise, but that's the end of the platform i guess :-(the 11600KF is decently priced with the code…
$305+ shippingOr perhaps the Gen 15 as it will be better than the 13 and 14.
Will probably still be on 14nm+++++++++
Is that x570 motherboard worth it with the ryzen 5600x, or should I buy seperate.
Its a $200 board separately, it really depends if you want/need it or not. I've seen a fair few x570 boards on OzB lately for ~$90 to $100.
They'll probs keep getting cheaper as well, cause next year when the next gen of Ryzen comes out, they will use a new socket. The current AM3 motheboards, b350, b450, x470, x570, this is the end of the road for them, whatever CPU you buy today will be the last one you can get without buying a new MB as well.
*AM4 not am3 👍
Also include b550 in that lineup :)
Shame there's no cheap AMD chips, been looking for one to complete a budget rig but with the 3600 only $20 more than a 3300x there's not really any point going budget.
It's so weird having AMD dominate the midrange chips and Intel dominate the low end.
As far as performance for dollar intel often comes out on top these days
Yeah saw an intel 10105 with free shipping for like $115 from computer alliance last night. Get a decent b560 board and upgrade to a 10700k down the line.
Can anyone please advise how to check if the cpu offered here I can upgrade my Dell Optiplex micro PC.
Easiest way is to check if Dell offer it as an option at point of sale, but they don't usually publish the CPU support list for their motherboards (like normal motherboards).
If it's a micro PC though, your options are going to be very limited from a thermal option, if you currently have a 35W chip at best you'll be able to get another 35W chip. Probably not much of an upgrade.
download cpu-z and work out if its the same socket as a start
5900X for $755 with this deal too
So very tempting. Especially now there are high capacity + high speed + low timing DDR4 memory sticks are finally out. But DDR5 manufacturing is already started or is starting very soon and Intel 12th gen QS are already out. Then there is Windows 11 TPM requirements etc. If you like to stay in the front, system built today will probably end up getting old in 6 months time… Still, very tempting.
Pretty much every motherboard made since Skylake (6700k,etc) should be compatible with the TPM requirements for Win11.
As for DDR5, from what little I've heard, the top end of DDR4 (your high speed, low latency) should be fairly comparable with the starting point of DDR5, performance wise, once it makes its way to consumer desktops.
Any CPU in this deal will support Win 11 because they can support TPM purely through the CPU.
TPM is scary I think it's just a way for M$ to control the tech sphere and I'll probs stick to W10 for as long as I can.
(soz, meant to reply to the parent of this post, not this one itself)
TPM is a motherboard standard I believe. Has to be implemented on the specific motherboard. I know that some Haswell boards had them, but Asrock didn't implement it until Skylake. Thus it's not solely based on the cpu to my understanding.
Every iPhone has a TPM chip. They are not scary, they are a standard tool that have been around for a really long time that drastically improve your security.
@FracturedArse: It's scary if you don't like the idea of M$ having as much control over your PC as Apple has over your IPhone
@jonathonsunshine: They don't have more control…the TPM chip contains a complex private key (among other things) to help with generating strong encryption. They are only going to use features of the TPM chip, they aren't going to have more control over the PC than they already have…being the operating system you're running which inherently gives them total control anyway.
Many mobos offer fTPM (Firmware TPM) - it’s an option with newer Intel ME and part of Intels PTT, which doesn’t require a dedicated TPM
I’ve been ensuring my gear has a TPM when making purchasing decisions for a decade. I find it quite a reasonable decision that MS are finally enforcing privacy and security with your personal data.
A TPM enables full disk encryption, which prevents the old boot from a USB and steal your private information attack.
IIRC an OEM actually needs a TPM to get on the WHQL starting from 2016 - so the requirement has been there for some time.
@2025: deleted 99% of this post
TPM is meant as a business tool to keep tabs on the machines that a company owns. For your personal computer, it is a way to let microsoft keep tabs on the computer that YOU own. Maybe decide what software to let you install. Maybe decide that you're not allowed to install anything other than Windows. Maybe decide that some A03 administrative gnat needs to look around your computer for whatever totalitarian nightmare reason they think of.
@jonathonsunshine: No no no lmao Intel ME is the Management Engine for business… The business framework that you are describing.
BTW I deleted the post and re posted because I replied the wrong way. Just like you.
