Upgrade from old x58 system

[Abilio_KID]

It's been a while since I upgraded my PC, with a few parts added here and there.
I've been working from home for a few years now, doing AutoCAD drawings for survey. My current PC, even at its age, has been able to get the job done. However, lately I started using point clouds and AutoCAD struggles with anything 3D. It basically needs a CPU with good IPC and speed on a single core, because it doesn't care much for multicores.
Anyway, I'm not certain when and if I will get a new machine. It's just so confusing trying to get anything these days that could last for a few years. It's all "gaming this" and "gaming that", OS's that suck and spy on us... you get the idea.

So, this is my current machine (you can laugh if you want to):

PC:
- Asus P6T SE
- Intel Xeon X5650, @ 4Ghz all cores, stable, low temps
- Noctua NH-D14 (for socket LGA1366)
- 36GB RAM: 3x8GB + 3x48GB (without issues at all)
- MSI Geforce GTX 1070 Armor OC 8GB
- Corsair HX750
- Creative Sound Blaster Z
- USB 3 add-in card

Storage:
- SSD Crucial BX200 480 GB (Windows 7 Ultimate!!!)
- SSD OCZ Vertex 2 120 GB (oldest one I have, used for swap disk and a few other things)
- SSD Samsung 860 QVO 1TB (old games that I rarely play now)
- HDD Toshiba HDWD130 3TB (movies, TV series, backups)
- SSD Crucial MX500 2TB (personal drive, work, photos, etc.)

+ the basic peripherals, all inside a Fractal Design Arc Midi R2.

I know anything made in the last few years can beat this old trusty potato. Thing is, I'm not sure what to get. Everyone is talking AM5+x3d (gaming), Core Ultra 200s (produtivity)... Geez!
I need fast single core but not necessarily too many cores. Also I can't stay on Windows 7 so I'll be using Windows 10 LTSC (don't bother mentioning W11). I will focus on work and general use, with a bit of gaming now and then (older games).
I don't mind paying a bit more if the PC will last for a while. I will be buying to last for a lot of years. I don't intend to upgrade again any soon...

Things that bother me:
- Chiplet designs are confusing. Latency and scheduling issues. 3D vcache seems to only help in a few games, almost a waste of money, etc.
- My CPU, even overclocked, doesn't get more than low 70's in full load, on air! I do not want to use liquid cooling on a new PC.
- BIOS settings these days... I'm getting too old to deal with stability problems.
- I may need 64GB+ RAM. It's probably enough though.
- The OS could go into a NVME but I need to keep the other SATA drives.
- I don't want stupid RGB stuff, wireless, or anything useless.
- Motherboard needs to be good but not cost stupid amounts of money.

I may be forgetting something but I'd like your opinions on the matter, if you may.
Thanks in advance.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

You've held out this long If I were you I would wait for Nova Lake/Zen6 and just get what's better both Core ultra 200 and Zen5 will destroy what you have sure but they also were both very unimpressive imho. Although there is no guarantee those will work well with windows 10.


These are just the most interesting builds I can think of ATM from each platform both has pros and cons and if you want more than 4 sata ports on Intel you are going to spend an arm and a leg on a decent board. Maybe someone else knows of a decent 6 sata port intel board at a decent price but I could not find one.

The majority of boards over 200 are pretty solid so it basically just comes down to picking one with all the features you need.

Part List - AMD Ryzen 9 9950X - PCPartPicker

Part List - AMD Ryzen 9 9950X

pcpartpicker.com

Part List - Intel Core Ultra 7 265K - PCPartPicker

Part List - Intel Core Ultra 7 265K

pcpartpicker.com

265k the last time W1z benched it was 6% slower in relative performance and 3% in games vs the 285K it's a bummer he left it out of his more recent testing.

AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D Review - The Best Gaming Processor

The Ryzen 7 9800X3D establishes AMD as the leader in gaming performance. This Zen 5-based X3D chip is not only fast, it also comes with full support for overclocking. Besides gaming, application performance is considerably improved over the 7800X3D, but that comes at a price.

www.techpowerup.com

The GPU market sucks the best two gpu's right now imho are the 9070XT and 5070ti both have pros and cons with the major con for the 5070ti being price.

5070 and below are meh AF if 40 series didn't make you want to upgrade 50 series below the 90 class is basically a refresh.

 

[A Computer Guy]

On the bright side literally anything modern within the last three years will be a significant improvement to what you have now. Since you use AutoCAD you might consider building your PC around compatibility for that. Research if certain GPU's or CPU's might be better suited for AutoCAD to help in your part selection.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

On the bright side literally anything modern within the last three years will be a significant improvement to what you have now. Since you use AutoCAD you might consider building your PC around compatibility for that. Research if certain GPU's or CPU's might be better suited for AutoCAD to help in your part selection.

