With prices haven risnen so sharply in recent weeks, due to oandemic and relations with China, I would say no .... I would wait until the new platforms are released, the 1st and 2nd steppings have been flushed from the market and hopefully, international trade recovers after Novemebr elections.
I see no point in "upgrading" your system remains quite viable and can be repurposed to a family member o r friend ... or just to have a spare box when one PC is on the fritz.
The best advice I can give you is ignore technology boast type of advice.... A smaller die size, does not provide a performance advantage. More cores do not provide a performance advantage unless you use apps that can take advantage of them.
Let's look at your usage and see how they measure up ... I'll pick the $400 CPU price point as it the most common we'ye get involved with. These are your three stated applications:
Gaming:
Financial (Quickbooks ?):
Perhaps a small chance of getting back to video Editing:
Overall Gaming is 8.3% faster compared to the 3900x
Financial programs are basically spreadsheets with a GUI added and the 3900x takes 5.8% more time to complete tasks than the 10700k
Video Editing on the 3900x takes 6,6% longer compared to the 10700k
Photo Editing on the 10700k is 14.9% faster compared to the 3900x
Overclocking can double those non-gaming numbers
We can't guess what the performance or cost numbers will be when the new generation CPUs will be released. The point here is .... Look at the numbers ; the ONLY thing that is relevant in YOUR choice is how the CPU performs in the applications you use ... in the case above, it would be Intel. Look Rendering and you will see that AMD kicks ass there, but if you are not doing that, it's irreleavnt to YOUR build choices
Looking at the $200 price point, that's the i5-10500 vs the Ryzen 3300X
Gaming - 10500 = 100% / 3300x = 92.3% / 3600c ($220) = 94.2% / 3700X ($275) = 95.5% / 3900X ($420) = 96.8%
Its real hard to make a case for an AMD based build if your only application of note is gaming
Spreadsheets ... you'd have to get a $3700x to bet the 10500 in math
AMD doesnt have anything that beats the 10500 in photo or video editing
=========================
Moving onto the GPU side ... and considering performance, noise, power and operating temps ... the price niche that AMD makes its strongest showing a is the 5600 XT where the models ya want are costing $280 - $300. That puts it in between the 1660 Super ($230 - $270) and the 2060 Super at $375. The original 2060 (6% faster MSI Gaming X vs MSI Gaming X 5600 XT) is on par performance and price wise with the 5600 XT but low stock means prices vary significantly daily. Expect the 2060 to go up as time goes on. Power consumption favor the 5600 XT by about 10 watts
The thing that stands out for 5600XT is that this is the 1st time in about 10 years where AMD came up with lower operating teams for comparable performance w/ 61C vs 68C under load w/ OC. AMD also wins with fan noise by 2 dbA (31 vs 29) . So I can't say enough about the surprise that is the 5600 XT but I can't get behind any of the other AMD offerings in higher price niches.
However, all that being said ... everything is just too expensive at this point in time ... so while it's fun to speculate, my advice remains:
1. Wait for next gen CPus / MoBos / GPUs
2. Wait for the pandemic to subside and world trade to stabilize
3. By the time both of those have happened, we should be into 2nd or 3rd steppings free from the bugs in the 1st ones and with better chances in the silicon lottery as production lines finish their tweaking stages.
www.techpowerup.com
