3930k ->7800X worth it?

[lyndonguitar]

Ryzen is objectively better than intel current line offer ups for HEDT.
Lower power consumption, very similar ipc, way lower price (especially with mobos taken into consideration), plus did I mention it's cheaper? Problem with it on a gaming factor is that people often compare it to an i7 7700k with both using a 1080 ti. The fact of the matter is that they ought to compare the ryzen 1600 with a 1080 ti vs a 7700k with a 1080 because it's about the same price at that point.
Tl;dr: quit hating on AMD for making a good product.

Good points, i like ryzen as well, but generally people tend to keep the CPU for longer times that GPUs, as they age better than GPUs. so they kinda want to prioritize the CPU to last longer ,and for gaming, 7700k will last longer than the 1600. people are more likely to buy the 7700k now with the 1080. then upgrade to a better GPU later. than get the Ryzen with the 1080ti now, then get a better Ryzen later.

 

[Rehmanpa]

Good points, i like ryzen as well, but generally people tend to keep the CPU for longer times that GPUs, as they age better than GPUs. so they kinda want to prioritize the CPU to last longer ,and for gaming, 7700k will last longer than the 1600. people are more likely to buy the 7700k now with the 1080. then upgrade to a better GPU later. than get the Ryzen with the 1080ti now, then get a better Ryzen later.

How will an i7 7700k last longer than a 1600? If anything, the extra cores from the 1600 will ensure that IT lasts longer. The 1080 ti would provide better fps than the 7700k and the 1600 would have better multithreaded rendering performance meaning that the system is faster In heavily cpu threaded applications and gaming for the same price. Idk why you think the 7700k will last longer. It's always been the whole, more cores = more future proof. The IPC difference is very small and getting less and less of an issue with software updates and game optimization.

 

[Vayra86]

Good points, i like ryzen as well, but generally people tend to keep the CPU for longer times that GPUs, as they age better than GPUs. so they kinda want to prioritize the CPU to last longer ,and for gaming, 7700k will last longer than the 1600. people are more likely to buy the 7700k now with the 1080. then upgrade to a better GPU later. than get the Ryzen with the 1080ti now, then get a better Ryzen later.

A 7700k doesn't last longer than a Ryzen at all. TODAYS 7700k performance *at 1080p and 1440p only* over a Ryzen at 4 Ghz, which also means delidding and voiding your warranty on the Intel CPU, is a meagre 10% in a best case scenario until you hit a GPU wall anyway.

That 10% best case, super situational advantage really isn't worth it at all. The 7700k is a niche product, specifically for the high refresh rate 1080p gamer if you ask me. For everyone else, including gamers, Ryzen is a much safer buy, or the upcoming 8700k. The additional cores will pay off in some engines already, and this will only increase over the lifetime of a CPU you buy today. You stand to gain far more than 10%, regardless of resolution and without voiding warranty.

You can't realistically say in the same comment that A. your CPU lasts much longer and B. then proceed to void warranty to extract the performance to make the same CPU worthwhile over competing products. It just doesn't make any sense at all.

 

[dj-electric]

The future of X299 and LGA2066 IMO is foggy.
The deal is that now getting a 7800X is of course a bad decision if there are no plans to upgrade further. That's why you have the 8700K.
If upgrades are in the future, than hopefully next year's 10+ cores won't be so utterly expensive, as 8 cores will enter the mainstream platform.

If a 10 Core is 999$ today, maybe the 10 core of next year will be at the 699$ range, hopefully.

 

[Mirkoskji]

Are you counting the motherboard upgrade factor? You can say your 7700k lasts more maybe. But then you have to change motherboard an CPU when you upgrade. With ryzen there are two to three generations that will run on the same platform. It can be a game changer considering the economic factor

 

[EarthDog]

How will an i7 7700k last longer than a 1600? If anything, the extra cores from the 1600 will ensure that IT lasts longer. The 1080 ti would provide better fps than the 7700k and the 1600 would have better multithreaded rendering performance meaning that the system is faster In heavily cpu threaded applications and gaming for the same price. Idk why you think the 7700k will last longer. It's always been the whole, more cores = more future proof. The IPC difference is very small and getting less and less of an issue with software updates and game optimization.

true, but again, most people dont heavily thread anything. 8t is fine for the next few years. Only IF you use those threads and when more uses it. Weve been saying quad for nearly 10 years now... and finally a quad is worth it... its going to be a few more uears bwfore anything over 8t is usefil to the majority.