TPM is different, it basically stores encryption keys. Like Apple’s “Secure Enclave”
MS don’t need a TPM for what you describe. They have the EULA that everyone agrees to and the telemetry in built to the software that is hardware independent lol
They have the MAC address of your NICs. Your system serial. CPU serial. Main board serial. They don’t need another chip for that ahahaha. They have your list of installed programs, updates, drivers. All this without a TPM.
Maybe I’m a shill for M$. After all I’ve been to more of their events then birthdays for my mates. So there ya go. But don’t believe every video you watch with fancy purple ambient lighting in the background. It’s rare to find anyone with any actual knowledge about PCs these days.
Also, your comments about what you can and can’t install? Auditing? That’s one of the many things we can do with Group Policy. That’s existed for years in Windows. And sure as f doesn’t need a TPM aha
And another thing. M$ have been deciding for decades what you can and can’t install. Windows’s compatibility features have a black list of programs that you can’t run. It won’t let you. Why are you happy with this? I believe 3.11 was the last version without that ability to block programs at M$’s discretion ahahahaha.
You seem to be parroting this article. https://web.archive.org/web/20110629082333/http://www.gnu.or…
But you’re happy to run Windows? When most of what that old article is on about is already happening with Windows, and the author suggests Linux without any proprietary software! Ahahahahahaha. Enjoy your Windows 10 i guess. Atleast it has WSL! That’s Linux, right?!?! :D
i'll be forever be saying - but this new model is just around the corner LOL
assuming its true 25% is massive!https://www.goodgearguide.com.au/article/688805/how-amd-3d-v…
nice one, thanks op
getting the 11600KF $315 delivered
was waiting for the 11400F - $229 but seem to be OOS everywherehow did you get 315? I saw 335 on the website? btw how's it compare to i7 10700kf with 3080? which one is better for money? thanks
HOLDDDDDDDDD
I paid ~$650 for a 9900k 2.5 years ago… $450 for basically the same CPU from Intel today seems pretty lame.
Nothing compelling from AMD either to upgrade to aside from better thermals or efficiency (or more cores).
Decent prices all the same.
considering i sold my i7 4790k/z97 setup
to 'upgrade' for barely anything $ wise/time wise seems solid.
How much did you sell it for?
300
@m3ndL3: just cpu n board… havent sold the ram yet…
got a good price on a gig z590 board from connections …
@spoonmugen: Wow, well done. $300 buys a brand new 10400f + mobo. Think you found a complete sucker…
@Noodles93: z97 was an asus rog maximus extreme board though…
and the 4790k still holds value.
look at the comparison for it and the 10400f
https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-4790K-vs…lol
z97 was an asus rog maximus extreme board though… and the 4790k still holds value.
Fair enough, did a search on ebay and it seems that people are still paying 200 bucks for a 4790k in 2021 lol. Admittedly, i don't follow collectability of old gen PC parts…
look at the comparison for it and the 10400f
User Benchmark is a worthless comparison tool for CPUs. A 10400f would be around 25% faster than a 4790k in 1080p games(not even taking into account frame times lol) and significantly better in productivity. Here's a loose comparison - use the 7700k as a best case proxy and shave a little bit of performance off for what your old 4790k would be.
A 10400f would absolutely decimate a 4790k in the real world, it's not even close. Collectability/enthusiasm would be the only rational reason for spending $300 on a 4790k/mobo vs a 10400f/mobo.
@Noodles93: decimate? depends what you're doing, they're basically the same in single thread performance
the 4790k clocks to 4.6 easily whilst the 10400f only does 4.3, haswell to skylake is 10-15%@abctoz: https://imgur.com/a/nB9kf1G
20% higher avg frames than a 7700k and 24% better 1% lows. The 7700k boosts to 4.5 so you can expect that to be better than a 4790k @ 4.6 (taking into account your estimate of 10-15% haswell to skylake).
Not saying that someone should upgrade from a 4790k to a 10400f. Just that it doesn't make any sense to spend $300 on a used 4790k/mobo instead of a brand new 10400f/mobo in any performance metric.
