Ryzen 3000 series- upgrade for photo editing and 4K gaming

[suedezu]

Hi guys,

I currently have the following system:

Intel Xeon 1230 v3 at running at stock speed 3.3 Ghz

Asrock B85 Pro4

Nvidia PNY GTX 1080ti

16.0 GB DDR3 running at 1600 MHz

Cryorig H5 Ultimate cooler

LG 27UK650 4K monitor

Samsung 850 EVO 256 GB boot drive

650 W power supply

I use the system mainly for two things: editing photos as I am a working professional photographer and playing games at 4K.

For the editing part, the system runs OK but it's obviously not blazing fast. When I have large batches of photographs to process as I often do, CPU usage hits 100% and it does struggle a bit. How much faster would a Ryzen 3000 series CPU be in this specific scenario?

When it comes to gaming I noticed that even though the GTX 1080ti should be enough to run games at 4K 60 fps with high details, sometimes I only hit 50 fps on average and the gameplay isn't the smoothest. I know that at 4K I am GPU bound but wouldn't a much faster CPU improve at least 1% lows and the overall gaming smoothness?

What motherboard would be a good choice for my uses? How much RAM and what RAM speeds?

I am seriously contemplating to upgrade my 5 years old rig but I want to make sure I don't just upgrade for the sake of upgrading.

Thanks in advance!

 

[NdMk2o1o]

Asrock taichi x470, ryzen 2700x and 32gb ddr4 3000/3200 would be my recommendation budget depending obviously

 

[suedezu]

Thanks for replying! I would like to wait for Ryzen 3000 series, probably the 3700x. I hope for much improved IPC vs the Ryzen 2700x.

Regarding the RAM, dual channel or quad channel? What latency?

 

[NdMk2o1o]

Well in that case you can only speculate until ryzen 2 is here with x570 motherboards... Also ryzen is only dual channel if you want quad channel you'll have to go threadripper, that doesn't mean you can't have 4 sticks of ram with ryzen it will just run in dual channel mode. Preferably 2 sticks are better for ryzen systems and anything cl14/cl16 will be fine.

 

[suedezu]

Well in that case you can only speculate until ryzen 2 is here with x570 motherboards... Also ryzen is only dual channel if you want quad channel you'll have to go threadripper, that doesn't mean you can't have 4 sticks of ram with ryzen it will just run in dual channel mode. Preferably 2 sticks are better for ryzen systems and anything cl14/cl16 will be fine.

What about my question regarding the gaming performance while playing at 4K? Will Ryzen 3000 improve my 4k gaming experience?

 

[dirtyferret]

Hi guys,

I currently have the following system:

Intel Xeon 1230 v3 at running at stock speed 3.3 Ghz

Asrock B85 Pro4

Nvidia PNY GTX 1080ti

16.0 GB DDR3 running at 1600 MHz

Cryorig H5 Ultimate cooler

LG 27UK650 4K monitor

Samsung 850 EVO 256 GB boot drive

650 W power supply

I use the system mainly for two things: editing photos as I am a working professional photographer and playing games at 4K.

For the editing part, the system runs OK but it's obviously not blazing fast. When I have large batches of photographs to process as I often do, CPU usage hits 100% and it does struggle a bit. How much faster would a Ryzen 3000 series CPU be in this specific scenario?

When it comes to gaming I noticed that even though the GTX 1080ti should be enough to run games at 4K 60 fps with high details, sometimes I only hit 50 fps on average and the gameplay isn't the smoothest. I know that at 4K I am GPU bound but wouldn't a much faster CPU improve at least 1% lows and the overall gaming smoothness?

What motherboard would be a good choice for my uses? How much RAM and what RAM speeds?

I am seriously contemplating to upgrade my 5 years old rig but I want to make sure I don't just upgrade for the sake of upgrading.

Thanks in advance!

