New to the forums? Click here to read the "How To" Guide.

Developer? Click here to go to the Developer Forums.

Why are people praising AMD Ryzen 9 3950X over the i7900k?

RedRizlaRedRizla Posts: 7,022 Valuable Player
edited May 2 in Off-Topic
At first I thought people were praising the AMD Ryzen 3950x due to it's price and since I'm looking to build another computer I thought I was in for a bargain. That is until I checked the price of the AMD Ryzen 9 3950x and saw it's £689. So why all the rave for AMD Cpu's? The Intel i7 9700k has better performance in games and it's cheaper at £570. 


«1

Comments

  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 5,317 Valuable Player
    edited May 1
    For gaming, it seems it doesn't matter for now - I'm still with Intel for compatibility, also for the mainboard chipsets. 

    i7 9700k may be a tiny bit faster in games - probably because games don't efficiently support so many cores...

    https://www.anandtech.com/print/15043/the-amd-ryzen-9-3950x-review-16-cores-on-7nm-with-pcie-40
    Intel i7 7700K (4.5 GHz); MSI GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X (oc 2100 MHz gpu boost, 11 GHz mem speed); 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 MHz; MSI Z270I Gaming Pro Carbon AC (VR-Ready) mainboard; Samsung 960 Evo M.2 SSD + Toshiba P300 HD; Windows 10 OS; Valve Index and Oculus Rift CV1 - the latter nearly always using super sampling 2.0. 

    "Ask not what VR can do for you – ask what you can do for VR"
  • pyroth309pyroth309 Posts: 1,668 Valuable Player
    Yea once you hit a certain threshold of cpu power it seems to become pretty irrelevant for gaming unless you're going for high fps on 1080p with low settings anyway. GPU bottlenecks before CPU does on graphical games and high resolution stuff like VR. That said, AMD outperforms Intel these days on most non gaming tasks. I find the 3950x to be overpriced personally. Can't say I could justify buying it over a 3900x.
  • RedRizlaRedRizla Posts: 7,022 Valuable Player
    edited May 1
    @RuneSR2 @pyroth309
    I just saw that intel are bringing out the intel 10900KF, but it still has 14nm and I was hoping for 7nm. I currently have a Skylake 6700 and a Geforce 2080ti. Do you think it's best if I just go with a i7 9700k for my upgrade given the intel 10900KF, is only going to have about 10% better performance in games.
  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 5,317 Valuable Player
    I've not seen any game (ok, I don't play RTS with thousands of units) where I can't get 90 fps using my i7 7700K (4.5 Ghz). I've seen a few games recommending 8700K, but I still got solid 90+ fps. 

    Unless you need cpu for certain and very specific tasks, you may end up wasting a lot of money going for the lastest and on-paper greatest processors. 

    RTX 3080 Ti might be interesting - personally I got no reason to care for cpus right now. 

    But I just reinstalled Diablo III on my office rig, and the Q6600 from 2008 is actually starting to feel a bit slow - because although I get same performance using 800x600 Low or 2048x1536 Ultra - it's no longer 85 fps, lol. 

    PS. I actually bought a pancake game yesterday - I'm so proud of myself  :D - but I think it'll run just fine with my Q6600 (quad-core, 2,4 GHz):


    SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS

      MINIMUM:
      • Requires a 64-bit processor and operating system
      • OS: Windows 7
      • Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 | AMD Phenom II X4 965
      • Memory: 4 GB RAM
      • Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 | AMD Radeon HD 6670
      • Storage: 8 GB available space
    Intel i7 7700K (4.5 GHz); MSI GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X (oc 2100 MHz gpu boost, 11 GHz mem speed); 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 MHz; MSI Z270I Gaming Pro Carbon AC (VR-Ready) mainboard; Samsung 960 Evo M.2 SSD + Toshiba P300 HD; Windows 10 OS; Valve Index and Oculus Rift CV1 - the latter nearly always using super sampling 2.0. 

