• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Compilation performance (gcc) of 8700k vs 9700k

DavidZemon

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2019
Messages
11 (0.08/day)
Location
St. Louis
I'm having a lot of trouble finding compilation performance comparisons of the new 8c/8t vs old 6c/12t chip. I currently have a 6700k at home on a crappy motherboard (won't even run the RAM at it's xmp profile) and my new work desktop (an 8700k) compiles our firmware in 6.5 minutes compared to the 11 minutes in my home machine. Needless to say, I'm going into the office a lot more than I used to because of how much faster the PC is!

Our build is NOT making the best use of parallel jobs - there's a lot time spent linking large objects or running inefficient bash scripts. For this reason (and some heavy blue bias) I don't think ryzen would be a good choice; I need the single-core performance as well.

So this is what brings me to the 8700k v. 9700k. Has anyone actually run some gcc tests - such as compiling the Linux kernel - on these CPUs? I found a BIG chart of Linux kernel compile times, but it is notably lacking any 9th gen chips.

Also - I have Corsair lpx 3000 RAM and 970 Evo SSD, so I'm covered there. Just need new CPU/motherboard/cooler.

I do occasional gaming via steam's (AMAZING) new Linux support... But I don't expect either of these CPUs to make a difference when I'm running 1060 6GB GPU.
 
Joined
Sep 3, 2017
Messages
149 (0.21/day)
Location
Russia
Processor FX 8320 @4.2 | i7 2600 @3.8 | Xeon W3670 @ 3.6
Motherboard Asus Sabertooth R2.0 | Asus P8Z77-V Deluxe | Gigabyte X58-UD7
Cooling Zalman Performa 10+ | Zalman Performa 11+ | Zalman Performa 10+
Memory Crucial Ballistix Sport XT 32GB @ 1866 | Corsair Vengeance 32GB @1866 | Samsung 24GB @ 1600
Video Card(s) XFX Radeon 390x | Zotac GTX 1070 AMP Extreme | Zotac GTX 980 AMP Extreme
Storage Intel SSD / SAS 15k Fujitsu | Intel SSD / Velociraptors / Hitachi 2TB | Intel SSD / Samsung 1TB
Display(s) Samsung 245T | HP ZR30w | IBM 20" 4x3
Case Chieftec | Corsair Graphite 600T | Thermaltake Xaser IV
Audio Device(s) SB Titanium HD | SB Titanium HD | SB X-fi Elite Pro
Power Supply Thermaltake 875W | Corsair 850W | Thermaltake 1500W
Mouse Logitech | Logitech | Logitech
Keyboard Mitsumi Classic | Microsoft |Microsoft
Software W7 x64 | W7 x64 |W7 x64 / XP x32

DavidZemon

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2019
Messages
11 (0.08/day)
Location
St. Louis
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Messages
2,002 (0.73/day)
System Name msdos
Processor 8086
Motherboard mainboard
Cooling passive
Memory 640KB + 384KB extended
Video Card(s) EGA
Storage 5.25"
Display(s) 80x25
Case plastic
Audio Device(s) modchip
Power Supply 45 watts
Mouse serial
Keyboard yes
Software disk commander
Benchmark Scores still running
HT adds about 25% on compile performance, so 6/12 is like 7.5/7.5, so then the 8/8 might squeak ahead a bit, but it's going to be not worth the effort of changing from 6/12 to 8/8, unless you have exactly 8T workloads. If it's a new Linux system, I'd probably get the 8/8 myself. Get the 6/12 if you run a lot of light threads perhaps.
 

Toothless

Tech, Games, and TPU!
Supporter
Joined
Mar 26, 2014
Messages
5,923 (3.01/day)
Location
Washington, USA
System Name Volt // Dualie
Processor i7-4790k // E5-2680v2 x2
Motherboard MSI Z97 MPower // S2600IP4
Cooling NZXT Kraken X60 // Hyper 212 x2
Memory G.Skill Ripjaws 4x8GB // 16x4GB ECC
Video Card(s) MSI GTX1080 Ti Gaming X // GT 7800
Storage 250GB NVME boot + 5 HDDs (2x RAID1) // 240GB SSD + 300GB HDD
Display(s) LG 34UB88-P + 2x AOC 2425W + Dell 2007FP // Dell 2007FP
Case Nanoxia Deep Silence 6 // Gutted case
Audio Device(s) LucidSound LS30 // None
Power Supply Rosewill Fortress 750w // EVGA NEX650G
Mouse Logitech G602 // IBM J85845R
Keyboard G.Skill KM780 RGB (Brown switches) // Logitech M100
Software Windows 10 Professional // Windows 10 Professional
Benchmark Scores Technical term is PEBCAK issue, which stands for Problem Exists Between Chair And Keyboard
If you need single thread and thread count, might be worth investing in a 9900k. It'll pay itself off with gas money saved.
 