A 7700k doesn't last longer than a Ryzen at all. TODAYS 7700k performance *at 1080p and 1440p only* over a Ryzen at 4 Ghz, which also means delidding and voiding your warranty on the Intel CPU, is a meagre 10% in a best case scenario until you hit a GPU wall anyway.

That 10% best case, super situational advantage really isn't worth it at all. The 7700k is a niche product, specifically for the high refresh rate 1080p gamer if you ask me. For everyone else, including gamers, Ryzen is a much safer buy, or the upcoming 8700k. The additional cores will pay off in some engines already, and this will only increase over the lifetime of a CPU you buy today. You stand to gain far more than 10%, regardless of resolution and without voiding warranty.

You can't realistically say in the same comment that A. your CPU lasts much longer and B. then proceed to void warranty to extract the performance to make the same CPU worthwhile over competing products. It just doesn't make any sense at all.

You dont have to delid to reach 5ghz. Some chips do though.

That said, ill buy into more slightly slow cores in a few years when its needed. Most users and games dont perform better with more cores and wont for hears. Until then, i prefer the faster chip for my, and most people's uses.

Are you counting the motherboard upgrade factor? You can say your 7700k lasts more maybe. But then you have to change motherboard an CPU when you upgrade. With ryzen there are two to three generations that will run on the same platform. It can be a game changer considering the economic factor

the problem with that is missing out on new technology... id rather upfrade my board every 3 years with my professor than to have it last 6 years an be missing out on the latest tech.

Some dont care about that though.

 

[Durvelle27]

What about Threadripper great IPC. lanes, and features with more cores

 

[Mirkoskji]

the problem with that is missing out on new technology... id rather upfrade my board every 3 years with my professor than to have it last 6 years an be missing out on the latest tech.

Some dont care about that though.

Next technological advances are mostly pcie 4.0 or 5.0 and ddr5. Maybe pcie don't even need a rewiring in the motherboard.

 

[BarbaricSoul]

Keep the conversation going. I'm enjoying you guys weighing the options between the different available platforms. Let me state a couple factors that are relevant to my possible upgrade.

1. My computer's main use is crunching. In that, I use every available core, thread, and GHz available from the CPU.
2. I'm looking to keep the upgrade below $1100 USD. I plan on doing the upgrade in the next month or two depending on how money goes
3. The computer is set up in my bedroom, so heat generation is definitely a factor.
4. I currently share a house with two friends, so the power bill is split three ways. Electrical usage is a non-factor.
5. I don't have a preference for Intel over AMD. I'm about bang for buck, but am willing to splurge a little for better performance.
6. I originally was set on the 7800X because future upgrade plans involving buying a used 10 core 2-3 years down the road, hence my lack of interest in the 8700k.

So with that said, please continue.

 

[Durvelle27]

Keep the conversation going. I'm enjoying you guys weighing the options between the different available platforms. Let me state a couple factors that are relevant to my possible upgrade.

1. My computer's main use is crunching. In that, I use every available core, thread, and GHz available from the CPU.
2. I'm looking to keep the upgrade below $1100 USD. I plan on doing the upgrade in the next month or two depending on how money goes
3. The computer is set up in my bedroom, so heat generation is definitely a factor.
4. I currently share a house with two friends, so the power bill is split three ways. Electrical usage is a non-factor.
5. I don't have a preference for Intel over AMD. I'm about bang for buck, but am willing to splurge a little for better performance.
6. I originally was set on the 7800X because future upgrade plans involving buying a used 10 core 2-3 years down the road, hence my lack of interest in the 8700k.

So with that said, please continue.

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/DRkJcc

12C/24T
16GB of 3200MHz
and a beast board


Edit: TR outperforms the current 7 series HEDT by a decent margin in multi-threaded apps while using less power and running cooler. It's IPC is also just about where Skylakes is

 

[jaggerwild]

Intel motherboards are far superior.....

