Why does nobody ever talk about the 10850k?

[phanbuey]

You're giving me such a pointless argument, I don't care whether you buy MSI or not, but to pay some $700 for a board is literally throwing your money to a garbage bin.

A $160 B550 Strix has all the VRMs going needed for that 5900X, while doing so, it also comes with various features such as wi-fi, BT, etc which are more or less the same stuff found on that very big board you're talking about.

A similarly capable Intel board will do you no less than 200.

Microcenter is not available to everyone and 5900x stock is super scarce -- but even if you look at just pure microcenter:

These processors are simply not in the same class - you're comparing $330-$380 processors vs a $550-$870 processor

 

[X71200]

That's the most basic board you can buy, which did cost around $220 earlier, and has no wi-fi or the other options of the B550 Strix.

 

[freeagent]

Don't get mad at me, I don't have a $700 board.

I would have no problem throwing a 5900 on my board.

 

[phanbuey]

That's the most basic board you can buy, which did cost around $220 earlier, and has no wi-fi or the other options of the B550 Strix.

That board cost $150 earlier actually - I bought it close to 6 months ago, it went up in price.

It's not a feature comparison, it's just to point out that there are budget boards that have great VRMs, dual nvme, and great memory overclocking capability to clock the 10 core chips for well under $200.

 

[X71200]

Well when I checked it did cost around $200 couple months back.

Of course features like the amount of USB and wi-fi matter, you're looking at buying high end gear here and the Z490-A is the base board. There are some nice 4.0 SSDs out today, for example you're not getting that with the Intel choice.

Over all, 5900X gives you better board, much better CPU and better over all options.

 

[phanbuey]

Well when I checked it did cost around $200 couple months back.

Of course features like the amount of USB and wi-fi matter, you're looking at buying high end gear here and the Z490-A is the base board. There are some nice 4.0 SSDs out today, for example you're not getting that with the Intel choice.

Over all, 5900X gives you better board, much better CPU and better over all options.

Of course -- for double the $$ and the same gaming performance...

The only 5900x I can get my hands on is $850+ then +$150 board - $1,000

The 10900 is available now, for delivery tomorrow for $340 + $170 board that can unlock power for it and lock it at ~5ghz -$510 or $560 for 10850K

 

[PaulieG]

The 5900X is currently in several stocks of Microcenter for $550, I checked the 10850K and it costs about $385. Board prices also tend to be higher on Intel. Personally for multi-tasking I'd grab the 5900X, it's a whole lot better CPU.

I have both cpu's. Yes, the 5900x is a significantly better processor. However, not everyone has a Microcenter close to them, so it's either not available or quite a bit more expensive. I've bought 3 10850k's in the last 2 months at an average price of $329. So basically, the 5900x is almost twice as expensive in many cases. Intel z590 boards are slightly more expensive than a good X570 or B550 board, but nowhere near enough to make up any difference.

 

[X71200]

I was more of directing that post towards you actually, should have said that. Since you mentioned multi-tasking, of course for gaming you don't need no 5900X.

 

[phanbuey]

Both processors are great... I would love a 5900 or 5900x that thing is a dream.

But the competition here is the 5800X /5600x vs 10850 / 10900 in terms of $$, and in those cases it's a much tougher fight. I think I would rather get the 10 cores and latency over a 5600x -- I would grab a 5800X at the same $$ for sure, but they're both still good choices either way.

 

[toilet pepper]

Right now is a very bad time to do a new build. DDR4 and the chipset compatibility is a their end. Meaning if you buy current gen cpus (for a new build) from either camp, you're pretty much SOL for upgrade options except with going for a higher SKU on the same gen.


The attractive point of going AMD is upgrade options if you already have a decent board. If you got the right b450 board you can choose from 5 Generations of Ryzen processors. Since we are at the end of the cycle, this value is not as attractive as it was a couple of years ago. Here's my upgrade cycle:

Arous X370 gaming 5 + Ryzen 1600 > MSI B450 Gaming pro + Ryzen 1600 > MSI B450 Gaming pro + Ryzen 3600 > Aorus B550i + Ryzen 3600 > Aorus B550i + Ryzen 5800x

I still have those parts with me and I can use them when something breaks.


Right now, it makes little sense to pay more money in buying new for an AMD system unless you need plenty of cores and PCIE gen4 support. If someone needs something now and Intel is cheaper, I would suggest them to go with Intel.

 

[evernessince]

The 5900X is currently in several stocks of Microcenter for $550, I checked the 10850K and it costs about $385. Board prices also tend to be higher on Intel. Personally for multi-tasking I'd grab the 5900X, it's a whole lot better CPU.

The 5900X is way faster than the 10850K in multi-thread.

Even the 5800X, with 2 less cores, matches the 10900K in multi-thread.

It's a PITA finding AMD CPUs over 8 cores, even older models. People are buying them up.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

I think the time for talking up the 10850K just passed quickly by, it's not a bad chip but far from the best.
And intel released it's next generation, it's a value Hunter's target perhaps but not the go-to either, I'd buy cheaper chip typically just for gaming on and dearer to do heavy duty work on, which doesn't leave it much room IMHO.

 

[newtekie1]

A similarly capable Intel board will do you no less than 200.