Puget recommends a core ultra 285k or a Ryzen 9000 CPU They did not specify the model but an RTX pro gpu lol. I did double check that briefly.

so 5060ti 16Gb or 5070ti would probably be the best gpu option at a sane price is my guess.

Hardware Recommendations

Our workstations for Autodesk AutoCAD are tested and optimized to give you the best performance and reliability. View our hardware recommendations.

www.pugetsystems.com

 

[freeagent]

If you are ok with your current power usage, my tuned 9900X system basically mimics my old x58 system at the wall.

 

[A Computer Guy]

Puget recommends a core ultra 285k or a Ryzen 9000 CPU They did not specify the model but an RTX pro gpu lol. I did double check that briefly.

so 5060ti 16Gb or 5070ti would probably be the best gpu option at a sane price is my guess.

Hardware Recommendations

Our workstations for Autodesk AutoCAD are tested and optimized to give you the best performance and reliability. View our hardware recommendations.

www.pugetsystems.com

Possibly used RTX pro options might be ok depending on the version of AutoCAD the OP decides to use which brings up another point. Will the OP also be needing to upgrade their version of AutoCAD for Windows 10/11 compatibility?

Probably best to consult the compatibility list.

https://www.autodesk.com/support/system-requirements/certified-graphics-hardware/autocad

As for used options for example they may be quite affordable:
Quadro RTX 4000 8GB can be had from ebay $200 to $250. I recently got one although not for any kind of CAD work.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

If you are ok with your current power usage, my tuned 9900X system basically mimics my old x58 system at the wall.

For 60 Bones I would go with the 9950X all day every day....

Possibly used RTX pro options might be ok depending on the version of AutoCAD the OP decides to use which brings up another point. Will the OP also be needing to upgrade their version of AutoCAD for Windows 10/11 compatibility?

Probably best to consult the compatibility list.

https://www.autodesk.com/support/system-requirements/certified-graphics-hardware/autocad

As for used options for example they may be quite affordable:
Quadro RTX 4000 8GB can be had from ebay $200 to $250. I recently got one although not for any kind of CAD work.

Yeah I wish puget had more information on that and as you say different version have different requirements but Core ultra 200 and Ryzen 9000 seem pretty good at it which leaves the gpu as the hard part but op has been using a 1070 so even a 5060ti 16GB should be a large uplift with maybe studio drivers. You would know more than me I guess.

Somthing esle for the OP to look at

Ryzen 9 9950X X3D Review - Is AMD finally closing the bag for this year? | igor´sLAB

AMD now has another ace up its sleeve with the Ryzen 9 9950 X3D, while Intel is stuck in a self-inflicted drought. The X3D technology, which comes with an additional 3D V-Cache, shows once again that…

www.igorslab.de

The main problem is no matter what you choose in 2025 there is going to be some downsides or something the CPU isn't great at.

 

[lexluthermiester]

It's been a while since I upgraded my PC, with a few parts added here and there.
I've been working from home for a few years now, doing AutoCAD drawings for survey. My current PC, even at its age, has been able to get the job done. However, lately I started using point clouds and AutoCAD struggles with anything 3D. It basically needs a CPU with good IPC and speed on a single core, because it doesn't care much for multicores.
Anyway, I'm not certain when and if I will get a new machine. It's just so confusing trying to get anything these days that could last for a few years. It's all "gaming this" and "gaming that", OS's that suck and spy on us... you get the idea.

So, this is my current machine (you can laugh if you want to):

PC:
- Asus P6T SE
- Intel Xeon X5650, @ 4Ghz all cores, stable, low temps
- Noctua NH-D14 (for socket LGA1366)
- 36GB RAM: 3x8GB + 3x48GB (without issues at all)
- MSI Geforce GTX 1070 Armor OC 8GB
- Corsair HX750
- Creative Sound Blaster Z
- USB 3 add-in card

Storage:
- SSD Crucial BX200 480 GB (Windows 7 Ultimate!!!)
- SSD OCZ Vertex 2 120 GB (oldest one I have, used for swap disk and a few other things)
- SSD Samsung 860 QVO 1TB (old games that I rarely play now)
- HDD Toshiba HDWD130 3TB (movies, TV series, backups)
- SSD Crucial MX500 2TB (personal drive, work, photos, etc.)

+ the basic peripherals, all inside a Fractal Design Arc Midi R2.

I know anything made in the last few years can beat this old trusty potato. Thing is, I'm not sure what to get. Everyone is talking AM5+x3d (gaming), Core Ultra 200s (produtivity)... Geez!
I need fast single core but not necessarily too many cores. Also I can't stay on Windows 7 so I'll be using Windows 10 LTSC (don't bother mentioning W11). I will focus on work and general use, with a bit of gaming now and then (older games).
I don't mind paying a bit more if the PC will last for a while. I will be buying to last for a lot of years. I don't intend to upgrade again any soon...