    "Ask not what VR can do for you – ask what you can do for VR"
  • RedRizlaRedRizla Posts: 7,022 Valuable Player
    @RuneSR2 - But do you reckon my i7 6700k might be bottle necking my 2080ti? I'm also looking at getting a 3080ti when that's available, but I'm just curious to know if my i7 6700k will ruin the Geforce 3080ti performance in some way.
  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 5,317 Valuable Player
    RedRizla said:
    @RuneSR2 - But do you reckon my i7 6700k might be bottle necking my 2080ti? I'm also looking at getting a 3080ti when that's available, but I'm just curious to know if my i7 6700k will ruin the Geforce 3080ti performance in some way.
    That'll probably depend a lot on the game. I don't think your 6700K will be bottlenecking anything using CV1 or Reverb. But if you're into 144 or 240 Hz pancake gaming, then maybe. 

    If you increase res and get same performance - you're cpu may be the bottleneck. If you increase res and get reduced performance, the gpu is probably the bottleneck. 
    Intel i7 7700K (4.5 GHz); MSI GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X (oc 2100 MHz gpu boost, 11 GHz mem speed); 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 MHz; MSI Z270I Gaming Pro Carbon AC (VR-Ready) mainboard; Samsung 960 Evo M.2 SSD + Toshiba P300 HD; Windows 10 OS; Valve Index and Oculus Rift CV1 - the latter nearly always using super sampling 2.0. 

    "Ask not what VR can do for you – ask what you can do for VR"
  • RedRizlaRedRizla Posts: 7,022 Valuable Player
    edited May 1
    RuneSR2 said:
    RedRizla said:
    @RuneSR2 - But do you reckon my i7 6700k might be bottle necking my 2080ti? I'm also looking at getting a 3080ti when that's available, but I'm just curious to know if my i7 6700k will ruin the Geforce 3080ti performance in some way.
    That'll probably depend a lot on the game. I don't think your 6700K will be bottlenecking anything using CV1 or Reverb. But if you're into 144 or 240 Hz pancake gaming, then maybe. 

    If you increase res and get same performance - you're cpu may be the bottleneck. If you increase res and get reduced performance, the gpu is probably the bottleneck. 

    How could I try this? I game on my Samsung TV at 2k sometimes because I have an option to play games at 120Hz in 2k on this Samsung TV. However, I can only play at 60Hz in 4K because this Samsung TV doesn't do 120HZ at 4k.
  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 5,317 Valuable Player
    edited May 1
    RedRizla said:
    RuneSR2 said:
    RedRizla said:
    @RuneSR2 - But do you reckon my i7 6700k might be bottle necking my 2080ti? I'm also looking at getting a 3080ti when that's available, but I'm just curious to know if my i7 6700k will ruin the Geforce 3080ti performance in some way.
    That'll probably depend a lot on the game. I don't think your 6700K will be bottlenecking anything using CV1 or Reverb. But if you're into 144 or 240 Hz pancake gaming, then maybe. 

    If you increase res and get same performance - you're cpu may be the bottleneck. If you increase res and get reduced performance, the gpu is probably the bottleneck. 

    How could I try this? I game on my Samsung TV at 2k sometimes because I have an option to play games at 120Hz in 2k on this Samsung TV. However, I can only play at 60Hz in 4K because this Samsung TV doesn't do 120HZ at 4k.
    Maybe you can use a program like fraps to measure fps. And maybe you can compare 2K 60 fps vs. 4K 60 fps? 

    If you're cpu bottlenecked, you may get let's say 38 fps in both 2K and 4K. But if you get like solid 60 fps in 2K and maybe 40 fps in 4K, then you may need that 3080 Ti. 

    If you turn off vsync, Hz should no longer matter. 
    Intel i7 7700K (4.5 GHz); MSI GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X (oc 2100 MHz gpu boost, 11 GHz mem speed); 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 MHz; MSI Z270I Gaming Pro Carbon AC (VR-Ready) mainboard; Samsung 960 Evo M.2 SSD + Toshiba P300 HD; Windows 10 OS; Valve Index and Oculus Rift CV1 - the latter nearly always using super sampling 2.0. 

    "Ask not what VR can do for you – ask what you can do for VR"
  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 5,317 Valuable Player
    edited May 1
    BTW - made these tests in august 2003 - they're as hot as ever  B)

    This is how to see when you're gpu bottlenecked - as res increases fps decrease:





    - and this is how it looks when you're cpu bottlenecked - fps are the same no matter the res:





    Note - these are actual benchmark numbers using a Radeon 9700 Pro and Athlon XP 2100+. 
    Intel i7 7700K (4.5 GHz); MSI GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X (oc 2100 MHz gpu boost, 11 GHz mem speed); 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 MHz; MSI Z270I Gaming Pro Carbon AC (VR-Ready) mainboard; Samsung 960 Evo M.2 SSD + Toshiba P300 HD; Windows 10 OS; Valve Index and Oculus Rift CV1 - the latter nearly always using super sampling 2.0. 