 

[Durvelle27]

Intel motherboards are far superior.....

Dude where

in imagination land

 

[ikeke]

With TR you really do need to fill all four memory channels, otherwise you'll starve the cpu.

You could also look at Epyc 7281 and Supermicro workstation board (H11SSL-i / H11SSL-C / H11SSL-NC).

 

[GorbazTheDragon]

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/DRkJcc

12C/24T
16GB of 3200MHz
and a beast board

Edit: TR outperforms the current 7 series HEDT by a decent margin in multi-threaded apps while using less power and running cooler. It's IPC is also just about where Skylakes is

I'm also on the TR train for this one. It's the one that makes most sense in terms of IPC. You lose out on some gaming performance but given @BarbaricSoul 's needs I'd say that is a non-factor. Upgrading to a 12c makes much more sense than the <10c chips.

The only thing I would say is to wait a few more months until there are more options in terms of boards and the drivers and reviews paint a more complete picture, especially given that this is more of a long-term investment.

 

[Durvelle27]

I'm also on the TR train for this one. It's the one that makes most sense in terms of IPC. You lose out on some gaming performance but given @BarbaricSoul 's needs I'd say that is a non-factor. Upgrading to a 12c makes much more sense than the <10c chips.

The only thing I would say is to wait a few more months until there are more options in terms of boards and the drivers and reviews paint a more complete picture, especially given that this is more of a long-term investment.

The Tachi is actually one of the best boards available both TR4 & AM4

 

[Rehmanpa]

What about Threadripper great IPC. lanes, and features with more cores

That's what I plan my next build to be. Price/performance over intel is absolutely mindblowing, and the PCIE lanes are awesome (NVME raid boot ftw).
edit: I would get the Asrock professional gamer motherboard, it's currently on sale on newegg and it also has 10gb ethernet (which is an expensive addon card for when you want it later, and then it's not taking up one of your precious pcie slots )

I'm also on the TR train for this one. It's the one that makes most sense in terms of IPC. You lose out on some gaming performance but given @BarbaricSoul 's needs I'd say that is a non-factor. Upgrading to a 12c makes much more sense than the <10c chips.

The only thing I would say is to wait a few more months until there are more options in terms of boards and the drivers and reviews paint a more complete picture, especially given that this is more of a long-term investment.

The IPC loss over say an i7 7700k is neglitable unless you're playing at 1080p. Since I'm currently playing at a combination of 1600p/1440p, and planning on upgrading to a 3440x1440 ultrawide, it will be hardly noticeable. So it really depends on your resolution. Threadripper is more than capable of gaming, and with all of the cost saving vs Intel's competing products and pure efficiency (180w tdp for a 32 threaded processor, now that's efficient), it just makes sense if you're willing to dish out the $$$. This whole "pure gaming then get intel" crap gets old after awhile, who want's to ONLY ever game? I mostly do gaming, but the times I do video-rendering, or say video recording and gameplay, or streaming and gameplay, or hosting a server while playing a game, I am hardly ever "just doing pure gaming."

Sorry if that only make sense in my head, kinda tired writing all this lol

 

[EarthDog]

If you can use the cores, its awesome!

 

[drade]

Don't mind if I chime in here. @barabaricsoul , I am upgrading in the next 1-2 months as well. My budget is similar to yours without a GPU, ~1300$. At first I was leaning towards Ryzen. Performance and value is there with Ryzen, new bios and updates are allowing more stability and OC headroom with the current AM4 platform, the additional cores are there for multitasking. My plan was to get the 1700x and attempt a 4.0-4.1 ghz OC. Another member here mentioned the ability to upgrade future CPU generations on the same AM4 platform. If this is true, the value is set in stone with Ryzen long term.

However, a few months ago rumors of coffee lake started surfacing. Now I am leaning towards the 8700k. The price is about ~400$, so yes it is expensive, more expensive than the previous generation. However, the OC capabilities and stability of the platform is well established. I will wait for release and true reviews/benchmark results. If heat generation at higher clocks is not overwhelming compared to last generation I will most likely buy an 8700k with a nice z370 mobo. However, the platform ends with coffee lake. Intel has been forced by AMD to conform to new standards in the innovation segment. This is good for consumers. So thank you AMD.