DavidZemon

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2019
Messages
11 (0.08/day)
Location
St. Louis
If you need single thread and thread count, might be worth investing in a 9900k. It'll pay itself off with gas money saved.
Ha! I like your thought process :) but not a chance. I could use it, for sure. It wouldn't go to waste. But I'm just too cheap for that.

I priced out the 9700k with motherboard and cooler and am suffering a bit of sticker shock. It's going to run me about $600. I'm hoping I can get about half that for my current combo... But that's still a lot of money. That has me considering ryzen a lot more seriously than I expected to be. I can pick up a working combo of 2700x + mobo for just $350 - meaning I'm out only $50. Starting to be a no brainier now! But that single core performance worries me...

So then I started thinking... What about a 9600k? That'll put me out around $140 instead of $300. I wonder how it will perform against the ryzen in kernel compile times...

Rough math... If the 9700k is slightly faster than 8700k and 8700k compiles in ~72s (source from link above), then let's just round and say the 9th gen does it in 70s. If we take two cores out we should see compile time jump up by a factor of 1.33, to 87.5. That's still MUCH better than the 118 measured by the same test on my CPU, but a fair ways off the 75 of the 2700x. But... The kernel is fairly well parallelized - better than much of the rest of our firmware. The increased single thread performance will be nice to have.

Or I try to hold my horses another six months and see what comes of 10th gen...
 

Toothless

Tech, Games, and TPU!
Supporter
Joined
Mar 26, 2014
Messages
5,923 (3.01/day)
Location
Washington, USA
System Name Volt // Dualie
Processor i7-4790k // E5-2680v2 x2
Motherboard MSI Z97 MPower // S2600IP4
Cooling NZXT Kraken X60 // Hyper 212 x2
Memory G.Skill Ripjaws 4x8GB // 16x4GB ECC
Video Card(s) MSI GTX1080 Ti Gaming X // GT 7800
Storage 250GB NVME boot + 5 HDDs (2x RAID1) // 240GB SSD + 300GB HDD
Display(s) LG 34UB88-P + 2x AOC 2425W + Dell 2007FP // Dell 2007FP
Case Nanoxia Deep Silence 6 // Gutted case
Audio Device(s) LucidSound LS30 // None
Power Supply Rosewill Fortress 750w // EVGA NEX650G
Mouse Logitech G602 // IBM J85845R
Keyboard G.Skill KM780 RGB (Brown switches) // Logitech M100
Software Windows 10 Professional // Windows 10 Professional
Benchmark Scores Technical term is PEBCAK issue, which stands for Problem Exists Between Chair And Keyboard
So first gen Ryzen had the single thread of Haswell. Second gen Ryzen has a bit of a boost over the first and honestly a 2700x would be better for your use. I'm personally waiting on third gen that should be coming out soon ish.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
25,119 (6.34/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2015
Processor Intel Core i7-6700K (4 x 4.00 GHz) w/ HT and Turbo on
Motherboard MSI Z170A GAMING M7
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-2133 8 GiB
Video Card(s) Sapphire NITRO+ RX 590 Special Edition 8 GiB DVI + HDMI
Storage Crucial MX300 275 GB, Seagate Exos X12 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster T240 24" LCD (1920x1200 HDMI) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW 19" LCD (1440x900 DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek Onboard, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei RAW
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
6,7,8,9 generation Intel processors...there's not much performance difference other than core count and clockspeed.

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/compare.html?productIds=88195,186604,126684
https://www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-ryzen-5-2600x
https://www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-ryzen-7-2700x
https://hothardware.com/news/amd-allegedly-confirms-ryzen-7-3700x-ryzen-5-3600x-zen-2

Assuming SMT is giving a 20% uplift...
Model|Layout|GHz|IPS|Time|GI|Time|GI
2600X|6c/12t|3.6|25.92| 579 | 15,000 |94.2|2442
2700X|8c/16t|3.7|34.56| 434 | 15,000 |74.78|2584
3700X | 12c/24t | 4.2 | 60.48 | 248 | 15,000 | 41.34 | 2500
6700K|4c/8t|4.0|19.2|660|12,672|118.81|2281
8700K|6c/12t|3.7|26.64|390|10,390|71.56|2061
9700K|8c/8t|3.6|28.8| 382 | 11,000 | 69.44 | 2000
So...let's figure about 12 tera-instructions to compile so we can roughly extrapolate for the unknowns (italicized in table)…

Now I'm going to add a theoretical for 3700X (underlined in table) which is coming in a few months for roughly $329...