Things that bother me:
- Chiplet designs are confusing. Latency and scheduling issues. 3D vcache seems to only help in a few games, almost a waste of money, etc.
- My CPU, even overclocked, doesn't get more than low 70's in full load, on air! I do not want to use liquid cooling on a new PC.
- BIOS settings these days... I'm getting too old to deal with stability problems.
- I may need 64GB+ RAM. It's probably enough though.
- The OS could go into a NVME but I need to keep the other SATA drives.
- I don't want stupid RGB stuff, wireless, or anything useless.
- Motherboard needs to be good but not cost stupid amounts of money.

I may be forgetting something but I'd like your opinions on the matter, if you may.
Thanks in advance.

Honestly, that's a fairly nice setup! Not bad at all, even for it's age.

Your upgrade path has a LOT of options available. If you want solid but you don't need the absolute "latest & greatest", my recommendation is two-fold and as follows;

For Intel;
Core i7 12700 or 12700k
Matching LGA 1700 ATX motherboard, and there are a lot of affordable, yet very solid, options to choose from.

For AMD;
Ryzen 9 5900X
Matching ATX B550 or X570 motherboard. Again there are a lot of very affordable solid options.

For either setup;
64GB DDR4 3600
2TB NVMe TLC based SSD
Geforce RTX 4060 16GB or RTX 5060 16GB
850W PSU(trust me, you want to get a new one)

You can reuse your SBZ as there are current Win10+ drivers.
You can also reuse your USB3 card.
You might even be able to reuse your NH-D14 heatsink if you still have the mounting parts and you go AMD as the AM3 kit works perfectly for AM4 CPU's. If you go Intel, you'll need a new heatsink.
You can likely reuse your existing case as long as you like it and it's got all the standard ATX fittings.

If you'd like some specific recommendations for parts, chime in.

 

[Abilio_KID]

Thanks for replying so fast.

I've waited this long because, tbh, I was OK with what I got, for what I did. Then the OS changed (badly), hardware got worse and too expensive...
I could wait forever and never buy anything, lol. I am getting old and too stubborn to change.
I had already seen Puget recommendations before. They were right about more single core speed and not so much core number. Having more won't hurt, unless it brings more heat with it.
Xeons are not needed for this type of work. Any normal consumer CPU will do more and probably be cheaper. Recently tested a RTX 4000 on a Xeon from 2017 with Windows 11 (my employer let me try it for a bit). I felt my old potato was snappier on desktop and the GPU didn't seem to make much difference. Got a feeling Win11 was bloated as usual.

BTW, certified cards only mean they were tested with certain drivers on Autodesk's labs. AutoCAD doesn't use special Quadro features.
Here's an older video:

I could upgrade the GPU to a more recent one. Pitty they're too expensive. Will be something to consider later.

From what I have already seen, the main idea would be to get something like a 9950X or a 265k/285K. No need for anything X3D: extra heat/power, no real use, expensive.
Is the extra speed of the 285K worth it over the 265K? I need to check local prices between both (Portugal) and availability.

Doesn't the 9950X need more power, gets hotter faster? Do both lines of CPU require a special version of Windows to properly deal with the chiplets? What motherboards brands have less issues nowadays? Asus degrading Intel CPU's, Asrock killing 9***X3D's... should I go MSI then? What about RAM's limitations? Seems hard to get more than 2 DIMMS at the same time.
If someone has more info I should know, I'd apreciate your help.

I am still reading and researching. All while having to do work .

Edit: I was typing and didn't see lexluthermiester reply. I'll have a look at it. Thank you.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

From what I have already seen, the main idea would be to get something like a 9950X or a 265k/285K. No need for anything X3D: extra heat/power, no real use, expensive.
Is the extra speed of the 285K worth it over the 265K? I need to check local prices between both (Portugal) and availability.

Doesn't the 9950X need more power, gets hotter faster? Do both lines of CPU require a special version of Windows to properly deal with the chiplets? What motherboards brands have less issues nowadays? Asus degrading Intel CPU's, Asrock killing 9***X3D's... should I go MSI then? What about RAM's limitations? Seems hard to get more than 2 DIMMS at the same time.
If someone has more info I should know, I'd apreciate your help.

Motherboard just comes down to bios preference and features you need MSI is super solid on both platforms. Asus is fine now afaik just used them on two builds both have been rock solid, Asrock not a huge fan but the tachi lite has a lot for what it cost look into if the latest bios fixed their issues, most people don't like gigabyte but I have been using their boards for decades on both AMD and intel without issues.