Doubtful you see any difference at 4k, the 2700k and intel 9900k are only separated by 2% at 4k (see below). As for IPC improvement I would not hold your breathe, history is not on AMD's side and they are re-using the same socket. Even if they knock it out of the park with 5-10% IPC increase it would not be a major improvement at 4k. I would say threadripper would be more meaningful for you if you are hitting a wall while doing photo editing.

 

[suedezu]

Doubtful you see any difference at 4k, the 2700k and intel 9900k are only separated by 2% at 4k (see below). As for IPC improvement I would not hold your breathe, history is not on AMD's side and they are re-using the same socket. Even if they knock it out of the park with 5-10% IPC increase it would not be a major improvement at 4k. I would say threadripper would be more meaningful for you if you are hitting a wall while doing photo editing.

I see what you mean. In this case maybe I'll stick to my current rig and save a ton of money.

 

[dirtyferret]

I see what you mean. In this case maybe I'll stick to my current rig and save a ton of money.

sounds like a good plan

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Unless you're consistently seeing less than 99% GPU utilization which is doubtful at 4k I would wait it out. I would imagine your Xeon is performing slightly slower than a 4770 unless you're able to OC it
but that should still be more than adequate for 4k gaming with a 1080 ti.

 

[R0H1T]

What about my question regarding the gaming performance while playing at 4K? Will Ryzen 3000 improve my 4k gaming experience?

That depends on your GPU, the best CPUs for gaming are within 5~10% of each other @4k depending on their clocks & mainly game in question.

 

[NdMk2o1o]

I see what you mean. In this case maybe I'll stick to my current rig and save a ton of money.

CPU usage hits 100% and it does struggle a bit

So what about this?

 

[suedezu]

So what about this?

If I don't get a performance uplift higher than 5-10% in games I might stick with my Xeon for a couple more years.

I have just played Metro Exodus and I get around 60 FPS at 4k with a bit of setting tweaking.

I have no doubt that photo editing will improve in Photoshop with a new CPU with 8 or 16 cores, 32 GB of DDR4 RAM at 3000 mhz and a new motherboard but I wonder if the upgrade cost is worth it. The estimated upgrade cost is around 700 euros is my country.

 

[R0H1T]

If it's related to work then it is worth it, you can save enough time with the latest gen of chips. For gaming @4k, your GPU will mostly decide the mileage.

 

[NdMk2o1o]

So not worth it for work but you'd figure 5-10% performance increase would be worth it in gaming, I hear ya

 

[silentbogo]

I have no doubt that photo editing will improve in Photoshop with a new CPU with 8 or 16 cores, 32 GB of DDR4 RAM at 3000 mhz and a new motherboard but I wonder if the upgrade cost is worth it. The estimated upgrade cost is around 700 euros is my country.

I doubt a new CPU will have that much of an impact even in photoshop. Adobe is so slow in implementing multi-core optimizations, that nearly 90% of standard filters are still unchanged since CS6 times or earlier, and Intel still wins in most Photoshop-related tests only because of the higher boost frequency when not fully loaded.
You'll be better off dumping that Xeon in favor of i7-4770K or i7-4790K (or non-K if you find it cheap enough), or just stick with that system for another year or two until you are up for a full system upgrade.

 

[HenrySomeone]

Precisely - there will be minor differences in Adobe and probably zero in gaming at 4k (even a 1080ti is not enough for consistent 60fps)

 

[Zareek]

Okay, so given your usage scenario. Irregardless of the IPC boost AMD produces with the Ryzen 3000 series you will more than likely be better off with an Intel CPU. The reason, Adobe massively optimizes their code for Intel processors and have for years. Intel is king of gaming, that may change but at 4K you are 99% GPU constrained anyway.

As for IPC improvement I would not hold your breathe, history is not on AMD's side and they are re-using the same socket.

Apparently you weren't around for AMD's Athlon days. They basically kicked Intel's butt in IPC almost 2:1. They successfully improved their architecture year after year, had the first on chip memory controller, built and sold the first true multi-core CPU, created the x64 architecture extensions that are the epicenter of modern computing. History is actually on AMD's side.

