Question i9-11900k or 11900kf

[flensr]

Hello,
I know this has been a discussion in the past but I can't seem to find anything relevant in search so here it is again.
I have an "old" 11th gen intel system with an i5-11600K cpu. I've been happy with it, but I have some tasks that could use a little more cpu so I'm considering maxing out the cpu on this system (don't want to upgrade everything at this time).
So the question then becomes do I get the i9-11900K or i9-11900KF? Previous discussions (years ago) seemed to indicate that the disabled GPU KF could give slightly lower power consumption and better thermals, which could translate to better reliability, stability, possibly better overclocking. But looking at actual performance benchmark databases, it looks like the 11900K cpus are consistently performing just a bit better than the 11900KF. Perhaps that's due to binning? Or due to users/overclockers simply putting more time and effort into getting the most out of the 11900K compared to 11900KF owners?

The price difference is about $20, and I'm happy with my nvidia gpu so the KF series chip should be fine. I also plan on upgrading my AIO water cooling (currently corsair i80 series) to something a bit more robust (2x or 3x size radiator) to make sure the cpu can actually use the higher clock headroom and increased core count without throttling.

Also, I plan on using a *mild* overclock, nothing dramatic just some tweaking to get the most out of the power I'll be running through the system.

So, it's been a while and I'm wondering does anyone remember any lessons learned about 11 series K vs. KF cpus that might help me choose?

Thanks!

 

[LightningZ71]

While there may be some measurable performance differences between the two chips based entirely on likely binning effects from "f" processors potentially being recovered chips that had bad GPUs and could also have other very minor deviations limiting overclocking, in practice you would never notice it. The advantage of having the built-in iGPU to allow for testing video card issues and replacing it is much more valuable.

 

[coercitiv]

Previous discussions (years ago) seemed to indicate that the disabled GPU KF could give slightly lower power consumption and better thermals, which could translate to better reliability, stability, possibly better overclocking.

This idea comes up from time to time in discussions, and it's a false narrative: the iGPU does not meaningfully affect power consumption, thermals, reliability, overclocking. It affects price. The 11900K is just a more complete chip, in the sense that it can use more of it's intended features.

What does affect performance is variability from one CPU to another even in the same SKU category. Take 100 CPUs from the 11900KF SKU pool and you will find most of them perform about the same, but some are significantly worse and some are much better than the average. The SKU binning ensures that chip quality passes a certain minimum spec, that does not mean chips can't be better than the spec. So when you compare a single 11900KF with a single 11900K, you're not comparing disabled vs. enabled iGPU, you're actually observing variance in chip quality from one CPU die to another.

We can argue that the KF chips, due to the nature of the defects that forces chips in this category, might have a different quality curve than the K chips, but that is just hypothetical and has no place in a purchase decision intended for regular use. The important question for the average consumer is whether the iGPU is needed now or in the future and whether the price difference makes the KF more desirable or not.