Games have been more recently trending in favour of core count rather than pure single thread power…
@Noodles93: depends on your use case man, the problem with these benchmarks is they always take some basket of games(mostly new AAA console ports) - i doubt most people even play those games on a regular basis(they sure as hell don't have a lot of replay ability)
look at the comparison here - they're pretty much on par with popular multiplayer titles because single thread is king there: https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-7700K-vs…
the 7700k will even beat the 10400f on single thread because you can clock it to 5 vs 4.3 - that's a 20% increase, exact same architecture, plus you can overclock memory for even more gains on the Z platform
@abctoz: Sure, the 7700k might do better in low core count multiplayer titles. I was moreso using the 7700k as a best case proxy when comparing to the 10400f since it's a bit harder to find something with both the 10400f and 4790k in the same bench.
Fact is a 10400f is on average going to be quicker than a 4790k. It just doesn't make sense to buy a used 4790k/mobo over a new 10400f + mobo for performance reasons (i.e. what this discussion was about). Any recent AAA is just going to run better on a 10400f vs a 4790k. https://imgur.com/a/OEIv3Qj, https://imgur.com/a/W6CFHHz
plus you can overclock memory for even more gains on the Z platform
Intel enabled mem OC on b560s
@Noodles93: my point is in single thread the 4790k actually edges over the 10400f - most of them do 4.8ghz, plus you can overclock the memory.
those motherboards can hold value ironically, because motherboards tend to die way more than cpu's, so in the end you have an oversupply of cpu's(well the 4790k not so much since it was top tier), and an undersupply of motherboards.
my point is in single thread the 4790k actually edges over the 10400f - most of them do 4.8ghz, plus you can overclock the memory.
Does it? Do you have any benchmarks to back it up? Here's a best case overclock of the 4790k: https://imgur.com/a/OEIv3Qj ,https://imgur.com/a/W6CFHHz
Those min framerates are dreadful.
plus you can overclock the memory.
Again, you can overclock memory on a b560 with a 10400f.
@Noodles93: bro tomb raider and red dead are multithreaded titles, i'm talking about single thread performance, see my original post.
if you can indeed overclock memory then i would take the 10400f any day of the week too
I'm talking about single thread performance
Most games released in the last 3 years aren't just solely reliant on single core. Plenty of coverage on places like Gamers Nexus and Eurogamer about core/thread scaling easily between 4c/8t vs 6c/12t.
That's what i've been saying along along around why it doesn't make any sense to buy a USED 4790k over a NEW 10400f. That's what the whole conversation was about when you joined in.
@Noodles93: they can talk all they want and get people to upgrade, but who even plays those games most of them are trash, look at the games people are actually playing: https://store.steampowered.com/stats/
i've been playing civ 5 the past year almost exclusively lol
i was originally responding to your use of the word 'decimate', well in single thread performance, they're actually on par. i made no claim on whether the purchase was good or bad value, i've seen way crazier shit tbh
@abctoz: Not going to bring in subjective opinions around which games are good which games are bad. Play whatever you want.
i was originally responding to your use of the word 'decimate', well in single thread performance, they're actually on par.
And in the real world of recent games, the 10400f is significantly better. Do whatever you want with your ST performance, the 4790k factually will run markedly worse in most modern games. So what if the ST is on par?
@Noodles93: play time is an objective measure not subjective… i would argue the choice of basket for benchmarks are a subjective measure - i don't think you realise this
for the games i play, i have 0 use for that 10400f, honestly, ok maybe 1% for the 30 hours i put in those newer titles, i can't even finish half of them.
@abctoz: How can you compare playtime between multiplayer titles and vastly single player AAA titles as a measure of which games are good vs bad? You would spend 20-60 hours on a AAA and then you'd be done with it. Of course you're not going to have those games in a top games by player count. I don't think you realise this.
i would argue the choice of basket for benchmarks are a subjective measure
Benchmarking hardware on easy to run multiplayer titles is a worthless exercise. You don't need a review to tell you that the latest hardware is going to get you an extra 5% in Dota 2 or CS GO. Those games have run well for a long time on OLD hardware. What are you going to gain by repetitively benching them on new hardware? AAAs that push the boundary in physics/graphics are the only meaningful way to benchmark hardware increments on gaming performance.