You can run 4 dimm but at really slow speeds better to go 2x48GB if you need more than 64GB of ram imho. A 285k system I did recently needed to run at 4400mhz for 192 and 5000 for 128 to be stable with a 1000 usd motherboard although a 300 usd one would likely have been the same.

https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-flare-x5-96gb-ddr5-5200-cas-latency-cl40-desktop-memory-black/p/N82E16820374537

At current pricing I would say no on the 285k is not worth 89% more money last I checked.

The best bang for you buck right now is the 265k if you have amazon prime or can get it at the amazon prime price of $259

The 9950X uses more power and runs hotter if that is important to you the 265k is the better option but it can be set to a more reasonable power level and is still quite fast.

around 200w for the 9950x, 155w for the 265k, and 229w for the 285k but if you use a similar quality tower heatsink none are hard to maintain proper performance. Most cpu are going to boost based on available cooling so temps aren't as relevant as long as they are not throttling. IF you are concerned about the amount of heat they put off the is solely dictated by the power consumption which again would make the 265K the best option.


Both should be fine on windows 10 any modern high core count cpu is going to have situation where it doesn't behave but the 9950X uses all the same core type vs on the 265k you get 8P+12E but there are programs like process lasso which I use for my 7950X3D and it works fantastic and you do not have to rely on the scheduler it does not work in some MP games but in every MP game I play the performance even without it is good.

12th,13th,14th, and Core ultra all use the P+E layout

Ryzen uses dual CCD on all the 12/16 core chips from 3000-9000

so honestly they all should behave similarly on windows 10 in applications.

The dual CCD thing is more of a gaming thing if a game bounces between them I never had this issue with a 5950X on W10 but that was the last cpu I used on that OS.


If you do look at AM4 look at the 5900XT it's basically a 5950X and usually 210 new but the 265k is much better at everything and not that much more expensive.

 

[A Computer Guy]

So, this is my current machine (you can laugh if you want to):

It looks like you had a really great workstation class motherboard there for it's time. When picking motherboards I would keep that experience in mind if that is important to you.

One of my big disappointments with AM5 has been with their motherboard designs with expansion slot offerings. Not saying the platform is bad but it was a bit disappointing from that standpoint when looking across the price range and I don't feel there is a motherboard that really stands out as a workstation with good expandability at a good price point. I ended up picking something at the lower end and affordable B650 that had an x16(cpu), x4(cpu), x4(chipset) configuration and decided that was enough to run my dual Intel Optane's in my x16 slot while wasting 2 x4 lanes, run my GPU gimped at x4, and leave one x4 slot at the bottom for a future 10Gbps NIC. It works as a build but some satisfaction is lacking. The highlight of that setup was I snagged a new 7950x at a heavy discounted price which ended up being the primary reason I jumped to AM5 at all. I like it in terms of performance, not so much in terms of configuration.

Things that bother me:
- Chiplet designs are confusing. Latency and scheduling issues.

When going with the uniform (non-X3D) chiplet CPU's such as 3950x, 5950x, 7950x, etc... latency and scheduling it's not much of an issue for day to day work, at least it hasn't been for what I do. For gaming I've used 5950x for quite awhile now but I'm at a lower tier of gaming limited at 60fps with my monitors, using 4060LP / rx6700XT. No complaints that I can attribute to latency or scheduling but I'm not gaming higher than 60fps so perhaps it's a non-issue at my level.

3D vcache seems to only help in a few games, almost a waste of money, etc.
- My CPU, even overclocked, doesn't get more than low 70's in full load, on air! I do not want to use liquid cooling on a new PC.

AM5 will come with a big surprise for you then as higher CPU temps are the new normal but you can mitigate that if you are concerned by dialing in temp limits, power limits, and curve optimizer. Chip die density makes it harder to dissipate the heat and the thicker IHS is also blamed often but these newer chips are quite efficient when being utilized. Overall a good air cooler is just fine with AM5. Just keep in mind 142w at 90c isn't the same as 300w at 90c.

- BIOS settings these days... I'm getting too old to deal with stability problems.

AMD's approach to long term socket support on AM4/AM5 I think has been a bit of a double edge sword. When it came to BIOS/UEFI I came from a vantage point where if it ain't broke don't fix it and BIOS updates were a rare thing. Long term socket support however changes the landscape and now more frequent UEFI updates are the new normal especially now if you want to keep up with updates for compatibility and security vulnerabilities. You can still choose not to but...

- I may need 64GB+ RAM. It's probably enough though.

I have another grip again with AM5 on this but perhaps it's just a DDR5 thing. AM5 offers dual channel 4 slots but you can get penalized heavy on RAM speed if you populate all 4. As DDR5 and AM5 UEFI matures I'm hoping this situation can improve but only time will tell. A plus for DDR5 is they will support higher capacities per DIMM so you can get around the speed sacrifice by sticking to 2 high capacity DIMMS in dual channel mode. DDR5 UDIMM ECC is still quite expensive compared to it's DDR4 counterpart. Depending on motherboard AM5 (opposed to AM4) acknowledges official ECC RAM support now for consumer models except for G model CPU's.