    "Ask not what VR can do for you – ask what you can do for VR"
  • pyroth309pyroth309 Posts: 1,668 Valuable Player
    edited May 1
    You can tell if you have a cpu bottleneck in games by looking at the percentage of GPU usage. It should be close to 99% usage. If the GPU isn't 99% then something else is holding it back. In low graphical games/pushing high frames the CPU should be the bottleneck but if you try and bench 4k and your GPU isn't working to it's max something's wrong. A lot of programs can throw your GPU usage on screen in game like MSI Afterburner.

    Another way is to run a benchmark tool that compares your system to others. If your score is drastically lower then that could indicate a bottleneck.
  • pyroth309pyroth309 Posts: 1,668 Valuable Player
    edited May 1
    Looking at some benchmarks online, going from an 6700k to a i9 9900k gets about a 10% bump in score with a 2080TI. I doubt it translates to 10% more fps though but it might depending on the game.
  • jabjab Posts: 237
    Nexus 6
    edited May 1
    The bottleneck in VR games are usually bandwidth/resolution related. Meaning VR games can use a better GPU more efficiently without needing a stronger CPU. Very similar effect as with 4K gaming. Only game I can think of that will push the CPU is probably Boneworks.
  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 5,317 Valuable Player
    edited May 1
    pyroth309 said:
    Looking at some benchmarks online, going from an 6700k to a i9 9900k gets about a 10% bump in score with a 2080TI. I doubt it translates to 10% more fps though but it might depending on the game.
    Yup, you can easily spend a lot of money on new cpu + mainboard + ram and end up with a close to non-existing difference due to vsync. But when you know what to look for, it's very easy to find out if a particular game is performing badly due to cpu or gpu. 

    So far I've had no problems getting a constant 90 fps in Alyx - pretty sure that won't change in 120 Hz either, but I have not checked the whole game, lol. 
    Intel i7 7700K (4.5 GHz); MSI GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X (oc 2100 MHz gpu boost, 11 GHz mem speed); 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 MHz; MSI Z270I Gaming Pro Carbon AC (VR-Ready) mainboard; Samsung 960 Evo M.2 SSD + Toshiba P300 HD; Windows 10 OS; Valve Index and Oculus Rift CV1 - the latter nearly always using super sampling 2.0. 

    "Ask not what VR can do for you – ask what you can do for VR"
  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 5,317 Valuable Player
    Also you may find some interesting numbers here:



    - low-res gaming to avoid cpu results being bottlenecked by the gpu. 

    And 9700K is about 3% faster than 8700K. More here: 

    https://forums.oculusvr.com/community/discussion/78426/amd-ryzen-9-3900x-vs-rysen-7-3700x-and-intel-i9-9900k-i7-9700k-i7-8700k-and-i7-7700k
    Intel i7 7700K (4.5 GHz); MSI GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X (oc 2100 MHz gpu boost, 11 GHz mem speed); 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 MHz; MSI Z270I Gaming Pro Carbon AC (VR-Ready) mainboard; Samsung 960 Evo M.2 SSD + Toshiba P300 HD; Windows 10 OS; Valve Index and Oculus Rift CV1 - the latter nearly always using super sampling 2.0. 