Has anyone timed compiling that code on a Ryzen? If my numbers are right, Ryzen 3700X could do it in just over 3 minutes. Ryzen 2700X should theoretically be roughly equal to or a smidge faster than 8700K.

To answer your question bluntly, 8700K should be slightly faster than 9700K assuming the code is well multithreaded.


Edit: Didn't notice that link until now...going to run some more numbers and update the table...

AMD is approximately 2500 GI where Intel is ~2100 GI. Because 6700K and 9700K is a pretty big gap in terms of time, I'm going to go with 2000 instead of 2100 due to optimizations and the like through the generations. The difference between AMD and Intel here is because of cache misses and the like. 2500 vs 2000 basically represents the efficiency gap between the two architectures at compiling...

Looking at the table now...and using that benchmark as a baseline...
3700X > 9700K > 8700K > 2700X > 2600X > 6700K

This is giving the 9700K the benefit of the doubt (scoring better per theoretically instruction than 8700K) and disadvantaging the 3700X (giving it a worse baseline than Zen+ gets).


Edit: Now I'm going to back and adjust your estimate compile time using the 2500/2000 baseline established by the benchmark...

Intel is roughly 25% faster than AMD so 12,000 gigainstructions for Intel turns into 15,000 for AMD...

More threads appears to suffer when compiling your code which should theoretically give the 9700K an advantage since it has no Hyperthreading...
3700X > 9700K > 8700K > 2700X > 2600X > 6700K
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
9,703 (5.40/day)
Location
Too Long to fit in a single line here.
Processor i7 8700k 4.7Ghz @ 1.26v
Motherboard AsRock Fatal1ty K6 Z370
Cooling beQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 3
Memory 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200/C16
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X @ 2100/5500
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 1TB + Samsung 830 256GB + Crucial BX100 250GB + Toshiba 1TB HDD
Display(s) Eizo Foris FG2421
Case Fractal Design Define C TG
Power Supply EVGA G2 750w
Mouse Logitech G502 Protheus Spectrum
Keyboard Sharkoon MK80 (Brown)
Software W10 x64
Get a new Ryzen honestly. Intel 9th gen high end is far too expensive for what if offers in performance advantage here.

ST is not your bottleneck, thread count is. All your options mainly improve on nT workloads to get those massive time wins.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
25,119 (6.34/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2015
Processor Intel Core i7-6700K (4 x 4.00 GHz) w/ HT and Turbo on
Motherboard MSI Z170A GAMING M7
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-2133 8 GiB
Video Card(s) Sapphire NITRO+ RX 590 Special Edition 8 GiB DVI + HDMI
Storage Crucial MX300 275 GB, Seagate Exos X12 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster T240 24" LCD (1920x1200 HDMI) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW 19" LCD (1440x900 DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek Onboard, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei RAW
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
OMG I flipped 8700K and 9700K around. Fixing...

The throughput fell a lot for 8700K relative to 6700K which gives me the impression that a significant amount of work gets blocked by busy threads. If all else is equal, higher clockspeed on fewer cores is probably going to come out ahead of lower clockspeed on more cores. 3700X wins both of those arguments if the rumors are to be believed. Between 9700K and 8700K, I would go 9700K because I think 8 physical cores > 6c/12t as far as compiling is concerned.

Since the spread is so large between 8700K and 6700K to the detriment of 8700K, I stuck 9700K in between them. I suspect it is closer to the 8700K than the 6700K though so the numbers are skewed in 9700Ks favor.

8700K and 9700K are likely to be very similar performing when taking into consideration the 6c/12t versus 8c/8t layout and 100 MHz difference in clockspeed.
 
Last edited:

DavidZemon

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2019
Messages
11 (0.08/day)
Location
St. Louis
All this activity, and numbers to back it up! Thank you!