- The OS could go into a NVME but I need to keep the other SATA drives.

If choosing an AM5 board you will need to look out for lane sharing on the motherboard to see where tradeoffs might be in play between NVMe slots, PCIe slots, and SATA.

- I don't want stupid RGB stuff, wireless, or anything useless.
- Motherboard needs to be good but not cost stupid amounts of money.

What would be your price range for non-stupid motherboard cost? For me is used to be $150-$200 during AM4's reign. It wasn't until I had a chance to get an X570 motherboard I realized $200-$250 was pretty reasonable for the quality and features and that was after a few years already where price drops eventually happened. When looking at AM5 I wasn't about to drop $400 for a motherboard that still didn't have what I wanted and ended up spending $150 instead.

I may be forgetting something but I'd like your opinions on the matter, if you may.
Thanks in advance.

I have a few opinions from my journey coming from a Asus P5E-WS X38 Q6600 platform to AM4 to AM5. What I love about AM5 is the good price/performance on the dual CCD CPU's variants with core uniformity (ignoring X3D). iGPU and ECC RAM support is a plus. Decent VRM's across the majority of the motherboard offerings (much better compared to AM4) is a plus. Pricing on non-X3D CPU's is quite competitive right now and in the used market. What I don't like about AM5 are the limited PCIe slot configurations, lane sharing issues, DDR5 speed reduction when populating all 4 ram slots, and motherboard pricing at the higher end.

For 60 Bones I would go with the 9950X all day every day....

I just missed out on a possible $260 used deal for 9950x. I'm kinda miffed about it but on the other hand the seller didn't have any reputation and didn't reply to my questions. It was a sweet thought to snag a deal like that.

Yeah I wish puget had more information on that and as you say different version have different requirements but Core ultra 200 and Ryzen 9000 seem pretty good at it which leaves the gpu as the hard part but op has been using a 1070 so even a 5060ti 16GB should be a large uplift with maybe studio drivers. You would know more than me I guess.

I have no expertise in CAD but some software can be quite picky. They have these compatibility lists for good reason. It's a good idea to consult with the vendor in cases where they have specific compatibility lists when going off the reservation. A 5060ti could be just fine or a dumpster fire I have no idea.

 

[QuietBob]

For AutoCAD you'll want a CPU with high single threaded performance and eight cores. In general, the newer the architecture, the faster ST. A Ryzen 7 9700X or a Core Ultra 7 265 will fit the bill nicely.

In terms of RAM, depending on the size of your projects 32 GB may be enough, but I'd consider 64 GB for futureproofing.

The graphics card must support DirectX 12 Feature Level 12_0, and have 12 GB VRAM with at least 106 GB/s bandwidth. Nvidia cards are better supported in productivity apps, so I'd recommened an RTX 3060 12 GB at minimum.

You can find official hardware requirements for Auto CAD here.

 

[Abilio_KID]

Once more, a big thanks to everyone who's helping me in this quest.
The limiting factor here is the fact we can't simply pick "the best" and just buy it. There are cons that may or may not affect us in the long run.
I just checked (online) a couple of the most known PC stores here in Portugal. Prices are more or less like this (VAT included):
- 265K : 329.90€
- 285K : 619.00€
- 9900X : 459.90€ (6+6 cores?)
- 9950X : 599.90€

Harder to pick is the motherboard...

 

[Abilio_KID]

Guys, sorry to bump this topic but I really need to make a decision or I'll have to wait for one more year or so...
For my type of work I was leaning on the 265K. Has good single core speed and can handle some multicore if needed. I could pick the 285K but it's a lot more expensive compared to the 265K. The problem is, at least from what I could see, that this CPU is becoming out of stock! Also I can't seem to decide on a quality motherboard with enough connectivity and not too expensive.
AMD is all about gaming, and even then, I doubt it's that much of a difference. Been seeing a lot of problems with AMD CPUs: high idle temps, RAM instability, etc.
So... I think a Z890 board would be nice. Should have good VRMs, at least 4 SATA ports (can't seem to find more than 4, but the OS will be on a new NVME disc), should support high enough RAM speed (if I get better sticks)... What else? At least 2.5GB ethernet, audio solution is not so important (will use the SBZ)...
What motherboard is ideal? Asus is giving RMA and assistance issues. Asrock? MSI? Which one? RAM brands? Would go for 2x32GB or 2x48GB. PSU? Want something with enough juice (not sure if I'll get a new GPU right now) and reliabilty (Gold+).