If your main goal is crunching, I would suggest the possibility of 8700k vs. Ryzen at this time. I believe the future of Zen will provide consumers with more OC potential, lower temps, lower power consumption, and improved stability.

 

[BiggieShady]

true, but again, most people dont heavily thread anything. 8t is fine for the next few years. Only IF you use those threads and when more uses it. Weve been saying quad for nearly 10 years now... and finally a quad is worth it... its going to be a few more uears bwfore anything over 8t is usefil to the majority.

Finally the time has come when you can produce a game build in any current engine (even Unity) that has multi threaded rendering in use on as many threads available out of the box. Too bad that's not the only condition one has to meet for good parallelization. Rendering a scene using many draw calls in a multi threaded way is kinda asymmetrical because of all the overheads. One thread gets to be the heavy one that sorts and pumps the draw calls. Yes, the thing that DX12 tries to mitigate with less overhead.
Only, solution is stupidly simple ... draw a scene using one fucking draw call ... yes, opengl supports this (don't know about dx, command lists are similar) ... you use the gpu as usual, issue draw calls but instead of pinging back-forth over pci-e with driver and api overheads on each call, you actually build a buffer you can issue at gpu one time per frame as a one huge draw call for the entire scene. The act of building up the buffer can be perfectly parallelized, and a single draw call makes no thread heavier than others.
Seems like a digression but it's not, because adoption of these techniques will make multi core behemoths very interesting for gaming soon. It may be off topic though

 

[thebluebumblebee]

id rather upfrade my board every 3 years with my professor

Whoa dude, TMI.

 

[Aquinus]

3. The computer is set up in my bedroom, so heat generation is definitely a factor.
4. I currently share a house with two friends, so the power bill is split three ways. Electrical usage is a non-factor.

For what it's worth, I think these are two contradictory statements. #4 is not even a consideration because power usage is directly proportional to heat generated.

I would wait to see what happens in the next couple of months if you're not in a rush. The 3930k is definitely a CPU that can run hot and suck down power though. I was astonished at how much more the 3930k draws over the 3820.

Edit: If your crunching, I wouldn't be surprised if threadripper proves to be the better perf:cost option though.

 

[jaggerwild]

Dude where

in imagination land

Yeah,
Cause I noticed you do not mention the Advantage of an AMD board, just yer opinion which is subject to croud approval. Talk all day, you'll never get a AMD CPU to clock out as high as an intel. Wow so you get more cores for yer buck, I'm not a fan boy I'm a realest.
I understand its cheap to use an AMD, but with all the issue's. Do they use dual rate memory yet? Or have IGPU? I know the boards don't over clock good yet, as I been doing my reading.

 

[thebluebumblebee]

Or have IGPU?

Well, you got us there.

 

[jaggerwild]

Or the Thread ripper dummy dies..........

 

[GorbazTheDragon]

The IPC loss over say an i7 7700k is neglitable unless you're playing at 1080p. Since I'm currently playing at a combination of 1600p/1440p, and planning on upgrading to a 3440x1440 ultrawide, it will be hardly noticeable. So it really depends on your resolution. Threadripper is more than capable of gaming, and with all of the cost saving vs Intel's competing products and pure efficiency (180w tdp for a 32 threaded processor, now that's efficient), it just makes sense if you're willing to dish out the $$$. This whole "pure gaming then get intel" crap gets old after awhile, who want's to ONLY ever game? I mostly do gaming, but the times I do video-rendering, or say video recording and gameplay, or streaming and gameplay, or hosting a server while playing a game, I am hardly ever "just doing pure gaming."

Sorry if that only make sense in my head, kinda tired writing all this lol

I really don't want to get dragged down this i7 vs r5/r7 argument. It's already a known factor, and those who run into single core bottlenecking like I have will know about it, but this thread asked about number crunching so just as you are hinting, why even bother mentioning the mainstream chips? Especially the intel ones...

Or the Thread ripper dummy dies..........