First, someone up there ^^^ mentioned that I shouldn't worry about single-core performance since I'm talking about compiling Linux as a benchmark. Let me share with you a CPU usage graph of our firmware build during the last 150 seconds (out of ~690 seconds)
Screenshot from 2019-04-03 07-54-12.png

The blue on the left is CPU. As mentioned in my first post, there are parts of our build which make CRAP use of parallelism. There are other parts - like actually compiling the kernel and some of our newer apps - which make much better use of it. As an example of the bad: we have to compile the entire OpenSSL package without parallel jobs because we run into intermittent errors otherwise (maybe that's fixed in newer versions, but that's an ENTIRELY different discussion so let's please not turn this thread into "how can we improve David's build system").
Also, this is my personal machine at home. I do use it for more than compiling firmware for my job. Nearly everything else I do with it does not need the 8c/16t parallelism of a Ryzen 7 and will suffer from lower single-core performance (though perhaps a negligible amount, depending on the simplicity of the task). There are also many times when I hit compile errors which are thoroughly hidden in the mess of parallel jobs and the easiest way to find them is re-compile without parallelism. Long story short, the low clock frequency of 2nd gen Ryzen scares the crap out of me. I really wish I could just try out a Ryzen 2700x for a week and see how it goes (I suppose I'm far from the first person to say that on these forums... sorry).

Now, all this activity sparked an idea in my head: we don't have to be guessing about the effectiveness of HT. I can just build the firmware twice, once with and once without hyperthreading enabled on my 6700k. Of course the raw numbers are useless compared to the kernel-compile times above, but the ratio should be very helpful. So, without further ado:

Code:
With Hyper-Threading
====================

real    11m28.925s
user    0m1.907s
sys    0m2.297s


Without Hyper-Threading
=======================

real    14m14.494s
user    0m1.562s
sys    0m2.128s
That comes out to 689 seconds with HT, and 854 seconds without. That's a 24% slow-down. @xorbe, you win the grand prize for guessing closest to the mark :D

I'm going into the office today and will check if the Dell XPS 8930 bios has the option to turn off HT... but I'm not hopeful. If it does, I'll run the test again from there though.

@FordGT90Concept, would you mind uploading the original spreadsheet? That's a great resource and I'd love to dig into those numbers some.

And thank you for bringing up 3rd-gen Ryzen - I had no idea the clockspeed was supposed to jump that much! If they can truly hold to that rumor, especially with TDP staying at 105W, that will be a no-brainer!
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
25,119 (6.34/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2015
Processor Intel Core i7-6700K (4 x 4.00 GHz) w/ HT and Turbo on
Motherboard MSI Z170A GAMING M7
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-2133 8 GiB
Video Card(s) Sapphire NITRO+ RX 590 Special Edition 8 GiB DVI + HDMI
Storage Crucial MX300 275 GB, Seagate Exos X12 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster T240 24" LCD (1920x1200 HDMI) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW 19" LCD (1440x900 DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek Onboard, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei RAW
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
So we know...
-8700K has a huge slump in performance compared to 6700K relative to maximum theoretical throughput (lack of parallelism throughout the whole process).
-SMT gives 124% performance instead of my 120% guesstimate when it is working on the parallel parts.
-AMD Zen+ has approximately 25% disadvantage (high estimate) compared to Intel Skylake and sons.

I didn't make a spreadsheet. I just created the table and used a calculator to get the numbers. I'm downloading LibreOffice now to create a spreadsheet. Should be able to get some definitive answers with it and the information above...

Single and Multi are rough guestimates of where they are parallel and not:
compile.png

I italicized fields that are guesses.

8700K and 9700K are very well matched. 8700K will do slightly better in single-threaded and 9700K will do slightly better in multithreaded.

Bare in mind that 3700X is expected to have at least 10% better single-threaded performance than 2700X but it is unlikely to catch the 8700K. 3700X can be expected to blow them all away in multithreaded because it has 4-8 more cores.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Messages
2,002 (0.73/day)
System Name msdos
Processor 8086
Motherboard mainboard
Cooling passive
Memory 640KB + 384KB extended
Video Card(s) EGA
Storage 5.25"
Display(s) 80x25
Case plastic
Audio Device(s) modchip
Power Supply 45 watts
Mouse serial
Keyboard yes
Software disk commander
Benchmark Scores still running
@xorbe, you win the grand prize for guessing closest to the mark :D
Well, a few months ago I benchmarked my delidded 8086K@5GHz with HT on and off in Linux while compiling things ...
 

DavidZemon

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2019
Messages
11 (0.08/day)
Location
St. Louis
Tom's Hardware has tamed my expectations of 3rd-gen Ryzen significantly. https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-3000-everything-we-know,38233.html
Near the very bottom of the article is "The AdoredTV Leak" and anyone waiting for Ryzen 3 should absolutely read this section.