Thanks in advance.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

Guys, sorry to bump this topic but I really need to make a decision or I'll have to wait for one more year or so...
For my type of work I was leaning on the 265K. Has good single core speed and can handle some multicore if needed. I could pick the 285K but it's a lot more expensive compared to the 265K. The problem is, at least from what I could see, that this CPU is becoming out of stock! Also I can't seem to decide on a quality motherboard with enough connectivity and not too expensive.
AMD is all about gaming, and even then, I doubt it's that much of a difference. Been seeing a lot of problems with AMD CPUs: high idle temps, RAM instability, etc.
So... I think a Z890 board would be nice. Should have good VRMs, at least 4 SATA ports (can't seem to find more than 4, but the OS will be on a new NVME disc), should support high enough RAM speed (if I get better sticks)... What else? At least 2.5GB ethernet, audio solution is not so important (will use the SBZ)...
What motherboard is ideal? Asus is giving RMA and assistance issues. Asrock? MSI? Which one? RAM brands? Would go for 2x32GB or 2x48GB. PSU? Want something with enough juice (not sure if I'll get a new GPU right now) and reliabilty (Gold+).

The 265K is going to be way faster and the cheapest of your choices. The difference between all the cpus you have in a line up is much smaller. So get the 265K.

I prefer Asus, MSI, Gigabyte, Asrock of the 4 major brands, in that order. Most of them have very good build quality, I use other reasons like bios layout, cosmetics and bang for buck.

What programs do you run that require a lot of system memory? Look up the specifications of your software use and buy the amount of ram that exceeds you uses. But generally 32gb and 64gb of memory total is pretty normal on a desktop system.

PSU, there are tier lists you could look up, but for the wattage amount, seems average 650w to 850w. Bronze tier is fine,for most systems, but I usually suggest gold. Research what components the PSU uses. Like for example, EVGA might of used SuperFlower and just slapped their sticker on it. But its going to be a good PSU.

Really, just go on parts picker and make a build. Ask people to critique it. That might be easier too.

GL with your new build!!

 

[QuietBob]

If you need connectivity, the Asus ProArt Z890-CREATOR WIFI may be worth considering:

- 2x PCIe 5.0 x16
- 1x PCIe 4.0 x16
- 5x M.2
- 4x SATA
- 10 Gb + 2.5 Gb Ethernet
- WiFi 7
- 1x HDMI 2.1
- 1x DP 2.1 (input)
- 2x Thunderbolt 5 (USB-C)
- 1x Thunderbolt 4/USB4 (USB-C)
- 6 x USB 10Gb
- 5x USB on front panel

 

[Abilio_KID]

If you need connectivity, the Asus ProArt Z890-CREATOR WIFI may be worth considering:

- 2x PCIe 5.0 x16
- 1x PCIe 4.0 x16
- 5x M.2
- 4x SATA
- 10 Gb + 2.5 Gb Ethernet
- WiFi 7
- 1x HDMI 2.1
- 1x DP 2.1 (input)
- 2x Thunderbolt 5 (USB-C)
- 1x Thunderbolt 4/USB4 (USB-C)
- 6 x USB 10Gb
- 5x USB on front panel

Thanks but it seems too much money for what it is. I don't mind going up to +-300 euros. More than that I don't think it's worth it.

 

[Fuzzi0n]

Guys, sorry to bump this topic but I really need to make a decision or I'll have to wait for one more year or so...
For my type of work I was leaning on the 265K. Has good single core speed and can handle some multicore if needed. I could pick the 285K but it's a lot more expensive compared to the 265K. The problem is, at least from what I could see, that this CPU is becoming out of stock! Also I can't seem to decide on a quality motherboard with enough connectivity and not too expensive.
AMD is all about gaming, and even then, I doubt it's that much of a difference. Been seeing a lot of problems with AMD CPUs: high idle temps, RAM instability, etc.
So... I think a Z890 board would be nice. Should have good VRMs, at least 4 SATA ports (can't seem to find more than 4, but the OS will be on a new NVME disc), should support high enough RAM speed (if I get better sticks)... What else? At least 2.5GB ethernet, audio solution is not so important (will use the SBZ)...
What motherboard is ideal? Asus is giving RMA and assistance issues. Asrock? MSI? Which one? RAM brands? Would go for 2x32GB or 2x48GB. PSU? Want something with enough juice (not sure if I'll get a new GPU right now) and reliabilty (Gold+).

Thanks in advance.

Motherboard wise just look for what you'd need for PCIe layout, M.2 storage and I/O. MSI Tomahawk or ASRock Lightning are worth looking at. ASRock also have the Nova which comes with an add in card for more M.2 storage if that was something you'd need. With RAM most brands are using Hynix M or A die depending on the config/capacity. 2x48GB will be a lot more expensive but it's up to you if you need it over 64GB. PSU I'd suggest looking at a tier list but the main thing is to get something powerful enough if you decide to upgrade your GPU, there's quite a jump in power requirements if you went to 4090/5090 for example. Something like the NZXT C1000 2024 is a really good performer, could drop down to 850W if you know you'll not go for a super high end GPU.