    "Ask not what VR can do for you – ask what you can do for VR"
  • pyroth309pyroth309 Posts: 1,668 Valuable Player
    Yea if you're just trying to push a lot of frames with minimal graphics then CPU is quite important. The CPU is still the master and has to process the frames. When you crank graphics/resolution the GPU has to work hard and becomes the bottleneck..which is the ideal situation. The way to fix that is to get a better GPU lol.
  • RedRizlaRedRizla Posts: 7,022 Valuable Player
    I though AMD were supposed to be the company that did things cheap, so I have to agree that the AMD MD Ryzen 3950x, doesn't even appear worth it. I think I'll stick with what I've got for now after reading the comments and if the Geforce 3080ti is 50% the performance of a Geforce 2080ti, then I'll get that when it arrives. I think the 50% performance increase is mainly to do with RTX side of things though and it's only going to be around 20% performance increase in other things in which case I won't bother.
  • pyroth309pyroth309 Posts: 1,668 Valuable Player
    edited May 1
    RedRizla said:
    I though AMD were supposed to be the company that did things cheap, so I have to agree that the AMD MD Ryzen 3950x, doesn't even appear worth it. I think I'll stick with what I've got for now after reading the comments and if the Geforce 3080ti is 50% the performance of a Geforce 2080ti, then I'll get that when it arrives. I think the 50% performance increase is mainly to do with RTX side of things though and it's only going to be around 20% performance increase in other things in which case I won't bother.

    That was before they took more than 50% of the market lol. The 3950x is a nice CPU with 16 cores and 32 threads which lets it compete with multicore monsters multiple times its price....but for gaming that's not very helpful or useful. Most games are still quite poor at utilizing multiple cores.

    With the power being rumored in the 3080TI (8192 cuda cores lol) you may run into a CPU bottleneck but we won't know until it arrives. If I had a 2080Ti with your cpu, though I wouldn't bother upgrading personally...especially if you're planning to go for a 3080ti and then I'd do both.
  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 5,317 Valuable Player
    edited May 1
    Also worth remembering is that we'll always have a bottleneck - and it will be either the gpu or the cpu which decides our maximum frames per second in any given game or app. 

    Maybe I can find some games where my 7700K can't do 144 fps with the Index, but it's my impression that my performance in VR games - and most pancake games in 2K res - are limited by my GTX 1080. I think my 7700K will be able to achieve 90 fps in most VR game for many years to come - especially those made for PS4 due to the more limited polygon processing capabilities of the consoles. Maybe PS5 will change that, maybe not... 
    Intel i7 7700K (4.5 GHz); MSI GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X (oc 2100 MHz gpu boost, 11 GHz mem speed); 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 MHz; MSI Z270I Gaming Pro Carbon AC (VR-Ready) mainboard; Samsung 960 Evo M.2 SSD + Toshiba P300 HD; Windows 10 OS; Valve Index and Oculus Rift CV1 - the latter nearly always using super sampling 2.0. 

    "Ask not what VR can do for you – ask what you can do for VR"
  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 5,317 Valuable Player
    RedRizla said:
    I though AMD were supposed to be the company that did things cheap 

    Only when they're the underdog and forced to sell cheap cpus - I still remember the Athlon (XP/64) prices in early 2000, when AMD dominated their prices went up really fast. I guess AMD is now trying to cover 15 years of losses, lol. 
    Intel i7 7700K (4.5 GHz); MSI GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X (oc 2100 MHz gpu boost, 11 GHz mem speed); 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 MHz; MSI Z270I Gaming Pro Carbon AC (VR-Ready) mainboard; Samsung 960 Evo M.2 SSD + Toshiba P300 HD; Windows 10 OS; Valve Index and Oculus Rift CV1 - the latter nearly always using super sampling 2.0. 

    "Ask not what VR can do for you – ask what you can do for VR"
  • oldgamergazzaoldgamergazza Posts: 66
    Hiro Protagonist
    My 7700k at 4.8ghz bottlenecks my RTX2080 in a few vr games using a Valve Index.
  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 5,317 Valuable Player
    My 7700k at 4.8ghz bottlenecks my RTX2080 in a few vr games using a Valve Index.
    Which specific games and how many hz are you using? You'd need to see below 90 fps even if using 50% res (or lower if that's possible). 

    Compared to my CV1, Index is extremely much more gpu bottlenecked with my GTX 1080. 
    Intel i7 7700K (4.5 GHz); MSI GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X (oc 2100 MHz gpu boost, 11 GHz mem speed); 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 MHz; MSI Z270I Gaming Pro Carbon AC (VR-Ready) mainboard; Samsung 960 Evo M.2 SSD + Toshiba P300 HD; Windows 10 OS; Valve Index and Oculus Rift CV1 - the latter nearly always using super sampling 2.0. 