 

[dirtyferret]

Okay, so given your usage scenario. Irregardless of the IPC boost AMD produces with the Ryzen 3000 series you will more than likely be better off with an Intel CPU. The reason, Adobe massively optimizes their code for Intel processors and have for years. Intel is king of gaming, that may change but at 4K you are 99% GPU constrained anyway.



Apparently you weren't around for AMD's Athlon days. They basically kicked Intel's butt in IPC almost 2:1. They successfully improved their architecture year after year, had the first on chip memory controller, built and sold the first true multi-core CPU, created the x64 architecture extensions that are the epicenter of modern computing. History is actually on AMD's side.

I was around but I guess you don't really know modern CPUs the past decade plus based on your comments. No worries, everyone needs to start somewhere to educate themselves.

 

[HenrySomeone]

Okay, so given your usage scenario. Irregardless of the IPC boost AMD produces with the Ryzen 3000 series you will more than likely be better off with an Intel CPU. The reason, Adobe massively optimizes their code for Intel processors and have for years. Intel is king of gaming, that may change but at 4K you are 99% GPU constrained anyway.

Apparently you weren't around for AMD's Athlon days. They basically kicked Intel's butt in IPC almost 2:1. They successfully improved their architecture year after year, had the first on chip memory controller, built and sold the first true multi-core CPU, created the x64 architecture extensions that are the epicenter of modern computing. History is actually on AMD's side.

Agree with the first part, but recent history most definitely isn't on their side (including the marginal zen > zen+ bump) and besides in the Athlon days of old Intel gradually lost their way with their later Netburst designs (Northwood was still very competitive) and AMD was able to come out on top in 2004 - 2006 but then they got complacent and allowed team blue to strike back with the Core 2 duos and they honestly haven't fully recovered since...

 

[Wavetrex]

If money amount is not a significant roadblock, I would go Threadripper 3000 series for the memory bandwidth.

Even a lower TR (let's say 16 cores only) would beat a theoretical 16-core Ryzen 3000 in productivity work due to having so much more bw, and probably double the cache as well (4 chiplets of 4 salvaged cores instead of 2 chiplets of 8 cores).

But... the wait might be long for TR 3000, I don't expect them to launch before September-October 2019

 

[Zareek]

I was around but I guess you don't really know modern CPUs the past decade plus based on your comments. No worries, everyone needs to start somewhere to educate themselves.

My point is the history of a company is more than the last decade. AMD has a history of innovation. I haven't had my head in the sand for the last 10+ years. The bulldozer through excavator processors were hopeless!

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

My point is the history of a company is more than the last decade. AMD has a history of innovation. I haven't had my head in the sand for the last 10+ years. The bulldozer through excavator processors were hopeless!

But they did beat their own goals when it came to IPC gains on Zen vs bulldozer. Even at launch of Zen, they basically said they had more improvements to make but had to stop tweaking to meet deadlines. Zen 2 has some significant design changes for being on the same socket, so I think we will see some IPC gains along with adjustments to allow the chip to clock higher. Not long to wait to find out, I suppose.

 

[Zareek]

If Zen 2 has more than a 3% IPC gain, I will be impressed. Intel has basically lived the last 10 years on 2-3% ipc gains. For me as a consumer, I don't really care who is number one. What I want is a competitor to keep Intel working and to keep their pricing in check. They've proven several times now, that if no one else is pushing them; they will sit on their hands and slowly drip feed the market with less than modest improvements year after year.

 

[suedezu]

Ryzen 3 series just launched and the reviews are already out.

Judging by the reviews do you think the Ryzen 3900x will improve 4K gaming using the same 1080 Ti that I currently own?

 

[Vayra86]

Ryzen 3 series just launched and the reviews are already out.

Judging by the reviews do you think the Ryzen 3900x will improve 4K gaming using the same 1080 Ti that I currently own?

Same thing really as 9900K. CPU performance for gaming plateaus and for 4K you are still and going to be GPU limited much more readily.