F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop Known as 9900KS or 3900x

Known as 9900KS or 3900x

Known as 9900KS or 3900x

Pages (3): 1 2 3 Next
L
LagMeter
Member
236
04-06-2019, 11:55 PM
#1
Need fast advice—both CPUs cost the same in the UK. I’m looking for guidance on selecting a CPU with a compatible motherboard and enough RAM. Any suggestions would be really appreciated.
L
LagMeter
04-06-2019, 11:55 PM #1

Need fast advice—both CPUs cost the same in the UK. I’m looking for guidance on selecting a CPU with a compatible motherboard and enough RAM. Any suggestions would be really appreciated.

F
Fritztech
Member
218
04-17-2019, 10:53 AM
#2
9900KS performs better on single-core when using OCed settings (aim for 5.2-5.4). 3900X will lag slightly in single-core but shine in multicore environments. Both options are viable. The main factor is your GPU model—Pascal or Turing with NVENC support allows GPU encoding during streaming, while the 3900X offers more cores. For AMD systems with weaker encoding, the CPU should suffice. The 9900KS includes an iGPU that enables QuickSync in compatible software like Adobe Premiere, and its 3900X provides extra cores for better performance. If cooling is a concern, the 3900X maintains lower temperatures.
F
Fritztech
04-17-2019, 10:53 AM #2

9900KS performs better on single-core when using OCed settings (aim for 5.2-5.4). 3900X will lag slightly in single-core but shine in multicore environments. Both options are viable. The main factor is your GPU model—Pascal or Turing with NVENC support allows GPU encoding during streaming, while the 3900X offers more cores. For AMD systems with weaker encoding, the CPU should suffice. The 9900KS includes an iGPU that enables QuickSync in compatible software like Adobe Premiere, and its 3900X provides extra cores for better performance. If cooling is a concern, the 3900X maintains lower temperatures.

I
ItzWillGuy
Member
222
04-17-2019, 07:17 PM
#3
Also think about using the 3800X instead of the 3900X. With the newest BIOS and DDR 3600 CAS 16 RAM, I'm achieving similar single-core speed to a 5.1Ghz Coffee Lake chip, and it greatly surpasses it in multithreaded tasks.
I
ItzWillGuy
04-17-2019, 07:17 PM #3

Also think about using the 3800X instead of the 3900X. With the newest BIOS and DDR 3600 CAS 16 RAM, I'm achieving similar single-core speed to a 5.1Ghz Coffee Lake chip, and it greatly surpasses it in multithreaded tasks.

C
csige791
Posting Freak
818
04-23-2019, 06:34 AM
#4
3900x on paper offers a stronger boost clock compared to 3800x. plus, it includes four additional cores. The standout benefit of top-tier AMD CPUs is their core count, which is particularly useful for content creation or CPU stream encoding.
C
csige791
04-23-2019, 06:34 AM #4

3900x on paper offers a stronger boost clock compared to 3800x. plus, it includes four additional cores. The standout benefit of top-tier AMD CPUs is their core count, which is particularly useful for content creation or CPU stream encoding.

G
GamingPro1321
Junior Member
16
04-24-2019, 07:53 AM
#5
The focus remains on Zen and Zen+, emphasizing more cores at comparable or reduced costs. With Zen 2 built on 7nm technology, they're now matching Intel's performance metrics (though slightly behind at the time). This matters because core/thread counts are similar, making the differences in clock speed, IPC, and architecture—like the 14nm ringbus versus mesh—more relevant. The 6950X performed marginally better in gaming, while the 7900X excelled in multithreaded workstation tasks, though neither showed a clear advantage.
G
GamingPro1321
04-24-2019, 07:53 AM #5

The focus remains on Zen and Zen+, emphasizing more cores at comparable or reduced costs. With Zen 2 built on 7nm technology, they're now matching Intel's performance metrics (though slightly behind at the time). This matters because core/thread counts are similar, making the differences in clock speed, IPC, and architecture—like the 14nm ringbus versus mesh—more relevant. The 6950X performed marginally better in gaming, while the 7900X excelled in multithreaded workstation tasks, though neither showed a clear advantage.

M
Mobarley7
Member
186
04-24-2019, 08:30 AM
#6
The 3800X edges slightly in this case compared to the 3900X on single-core performance, and it remains ahead of the 9900KS in multi-threaded scenarios. For more details, check the comparison link provided. The 3900X still leads in multi-threaded tasks, but you can find the 3800X for around $350, making it a more affordable option than before.
M
Mobarley7
04-24-2019, 08:30 AM #6

The 3800X edges slightly in this case compared to the 3900X on single-core performance, and it remains ahead of the 9900KS in multi-threaded scenarios. For more details, check the comparison link provided. The 3900X still leads in multi-threaded tasks, but you can find the 3800X for around $350, making it a more affordable option than before.

K
kaaskotskikker
Posting Freak
795
04-24-2019, 09:02 AM
#7
The 9900KS supports a 5GHz all-core boost by default. That means it comes with this feature built in, not something you have to enable separately.
K
kaaskotskikker
04-24-2019, 09:02 AM #7

The 9900KS supports a 5GHz all-core boost by default. That means it comes with this feature built in, not something you have to enable separately.

X
xLeadxSingerx
Junior Member
15
04-24-2019, 09:40 AM
#8
According to passmark, the 3800X shows roughly a 20% boost over the i9-9900KS in multi-threaded tasks. It seems AMD offers significantly wider bandwidth for multiple threads compared to Intel's design. This matches the observations from Anandtech benchmarks for the 3700X and 3900X as well.
X
xLeadxSingerx
04-24-2019, 09:40 AM #8

According to passmark, the 3800X shows roughly a 20% boost over the i9-9900KS in multi-threaded tasks. It seems AMD offers significantly wider bandwidth for multiple threads compared to Intel's design. This matches the observations from Anandtech benchmarks for the 3700X and 3900X as well.

S
Sharkbite1304
Member
196
04-24-2019, 02:16 PM
#9
Apparently it's a naming issue. The part is named "9900ks @ 4.0Ghz" but that is just a text nametag, not the running frequency of the part. If you have a subscription you can see the frequency/performance spread: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/547...le-thread/
S
Sharkbite1304
04-24-2019, 02:16 PM #9

Apparently it's a naming issue. The part is named "9900ks @ 4.0Ghz" but that is just a text nametag, not the running frequency of the part. If you have a subscription you can see the frequency/performance spread: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/547...le-thread/

S
Shizo_Umera
Member
201
04-24-2019, 07:07 PM
#10
IPC doesn't relate to the node. They're around ~12% regarding IPC, which is within the range of the rough data from that low-quality source. The 3700x looks more promising than the 3800x, though this isn't accounting for how Zen 2's real performance stacks up in actual game tests—typically lagging behind the 9900k on a straightforward core-to-core basis.
S
Shizo_Umera
04-24-2019, 07:07 PM #10

IPC doesn't relate to the node. They're around ~12% regarding IPC, which is within the range of the rough data from that low-quality source. The 3700x looks more promising than the 3800x, though this isn't accounting for how Zen 2's real performance stacks up in actual game tests—typically lagging behind the 9900k on a straightforward core-to-core basis.

Pages (3): 1 2 3 Next