    "Ask not what VR can do for you – ask what you can do for VR"
  • bigmike20vtbigmike20vt Posts: 4,153 Valuable Player
    edited May 2
    RedRizla said:
    @RuneSR2 @pyroth309
    I just saw that intel are bringing out the intel 10900KF, but it still has 14nm and I was hoping for 7nm. I currently have a Skylake 6700 and a Geforce 2080ti. Do you think it's best if I just go with a i7 9700k for my upgrade given the intel 10900KF, is only going to have about 10% better performance in games.
    CPU upgrades have been dissapointing since the sandy bridge era imo 
    With a tasty overclock my i7 5820k from 2015 is still fab for gaming and whilst I am not certain, I am hopefull it will see out 1 more upgrade with a 3080/3080ti
    Hell at a push my arcade pc which is running my sandy bridge i5 2500k (also overclocked) can still run any game I have tried on it.

    Personally IF I was upgrading today I would go Ryzen but tbh I don't think it makes much difference if all you want is gaming. I just want to support the underdog for a change and I don't believe AMD will do it for gpu
    Fiat Coupe, gone. 350Z gone. Dirty nappies, no sleep & practical transport incoming. Thank goodness for VR :)
  • RattyUKRattyUK Posts: 1,175
    Wintermute
    edited May 2
    I changed from a 7700K to a 2700 a couple of years ago - just as an experiment - and stuck with the AMD CPU as it does offer a few spare cores when running several apps.
    Not had any obvious issues gaming, no slower or faster, so no gripes.
    I may go for the 3700 or 3900 later as I have the X570 chipset so there would be gains over the 2700, plus 7nm architecture to play around with.
    The 2080 Super appears to be a nice compromise too, handles 4K gaming nicely and VR too, although I suppose one day I'll have to run actual benchmark tests to see if the combo is as good as it appears :)
    PC info: AMD Ryzen 7 2700X, MSI MPG X570 Edge, 16GB Tforce Pro Dark DDR4 3200, KFA2 RTX 2080 Super, Samsung 870 Pro M.2, 2x 240GB SSD, 3TB WD Green HDD & 4 TB Seagate Barracuda HDD, Antec Modular 750w PSU, custom watercooling loop. (Win 10 Pro & Opensuse Leap 15.1 Linux) 32" AOC 4K Monitor.
    Rift S
    Laptop: Aorus X5 V6-CF1 (I7-6820HK, GTX 1070, 2* 256GB M.2 NVME, 1TB 7200 HDD)
  • bigmike20vtbigmike20vt Posts: 4,153 Valuable Player
    My 7700k at 4.8ghz bottlenecks my RTX2080 in a few vr games using a Valve Index.
    Really? Wow that surprises me unless you mean FSX or other highly inefficient older title 
    Fiat Coupe, gone. 350Z gone. Dirty nappies, no sleep & practical transport incoming. Thank goodness for VR :)
  • RedRizlaRedRizla Posts: 7,022 Valuable Player
    RedRizla said:
    @RuneSR2 @pyroth309
    I just saw that intel are bringing out the intel 10900KF, but it still has 14nm and I was hoping for 7nm. I currently have a Skylake 6700 and a Geforce 2080ti. Do you think it's best if I just go with a i7 9700k for my upgrade given the intel 10900KF, is only going to have about 10% better performance in games.

    Personally IF I was upgrading today I would go Ryzen but tbh I don't think it makes much difference if all you want is gaming. I just want to support the underdog for a change and I don't believe AMD will do it for gpu

    I'd support the underdog if they weren't more expensive than the top dog  :D
  • ohgrantohgrant Posts: 323
    Trinity
      I think some of peoples perceptions of what's better is familiarity and unconscious bias. Some of it has to do with the games they are playing. I think it's safe to say there is nothing you can do with one that you can't do with the other without really noticing a difference unless you benchmark. The computer I built last year was the first AMD machine I've built since the 486 days. 
     I thought it would be nice to have more cores because my digital audio workstation software finally got to the point that it was using cores more efficiently.  I'm happy with my choice. I get a few more tracks without having to bounce or freeze.    I may have got a few fps more in some VR games if I went for an equivalent  Intel processor,  probably a few less in other games 
     One thing I appreciate AMD for is providing good competition to Intel throughout the years. Without them I believe Intel would have become complacent. 
      I would say a well chosen motherboard and RAM combo and getting the RAM optimized will make more of a difference in performance than choosing AMD or Intel .
     Here are some gaming benchmarks to show how close those two are. 
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5AWio1gBnc&t=525s
     