That is just outright wrong. https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813157986?Item=N82E16813157986

 

[X71200]

That is just outright wrong. https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813157986?Item=N82E16813157986

I wouldn't agree on that board either there, it's not as feature packed as the Strix B550 I talked about earlier. I've gotten my Tomahawk X570 earlier for about 200, which was its actual MSRP. You get much worse boards on Intel for that money.

 

[Atnevon]

Based on the thread I'd say I made a good call.

I get the vibe that its a true-value but no frills CPU and great at many things, good value, and not a bad pick. I can see where the 900 gets the coverage too from that.

My days of pushing chips are over though. Its nice to have unlocks jsut ot give it a little extra juice; because why not. Though my days of spreadsheet-overclocking are done. I just want things to work. (hence that Asus 490-A Prime board REFUSING to read my Corsair Strife keyboard at first boot is just plain near-unacceptable)

Noentheless with todays miners and their monolpoly-fun-buck coins ruining the GPU/CPU stock – Mainstay route of getting something good and being done with it are looking better by the week.

 

[newtekie1]

I wouldn't agree on that board either there, it's not as feature packed as the Strix B550 I talked about earlier. I've gotten my Tomahawk X570 earlier for about 200, which was its actual MSRP. You get much worse boards on Intel for that money.

What features does the Strix B550 have that the board I posted doesn't?

Heck, the standard Strix B550-F is more expensive than the board I posted, doesn't come with Wifi, doesn't come with Bluetooth and has one less M.2 slot. I fail to see how you are arguing that it has more features. Just to get a Strix B550 with WiFi will cost $210 kind of blowing your point about decent Intel boards costing $200 right out of the water.

 

[X71200]

There are other boards though, it was one example. Last I checked, the Tomahawk's price was increased and was OOS. Most AMD boards are OOS right now on the higher end echelon, so I couldn't find a better example. When the X570S chipset boards go up, we might get some better boards for cheaper again.

 

[nguyen]

Why buy the Z590 or Z490 board when people can buy the B560 and call it a day LOL. I mean the Asus Prime B560-Plus is 120usd over at newegg
That means people can buy a 10850K/10900non-K + B560 board + Tower CPU cooler for the same price as 5900X alone.
This is the Pentium 4 era all over again.

 

[newtekie1]

There are other boards though, it was one example. Last I checked, the Tomahawk's price was increased and was OOS. Most AMD boards are OOS right now on the higher end echelon, so I couldn't find a better example. When the X570S chipset boards go up, we might get some better boards for cheaper again.

So what you're saying is, you were wrong.

Why buy the Z590 or Z490 board when people can buy the B560 and call it a day LOL. I mean the Asus Prime B560-Plus is 120usd over at newegg
That means people can buy a 10850K/10900non-K + B560 board + Tower CPU cooler for the same price as 5900X alone.
This is the Pentium 4 era all over again.

The problem with sticking the 10850K or 10900K in a cheap board like that is the power limits. I don't think most non-Z boards can adjust the power limits, which really cripples these chips. Even if I was getting a locked 10900, I'd get a Z board just so that I can up the power limits.

But even still, you can get a 10850K and a Z590 motherboard for $560. The 5900X, if you can find it in stock, is $550. Yes, the 5900X might be the better processor in multi-threaded application, but it also costs a significant amount more and for gaming the 10850K does pretty much just as well.

 

[unclewebb]

I'd get a Z board just so that I can up the power limits.

The power limits are within the CPU so it is possible that you can access them without needing a Z series board.

A user had an ITX Z490 board and the manufacturer locked the turbo power limits in the BIOS. There was no option in the BIOS to adjust them and because they were locked, you could not use software to adjust them higher. You need to do your Google research before buying any board.

A fully loaded 11400F can run 40% faster with unlocked turbo power limits.

The 10850K is a bit of a dog when limited to the default 125W. Instead of 5100 MHz in Cinebench R23, it struggles to maintain 4100 MHz at 125W.

 

[freeagent]

Open the taps.. I would! 125w is just getting started.. cmon!

 

[unclewebb]

Here is an example of the ASRock B560 Pro4 motherboard BIOS. It gives you full access to the turbo power limits.

 

[Selaya]

PLs is something up for the board maker to decide, Intel's declared that part of 'overclocking' a fucking free-for-all a good long while ago. Quite puzzling given that they would usually not even allow memory OC otherwise on non-Zs until the 500s series, but it is what it is.

However, ymmv here since most lower-end boards tend to come with inadequate vrms and given how much power these 14nm+++++s can guzzle even if your cheap H410 board allows you to unlock limits, it may not be the most advisable thing to do.

 

[newtekie1]

The power limits are within the CPU so it is possible that you can access them without needing a Z series board.

A user had an ITX Z490 board and the manufacturer locked the turbo power limits in the BIOS. There was no option in the BIOS to adjust them and because they were locked, you could not use software to adjust them higher. You need to do your Google research before buying any board.

A fully loaded 11400F can run 40% faster with unlocked turbo power limits.

The 10850K is a bit of a dog when limited to the default 125W. Instead of 5100 MHz in Cinebench R23, it struggles to maintain 4100 MHz at 125W.

View attachment 197955

Here is an example of the ASRock B560 Pro4 motherboard BIOS. It gives you full access to the turbo power limits.

View attachment 197973

You are correct, but my point was more that a Z board is more likely to give you power limit control than a lower board, IME.