 

[dgianstefani]

For now - 265K system with Z890, 2x32 CUDIMM with option to add two more later, or 9800X3D system with same specs (but without CUDIMM at 64 GB you're going to be running at 5800 MT, above 64 GB you're looking at 4800-5200 MT).

Currently, after a bunch of patches, discounts and the release of 200S boost which fixes inter tile latency, Arrow Lake 265K is the only competitive current gen above a cheap APU and below the 9800/9950X3D, which occupy the high end and must be paired with a fast GPU and high refresh rate display to be worth it for gaming. Otherwise with non-X3D, all the current gen chips essentially perform the same, but Arrow Lake is cheaper and generally offers a tier above for productivity, e.g. 265K being faster than 9900X at productivity, but priced below the 9700X. The price premium for the 285K is only a good option if you require Intel specific things like QuickSync, or high capacity/frequency memory.

The Intel Z890 chipset and platform is slightly better than the X870E platform, which uses two daisy chained chipsets connected to the CPU with a PCIE Gen 4 x4, whereas Z890 is connected by PCIE Gen 4 x8. There's the "futureproof" argument, but that's irrelevant if you've kept your current system this long, besides AM5 only has one more generation on it.

For 64 GB+, you want DDR5 CUDIMM, using higher than 32/48 GB sticks sucks if you don't have CUDIMM, and rated speeds start going from 5800 on AMD to lower than 5000 MT. Currently only Intel supports CUDIMM. For a typical 4x 32 GB CUDIMM setup on ARL and Z890, you'll probably get around 6400, maybe 6800 or 7200 if you're lucky. Without CUDIMM that would be around 5600. On AMD it would top out at 5200 MT, more realistically 4800 MT, due to the lack of CUDIMM support.

But wait for Nova Lake and Zen 6, both are significant improvements over the current generation. AMD should finally fix their chiplet latency issue with better packaging, and Intel should get it right out of the box with their own disaggregated design.

Zen 6 should also come with an actually new chipset, X800 series is just X600 series with some more board features mandated, and the daisy chained chipsets suck compared to a single chipset solution.

Z800-series

X870E

 

[Abilio_KID]

Thanks for the diagrams. Was a bit lazy trying to look for them but now it's easier to understand how the chips work.
Was just having a look at RAMs here (Portugal) at least on one site. I'd prefer to buy everything from same place but the CPU is out of stock. The site has "CUDIMM Kingston ValueRAM KVR 32GB (1x32GB) DDR5-6400MHz CL52 (52-52-52) 1.10V 1Rx8". I assume I could get a couple of them and later buy more, if needed. Latency seems a bit too high, no? All other normal DDR5 either have less than 6000MT and lower CL or the opposite. Oh, what about this "1Rx8"? Some say "2Rx8" instead.
The higher MT and lower CL increases price a bit.
I should stop looking for today and go back to work. Still have a few drawings to finish.

 

[dgianstefani]

Thanks for the diagrams. Was a bit lazy trying to look for them but now it's easier to understand how the chips work.
Was just having a look at RAMs here (Portugal) at least on one site. I'd prefer to buy everything from same place but the CPU is out of stock. The site has "CUDIMM Kingston ValueRAM KVR 32GB (1x32GB) DDR5-6400MHz CL52 (52-52-52) 1.10V 1Rx8". I assume I could get a couple of them and later buy more, if needed. Latency seems a bit too high, no? All other normal DDR5 either have less than 6000MT and lower CL or the opposite. Oh, what about this "1Rx8"? Some say "2Rx8" instead.
The higher MT and lower CL increases price a bit.
I should stop looking for today and go back to work. Still have a few drawings to finish.

1R is 1 rank, 2R is two ranks. Any single 32 or 48 GB DIMM will be 2R. The vast majority of single 16 or 24 GB DIMMS will be 1R.

Ranks determine speed, they have higher bandwidth and worse timings for 2R vs 1R, but 2x 2R will have a lower MT cap than 2x 1R. However, 2x 2R will have faster speeds than 4x 1R, for the same capacity. Going 2x 2R is always better than 4x 1R, both for speed, and for the fact you will still have 2 slots left if you decide to add a matched 2x 2R kit later. Going CUDIMM is essentially a must if you want 4x 2R.