Given that, I'm going to assume that Zen 2 will come out this Spring/Summer and 10th gen core will come out this Fall, both with smaller processes and therefore significant performance and power improvements, but nothing unheard of relative to other die shrink enhancements from the past.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
25,119 (6.34/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2015
Processor Intel Core i7-6700K (4 x 4.00 GHz) w/ HT and Turbo on
Motherboard MSI Z170A GAMING M7
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-2133 8 GiB
Video Card(s) Sapphire NITRO+ RX 590 Special Edition 8 GiB DVI + HDMI
Storage Crucial MX300 275 GB, Seagate Exos X12 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster T240 24" LCD (1920x1200 HDMI) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW 19" LCD (1440x900 DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek Onboard, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei RAW
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.

DavidZemon

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2019
Messages
11 (0.08/day)
Location
St. Louis
Yep, that's what makes me think Spring/Summer release for Zen 2.

I really wanted to know what kind of performance enhancements 8th gen provides over 6th for compiling... WOW. Not much... Here's a test of one of our smaller apps. I ran "make clean && time make" on both my home machine and work machine:

22.646s vs 21.102s

7% slow down on the older machine. Not much for being two years older. So clearly the benefits I'm going to get by moving from Intel -> Intel are purely from the core/thread count, with little coming from architecture improvements.

Yikes.... my Dell XPS at work must be really held back by something (I suppose RAM and SSD are the only two things it could be, right?). I just ran a full build with a single job overnight on both machines and got 48m6.202s (home) vs 55m1.005s (work). Both have NVMe SSDs but my home machine has a 2 TB 970 EVO and the work machine has a slower 512 GB Toshiba KXG50ZNV512G. However, the RAM in my local machine is only running at 2133 and the Dell is running at 2666.
 
Last edited:

DavidZemon

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2019
Messages
11 (0.08/day)
Location
St. Louis
Well I finally did it. I bought a 3700x today. Microcenter has it for just $330 AND $50 off a matching motherboard. I have a mATX case, so my choices were limited... but that means I left the store having paid $385 including tax. HOLY COW. And I'm selling my 6700k + motherboard for $200.
This is one happy programmer over here :D
 

eidairaman1

The Exiled Airman
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
26,733 (6.03/day)
Location
Republic of Texas (True Patriot)
System Name PCGOD
Processor AMD FX 8350@ 5.0GHz
Motherboard Asus TUF 990FX Sabertooth R2 2901 Bios
Cooling Scythe Ashura, 2×BitFenix 230mm Spectre Pro LED (Blue,Green), 2x BitFenix 140mm Spectre Pro LED
Memory 16 GB Gskill Ripjaws X 2133 (2400 OC, 10-10-12-20-20, 1T, 1.65V)
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon 290 Sapphire Vapor-X
Storage Samsung 840 Pro 256GB, WD Velociraptor 1TB
Display(s) NEC Multisync LCD 1700V (Display Port Adapter)
Case AeroCool Xpredator Evil Blue Edition
Audio Device(s) Creative Labs Sound Blaster ZxR
Power Supply Seasonic 1250 XM2 Series (XP3)
Mouse Roccat Kone XTD
Keyboard Roccat Ryos MK Pro
Software Windows 7 Pro 64
Platform upgrades in cpu dept are bios update and cpu swap, easier than pulling a board out constantly...
 

eidairaman1

The Exiled Airman
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
26,733 (6.03/day)
Location
Republic of Texas (True Patriot)
System Name PCGOD
Processor AMD FX 8350@ 5.0GHz
Motherboard Asus TUF 990FX Sabertooth R2 2901 Bios
Cooling Scythe Ashura, 2×BitFenix 230mm Spectre Pro LED (Blue,Green), 2x BitFenix 140mm Spectre Pro LED
Memory 16 GB Gskill Ripjaws X 2133 (2400 OC, 10-10-12-20-20, 1T, 1.65V)
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon 290 Sapphire Vapor-X
Storage Samsung 840 Pro 256GB, WD Velociraptor 1TB
Display(s) NEC Multisync LCD 1700V (Display Port Adapter)
Case AeroCool Xpredator Evil Blue Edition
Audio Device(s) Creative Labs Sound Blaster ZxR
Power Supply Seasonic 1250 XM2 Series (XP3)
Mouse Roccat Kone XTD
Keyboard Roccat Ryos MK Pro
Software Windows 7 Pro 64
I'm afraid that I can not, for the life of me, figure out what you're trying to say.
Ok your platform which is Ryzen can be upgraded with just a bios update to the motherboard and a cpu swap, by far easier than having to change motherboards every other year...
 

DavidZemon

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2019
Messages
11 (0.08/day)
Location
St. Louis
Ah, yes. That is sort of true. Except, by the time i'm ready to upgrade this CPU, I'll likely be ready for a faster SSD and therefore PCIe 4 as well (to be clear - I went with a B450 due to mATX and Microcenter not having any better mATX options).
 
Top