@Noodles93: to give you an idea, in the past year i have spent 1000 hours on civ 5, maybe 30 on tomb raider + borderlands 3.
this is why i believe those stats - i've played many of those games and can believe why people would want to spend hours there. and if you base your purchase decision on that then single thread is all you need.
this is why prefaced with "depends on your use case man"
i already agree with you on the value proposition, i'm not sure what we're arguing about lol
@abctoz: Yeah but benchmarking on the top 10 steam games is pointless exercise. They're going to run well on anything in the last 10 years. You wouldn't really need to factor in a purchase decision because why would you be upgrading hardware to play CS GO/Dota2/TF2? Any single thread benefit you gain is largely just academic.
i'm not sure what we're arguing about lol
Neither mate. See you around.
@Noodles93: no you don't understand the amount of nerd, when there is competition people go all out, for the single thread juice in this case, even if it is an extra 10%
You missed the cheap 10700k from Amazon.
How did I miss it? It would be a side grade lol. 9900k and 10700k at the same clocks are identical apart from better thermals on the 10700k.
Seem like website got OzBargained….
I was just checking the price and it lagged out :( 5600x for $376.60
same i just sent a message to them….
the photo i took has $315…
but after it processed its showing $352….
thinkng the code dropped off???
wait… check your emails…
i have 2 invoices from themone says paid - correct amount
other says due on invoice… which is the wrong amount
lol i'm stuck
We will be back online shortly
Please try again in a few minutes.done the paypal pay in 4 sections - now the website is hanging…..
There's a open box 5950x going for $989 after discount - not sure if its been used or not
https://www.shoppingexpress.com.au/buy/opened-box-sale-amd-r…
Pffft! What's 10 Percent? That's a kick in the balls - Where's my 25 percent like that Klarna deal ???
This is more a public service announcement if your looking at a CPU for a pure gaming system.
For gaming purposes only, the 10900k is still the king of the roost overall. The 5950X is a close second surpassing in some titles but not overall.
You can buy a z590 board and put a 10900k in it if the current motherboards have something superior to the z490 variant, if not a 10900k for $600 AUD new and a z490 board is very reasonably priced and is the best overall at gaming performance, you cannot beat its 10 monolithic cores and higher overclocks from 5.2Ghz all-core or beyond. Tuning intel CPU's compared to the AMD variants is also a lot easier and less hassle with memory timings, ratio and clock.
This might be a less than popular opinion if you base your technology purchasing on the popular tech youtubers but the 11th gen CPU's are not better than the 10th gen CPU's for gaming, I am not talking about productivity or value or anything, gaming FPS on your screen only. Less cores and more IPC does not equal better gaming performance, its a downgrade of about 10%. Now if that means nothing to you or gaming is not your priority or not your only priority than get the latest, but for gaming it's not the greatest.
hi wondering i5 11600kf vs i7 10700kf pair with 3080, for all round , gaming and productivity , which one is better for money? or 5600x is better of 3?
The 10700kf will perform on par with the Flagship 11900kf in Call of Duty Warzone. Here is a link to a guy who has had the CPU's and tested them. Based on those results the 10700KF is superior to the 11600KF in gaming.
Overall though for productivity the IPC gains on the 11600kf would need you to look at some comparison results on the specific productivity suites your looking at. But even with theses "IPC" gains on the 11th gen CPU's compare these two links and tell me which one logically looks like the superior choice:
10700KF: https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/199325/…
11600KF: https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/212276/…For gaming there is a clear winner between the two, I honestly don't know why Intel even released the 11th gen series.
"For gaming purposes only, the 10900k is still the king of the roost overall. The 5950X is a close second surpassing in some titles but not overall."
This is wrong. Not sure where you get the data from but Hardware Unboxed tested out 5950x average&1%low fps to be 214/173, vs 10900K 213&170.
https://youtu.be/zsfvRw74h30?t=870
5950x is a better gaming cpu, at least in most cases when looking at the average performance.
I'll bite because someone negged me.
Hardware Unboxed is one of the popular tech youtubers in the group I mentioned in my original post and your link is a great example of how these popular tech youtubers can inadvertently sway the public into forming an opinion without personal thought, or specifically, users with limited tech knowledge or experience. Hardware Unboxed do not do any significant overclocking, they review stock performance and sometimes do a very basic overclock. If you push the hardware with a significant overclock, which is very easy to do on the Intel platform, you will find the data is different.