PCPartPicker Part List: https://pt.pcpartpicker.com/list/h99r8Q

CPU: Intel Core Ultra 7 265K 3.9 GHz 20-Core Processor (€338.50 @ Switch Technology)
CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-D15 G2 91.58 CFM CPU Cooler (€142.90 @ Globaldata)
Motherboard: Asus TUF GAMING Z890-PLUS WIFI ATX LGA1851 Motherboard (€295.44 @ Chipman)
Power Supply: Corsair SF850 (2024) 850 W 80+ Platinum Certified Fully Modular SFX Power Supply (€199.90 @ Corsair)
Total: €976.74
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2025-07-19 19:23 WEST+0100

Couldn't find CUDIMMs on PCPartpicker, but Corsair and most major manufacturers have some. You'll definitely want CUDIMM.

Crucial CUDIMM DDR5-6400 128 GB CL52 Review

Crucial has taken a significant step forward with its Classic Series by introducing 64 GB DIMM sizes. The DDR5-6400 JEDEC 128 GB (2x 64 GB) memory kit featured in this review is specifically designed for content creators, data scientists, and individuals requiring large amounts of system memory...

www.techpowerup.com

It's a SFX PSU but that doesn't really matter. It's the cheapest decent 850 W unit I could find.

There's also 750 and 1000 W options in that range. I have the 1000 W and it's excellent. HWBusters and TPU both do PSU reviews. You don't have to pick a top tier PSU but I'd recommend it for a build you'll keep.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Once more, a big thanks to everyone who's helping me in this quest.
The limiting factor here is the fact we can't simply pick "the best" and just buy it. There are cons that may or may not affect us in the long run.
I just checked (online) a couple of the most known PC stores here in Portugal. Prices are more or less like this (VAT included):
- 265K : 329.90€
- 285K : 619.00€
- 9900X : 459.90€ (6+6 cores?)
- 9950X : 599.90€

Harder to pick is the motherboard...

Didn't see this post till today but 265K is the no brainer at those prices if you cannot wait for Zen6/Novalake. If gaming isn't the priority go for Ram amount over speed a nice 64/96GB 5600mhz kit would be fine just stick to 2 dimms as 4 can be a pita at high capacities.

 

[dgianstefani]

Thanks for the diagrams. Was a bit lazy trying to look for them but now it's easier to understand how the chips work.
Was just having a look at RAMs here (Portugal) at least on one site. I'd prefer to buy everything from same place but the CPU is out of stock. The site has "CUDIMM Kingston ValueRAM KVR 32GB (1x32GB) DDR5-6400MHz CL52 (52-52-52) 1.10V 1Rx8". I assume I could get a couple of them and later buy more, if needed. Latency seems a bit too high, no? All other normal DDR5 either have less than 6000MT and lower CL or the opposite. Oh, what about this "1Rx8"? Some say "2Rx8" instead.
The higher MT and lower CL increases price a bit.
I should stop looking for today and go back to work. Still have a few drawings to finish.

Don't buy single kits. Buy matched kits. 2x 32, 2x 48 or 2x 64.

Don't buy high capacity memory that isn't CUDIMM, the speed sucks, it might say "6800 MT" but you won't get more than 5200 if you use four of them.

TBH I'd bite the bullet and get that 2x 64 Crucial kit. It's CUDIMM and has perks of being two DIMMs, not a set of four. The capacity means you likely won't have to add more sticks later to get 128 GB, which can be an issue, even if they're the same kit/rating.

https://www.crucial.com/memory/ddr5/ct2k64g64c52cu5

Allows you to add a matched kit at a later date, if for some reason you want 256 GB. @ir_cow got 4x 64 running at 4400 MT and 2x 64 at 6400.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

https://www.crucial.com/memory/ddr5/ct2k64g64c52cu5

Allows you to add a matched kit at a later date, if for some reason you want 256 GB. @ir_cow got 4x 64 running at 4400 MT and 2x 64 at 6400.

I wish that kit existed when I did the 285k build getting 4x48 and 4x32 to work at reasonable speeds was a pita and even then I gave up on the 4x48 kit because speeds were terrible for it to be stable.

glad to see some high capacity cudimms but a high price to match.

 

[Abilio_KID]

I just noticed PCPartPicker allows me to change language... (stupid me). Thank you for the list.
I'll try to get most parts from the same place if possible but I will look anywhere.
I like my Noctua a lot, altough the newer version is more expensive. I read that Thermalright is doing some interesting value/performance ones. Maybe a Peerless Assassin 120 or 140 could be an option.
The Asus TUF GAMING Z890-PLUS is €400+ except that site on the part list. I need to check better.
My Corsair PSU has been working well, even after so many years. If it hasn't decreased in reliability, I'll look into the Platinum 850 or 1000.
For now 64GB could be enough. I still can't find where to buy "Crucial 64GB Kit (32GBx2) DDR5-6400 CUDIMM".
For now I'll move my eyes away from a new GPU... for now...