Convince me to buy AMD. (Seriously)
Convince me to buy AMD. (Seriously)
Hey everyone. It’s been a tough week for me, but my old motherboard definitely had some issues when I was cleaning up. Right now I’m trying to swap out a heavily overclocked 5820k (which was Haswell-E, with 6 cores and 12 threads, running at around 4.5 GHz). For a rough idea of what to expect, I used about 180 single-core and 1250 all-core speeds in R15 a few years back.
I’ve had enough boot-up problems lately, especially since I was using SLI (though I’m not in that setup anymore). I really don’t want a CPU without an integrated graphics card. It makes fixing things way more complicated and just isn’t worth it.
The problem is, the 9700k doesn’t seem like a solid upgrade. Even with a 12% speed boost and a 20% multiplier, it’s not impressive. The 9900k is way more expensive but gives a decent multiplier. For AMD, aside from the lack of a good integrated GPU, AVX is actually pretty powerful for performance. It speeds up certain tasks a lot, even though AMD’s version isn’t the best yet. The 3700k seems like a smart choice—it offers solid performance at 9900k for around the price of 9700k, and the 3900k is great at boosting MT.
My RAM is also acting up. I have 32 GB of old DDR4-2400 CL16 (I’m not sure about the exact speed). I’m not planning to replace it. This wasn’t something I expected, and spending 130-150 dollars on new RAM isn’t justified. I also don’t feel like swapping it right now. Both my CPU and RAM will be affected, but I think Zen 2 is likely to hit the hardest.
Thanks for any thoughts!
Having more cores at a lower price improves performance compared to older models. These extra threads can help offset losses when comparing systems like a 9700K and a 3700X. The specific AVX tasks you run matter, and if you can boost your memory speed, you may reduce the impact. The $130 price tag doesn’t always mean you need expensive RAM—look at options like the 32GB 2x16GB DDR4 model. Your motherboard budget also plays a role; a B450 might work for 3700X, but an X570 could offer better RAM overclocking. Also note that third-gen Ryzen processors allow further speed improvements on the Infinity Fabric memory.
It seems the issue is... do you rely on powerful software that fully utilizes AVX512 or quicksync? If so, Intel processors will likely perform better. Otherwise, you're essentially wasting money on Intel chips. Think about it—you could upgrade to a 3700x and some faster RAM for the cost of a 9900k. In a couple years you might upgrade to a used 3900x or 3950x without making other changes. Still, faster RAM tends to help more with Ryzen processors, though 2400Mhz sticks won't necessarily cause problems. The answer really depends on the specific tasks you're running.
Discussing the switch from Intel to AMD can be quite challenging. Your 2400mhz memory is notably slow for current applications. AMD offers around 3600mhz for a 4000mhz processor, while Intel’s specs are typically higher. Converting someone is tough. Both setups can handle modern tasks, but AMD tends to be more efficient in power usage. Intel excels in memory speed and latency, whereas AMD provides better performance per watt. Gaming performance is similar on both sides. AMD generally runs cooler but with lower voltage limits. Intel remains stable at 14nm, while AMD often has more competitive pricing. It depends on specific needs and real-world testing.
I consider both the 3900k and 9900k models with the premium halo upgrade. On every platform I could justify purchasing the halo version due to its performance edge. Dropping the older RAM or not is something I can handle across all systems, so it shouldn’t be seen as a cost difference reason. For clarity... this highlights the importance of AVX. Now, while I don’t rely heavily on AVX-heavy programs like Linpack, my scientific applications—such as molecular dynamics and Monte Carlo particle transport—often depend on it. I anticipate my 3900X will match the 9800k and 9900k in overall speed, while the 3700k will lag noticeably, though I haven’t run benchmarks yet. This should be a noticeable improvement over my 5820k, though it won’t always be used. I won’t replace CPUs mid-platform like I wouldn’t discard good RAM. Overclocking isn’t my priority here (unlike x99, where the performance gap isn’t huge), but I’ll need ample USB ports—my board currently has 10, using 8 of them. It includes two USB 2.0 and two USB 3.0 headers, all active. I’ll likely need a few specialized boards to meet my requirements and expect to pay for a high-end model just to access the full feature set. I also need at least four USB slots for a 10GbE SFP+ card, which I already own. I’ll either install Wi-Fi directly on the board or use my existing Wi-Fi PCIe card, but both options aren’t major constraints on these premium systems.
Here’s a revised version of your text:
For reference, I performed a basic comparison of PCPartPicker part listings. The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 3.6 GHz 8-core processor is listed at $289.99 on Walmart, paired with the Asus Prime X470-Pro ATX motherboard for $123.04 on Amazon. The memory option costs $112.99 at Newegg, bringing the total to $526.02. These figures were generated by PCPartPicker on March 10, 2020.
As shown, even when considering the most affordable SLI-compatible models, the Intel configuration is nearly identical in price—without accounting for RAM. Regarding X470 compatibility, you can reach out to AMD support for boot kit assistance at the provided link. If you don’t have access locally, consider having the 200GE shipped to you.
For premium choices (and without replacing quality RAM), the Intel setup matches the X470 in cost. You can also email AMD support about the boot kit and arrange for the 200GE to be sent.
If you’re looking at high-end options, the Gigabyte Z390 AORUS PRO ATX motherboard offers a solid 3.1 header and supports 10 USB ports, including one USB-C port. It also features a 3.0 header that can be adapted for different needs.
You're asking about the memory bandwidth impact of dual-channel 2400 RAM on a Zen 2 chipset. It seems you're concerned about performance differences compared to quad-channel systems and whether that will affect your work. You also want to avoid reverting to older platforms like HEDT or TR2.
Thank you for breaking that out btw. So basically the same cost either way, just trading AVX specific performance vs non AVX MT performance. Both for the halo and non-halo variants of each platform. And then igpu... god darnit I wish AMD made a 3(7)900X with a gpu. Yes I'm an enthusiast, but I'm also enthusiast enough to know how much iGPUs are lifesavers. Unless anyone randomly knows AMD boards outside of servers with an onboard bio gpu? (This is fairly common in servers)
I could share the memory bandwidth from my 8700K. It's clocked at 4000mhz with CL 16-16-16, but not the 3200mhz AMD stuff. I think that's a slower speed for the Ryzen 2. I run my Zen+ at XMP, and it shows a noticeable difference from 2400mhz. We used to reach 2200-2400mhz on DDR3. I'd consider upgrading, but I'm limited by budget. You'd miss out on a lot of performance, letting the benchmark results speak for themselves. The system settings test clearly shows it, lol.