Your link shows a gaming average where all processors are at stock clock, not overclocked as mentioned, even at stock your seeing only a 1 fps gain average and a 3 fps gain on the one percent lows between the 5950X and the 10900k. That performance difference is completely negligible in the real world and would swing either way if you ran the numbers multiple times. But a single additional frame per second is not the point of my message, the point is those are stock numbers and the 10900k would be at the best stock performance 4.9Ghz on all 10 cores for their testing, we don't actually know what stock all core clock they get as they do not tell us, it could be lower than 4.9Ghz all core if they did not get the best silicon. With a decent overlock however, the 10900k on nearly all silicon variations can see 5.2Ghz on all cores which changes the numbers completely.
Hardware unboxed attempted an overclock of the 5950X in that same video only moments later and what do we see? In gaming the overclocked 5950X had worse performance than the stock 10900k in Rainbow Six Siege and Far Cry New Dawn. And we are are talking at least 20 or more frames on both average, and at the 1 percent lows. How much more difference it would be if the 10900k was overclocked.
https://youtu.be/zsfvRw74h30?t=951I don't care about Cinebench numbers, I don't care about Blender numbers, I care about the best gaming performance. I don't even care about price to performance but I would be amiss on OzBargain not to mention that the 10900k is around half the price of the 5950X if you keep your eyes peeled for decent pricing.
TLDR You can buy an average silicon 10900k for half the price of a 5950X and spend 20 minutes overclocking it to 5.2Ghz all core and even the people who have spent weeks tinkering with their 5950X and getting the right RAM and fiddling with the timings and the infinity fabric will at the best possible silicon tie with the gaming performance you are seeing on the easy to use 10900k. Or if overclocking scares you, which on an Intel platform it shouldn't, you can leave the 10900k completely stock, like a race car using cheap fuel, and have the same performance or in some games better than the 5950X which is twice the price.
Also not that this matters in any way but I thought it was amusing, Asmongold the World of Wacraft streamer uses a 10900k.
You can keep living in your little bubble that 10900k with OC is still the fastest while the rest of the world moves on knowing the truth is quite the opposite.
https://youtu.be/72AHENDeTEI
https://youtu.be/OnMEAW5VVUo
https://youtu.be/utWSSlyabjcI have no interest in opinions from you, or Hardware Unboxed as a single source, but based on the raining evidence of online sources I know 5950x is a BETTER GAMING CPU. Btw your price argument is also quite bad: we are talking about THE TOP GAMING PERFORMANCE here, if price is what you care why not get a 5600x? Or even Intel's own 10600k./11600k? While we're at it, are we just going to ignore the fact that OCed 10900k runs at almost twice the power of a 5950x?
@RageofAsmongold: Looks like we have reached the caps lock stage…
Incase you missed it I don't care about the price of computer hardware, I already mentioned that in my posts, but seeing as this is OzBargain and people are on here for discounted or cheaper options I thought it was worth mentioning to cater for said users. It cannot be used as ammunition in your rebuttal as the cost of x or y does not personally phase me in the least. Same goes for power consumption, that does not concern me either as the cost of my electricity bills has never been a financial issue for me.
In you response you say that you don't care about the cost of the AMD CPU when its more expensive than the Intel CPU, but then you go to say that you do care that the Intel CPU requires more power than the AMD CPU? Sounds to me like your just trying to affirm your purchasing choice with whatever you can find.
If you look at the video you linked there is 63.6 watts of additional power from the Intel 10900K OC vs the 5950X OC so not sure why your saying almost twice the power consumption. That is false information. Unless you cherry picked the numbers and went with the 5950X stock power consumption and compared it to the 10900K OC power consumption which would be pretty funny.
Even the stock 5900x beats the 10900k overclocked at 5.2ghz, it's not even a competition. Why do people keep trying to spread misinformation like you?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utWSSlyabjc
Even the 5600x/5800x at stock beats the overclocked 10900k in a game like Three Kindgoms, a game that's CPU bound and sponsored by Intel…
https://i.imgur.com/BmRU75Q.png
Unless Gamers Nexus isn't too technical enough for you?
Tempted to get the Ryzen 3600 Bundle seems like good price for Motherboard + Processor.
I’m super out of the loop right now, will this be a good upgrade to my aging z97 + i7 4790?
do it….
Hi all, evening from lockdown central..if you had $600 to spend on a cpu , motherboard ( WiFi pref ) and maybe 16gb ram on, what would you go for. Currently have some 10 yo set up that I just surf n play wargaming on, not stressing it at all.thanks all ,:)
Very nice deals.