    Gigabyte  AB350 Ryzen 2700x, 16gb ddr 4 3200, 1080ti. Z800 HMD, DK1, DK2, CV1, Vive wireless, Quest, HP Reverb. Viewsonic 1080p 3D projector ASUS 3D vision monitor.  UAD Apollo interface, Yamaha studio monitors.  
  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 5,317 Valuable Player
    edited May 2
    RedRizla said:
    RedRizla said:
    @RuneSR2 @pyroth309
    I just saw that intel are bringing out the intel 10900KF, but it still has 14nm and I was hoping for 7nm. I currently have a Skylake 6700 and a Geforce 2080ti. Do you think it's best if I just go with a i7 9700k for my upgrade given the intel 10900KF, is only going to have about 10% better performance in games.

    Personally IF I was upgrading today I would go Ryzen but tbh I don't think it makes much difference if all you want is gaming. I just want to support the underdog for a change and I don't believe AMD will do it for gpu

    I'd support the underdog if they weren't more expensive than the top dog  :D
    - and then there's potential compatibility issues, maybe it's just me, but I've noticed quite a few AMD users with Rift-S problems (but if that is true it may of course be caused by mainboard components).

    With Intel I get the feeling that I can sleep better at night and don't have to worry about anything, lol. 

    I might consider AMD, but only when they dominate clearly when it comes to gaming performance and most (Steam high-end) users have an  AMD cpu. Right now I'd feel like a beta tester using a Ryzen cpu ;)


    Intel i7 7700K (4.5 GHz); MSI GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X (oc 2100 MHz gpu boost, 11 GHz mem speed); 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 MHz; MSI Z270I Gaming Pro Carbon AC (VR-Ready) mainboard; Samsung 960 Evo M.2 SSD + Toshiba P300 HD; Windows 10 OS; Valve Index and Oculus Rift CV1 - the latter nearly always using super sampling 2.0. 

    "Ask not what VR can do for you – ask what you can do for VR"
  • bigmike20vtbigmike20vt Posts: 4,153 Valuable Player
    edited May 2
    RedRizla said:

    I'd support the underdog if they weren't more expensive than the top dog  :D
    So I would need to do more research if I was actually planning to upgrade so i could be wrong but the little I have followed is that the Ryzen 3700x takes some beating in the gaming bang for your buck 
    Sure for benchmarking willy waving it may fall short, but I am not sure you would gain any actual noticeable improvement when it comes to gaming experience over spending more.   I think I have seen that chip before things went silly recently for the bright side of £250

    Like I said I am hoping I can eek another GPU generation out of my 5820k. I got lucky. I was gonna buy a 4 core i7 but my 6 core CE up In a 2015 black Friday bundle I could not. refuse . At the time the extra 2 cores didn't really help me but I think it has come into its own the last few years.
    Fiat Coupe, gone. 350Z gone. Dirty nappies, no sleep & practical transport incoming. Thank goodness for VR :)
  • ohgrantohgrant Posts: 323
    Trinity


    With Intel I get the feeling that I can sleep better at night and don't have to worry about anything, lol. 

    I might consider AMD, but only when they dominate clearly when it comes to gaming performance and most (Steam high-end) users have an  AMD cpu. Right now I'd feel like a beta tester using a Ryzen cpu ;)


     Fair enough, I'm glad you're sleeping well. Perhaps consider that both the PlayStation and X-box use AMD exclusively, I just can't see AMD as the underdog in the gaming category  
    Gigabyte  AB350 Ryzen 2700x, 16gb ddr 4 3200, 1080ti. Z800 HMD, DK1, DK2, CV1, Vive wireless, Quest, HP Reverb. Viewsonic 1080p 3D projector ASUS 3D vision monitor.  UAD Apollo interface, Yamaha studio monitors.  
  • RedRizlaRedRizla Posts: 7,022 Valuable Player
    edited May 2
    @bigmike20vt - I'm was comparing the highend intel and AMD Cpu's. I'm haven't looked at the pricing for the mid range Cpu's, so AMD might come out top when it comes to pricing in that range.
Sign In or Register to comment.