Upgrade Advice for Build AdviceTwo PCs: AMD Ryzen 9000 vs Intel Core Ultra 200?
Upgrade Advice for Build AdviceTwo PCs: AMD Ryzen 9000 vs Intel Core Ultra 200?
I'll rely on the figures. That's an impressive 70, mostly upbeat feedback probably because switching from something older gives no baseline. Ryzen has consistently delivered strong results many times before.
My prediction is that for each positive out of those 70, there are around 100 positive reviews for any current Ryzen model.
When choosing CPUs for gaming, avoid ultra200 models as they won’t match the performance of 9700X in most titles. The main appeal of ultra200 CPUs is their low cost, but this strategy seems limited to certain areas. In my region, a 265K CPU costs around $1999, while a 245K one is about $1699 and a 285K model reaches $4399—keeping the higher-end non-265K ultra200s out of reach. The 9700X currently stands at $1800, 9600X at $1200, and 9950X at $3899.
If 265K CPUs are priced similarly to 9700X, playing in pure 4K resolution without considering GPU limitations makes a strong choice. You’ll enjoy comparable gaming performance with an additional 50% boost in multi-core tasks for non-gaming activities. For those needing a very large motherboard, a 245K CPU at the same price as 9700X is acceptable, though you might notice slightly lower frame rates in games.
If neither of these fits your requirements, go with the 9700X for pure gaming.
I suggest Coolermaster Hyper 612 Apex:
- It’s straightforward to install—no complicated wiring needed. I found it very user-friendly thanks to its magnetic rails and lid.
- Its cooling performance rivals top dual-tower solutions like Noctua d15, while being more affordable.
- The design looks good, and I’d recommend it to others.
- I’ve tested it with 9950X3d and 14600KF, successfully handling those speeds and more.
For the most people, yes, there's little reason to panic because Win10 support ends. But for us in Estonia, there is a valid reason for panic.
Namely, our lives are intertwined with digital features and our ID cards use dedicated ID-software, that only works on current, supported OS. It does not work on old, unsupported OS (e.g Win7).
Further reading (in English):
https://www.id.ee/en/article/operating-s...-software/
And that is a BIG deal for us, if we can not use our ID cards electronically via our PCs. For bare minimum, bank transfers and payment of bills can not be done. Also, we can not log into official government sites that are needed for our daily lives (e.g health care for booking an appointment to the doctor or DMV to manage our vehicles). On top of that, we often work in home office and without being able to identify ourselves via our ID cards electronically, we can't even do our jobs. So, income also goes goodbye.
So, we do not have an option.
Core Ultra 5 235 vs R5 9600X comparison:
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/652...en-5-9600X
Based on that, R5 9600X has better single core performance than U5 235.
And price wise, R5 9600X costs me €261.90:
https://www.galador.eu/1903-cpus/1779010...-l2-l3-box
While U5 235 costs me €302.19:
https://www.galador.eu/1903-cpus/1949072...-5-235-box
It does not make sense to pay ~€40 more for a worse single-threaded performance.
And Intel's stock CPU cooler isn't that great either.
In my 2nd build, i have Intel stock CPU cooler cooling i5-4590 and that cooler struggles to cool that CPU. So, no, i won't be getting stock coolers anymore.
That i do know. However, it would be annoying for us to use our PCs when Windows constantly reminds us to activate the Win. And personalization options would also be needed. Since i'm planning to slap Win7 GUI onto my Win11 (or Win12), if possible. E.g we currently have Win7 GUI slapped to our Win10, since we don't like how Win10 looks like. (Back in the day when i was using WinXP, i had Win98 GUI on it.)
Yes, RAM issues are known for Ryzen, but these are mainly when folks try to get EXPO running on DDR4/DDR5. With JEDEC speeds, DDR4/DDR5 works fine.
For DDR5, i'm eyeing 6000/6400 MT/s. Even if it doesn't work, highest JEDEC would be 5600 MT/s, which coming from 6000/6400, isn't such a big drop. (Diff could even be negligible.)
But Intel CPUs also have their issues. 13th and 14th gen had firmware issues, where CPU could even die. While Core Ultra 200 is underperforming and Intel is looking to fix it.
So, risk wise, there's far more risk with latest Intel CPUs than with Ryzen CPUs. With Intel, and as it was seen with 13th and 14th gen, i'll never know when another issue is discovered that can outright kill my CPU. But with Ryzen, the only issue would be not being able to run EXPO, loosing me 400-1000 MT/s worth of speeds.
Sorry, i don't look customer feedback when i buy my hardware, since that can't be trusted.
E.g Apevia Galaxy 650W PSU has nice 4.4 rating on amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/Apevia-ATX-GX650W...B094278HKG
Would you buy that PSU based on the good rating? If not, then why not?
Instead, i read reputable unbiased reviews to make my decision.
And reviews have shown that Core Ultra 200 doesn't improve much over 14th gen. Most improvements are to do with power consumption and thermals, but we are talking desktop PCs here, where power consumption is not an issue. Also, since CPU coolers can be freely choosed, thermals aren't an issue either. With this, the two strong points Core Ultra 200 has, are meaningless. On top of that, Core Ultra 200 CPUs cost more than their AMD counterparts. And on some instances, even perform worse, performance wise, than Ryzen counterpart.
While i do like to Intel CPUs (especially older generation ones), my brand loyalty isn't that strong that i'm willing to pay more for a worse product.
Everywhere i've looked at, Core Ultra 200 costs more than their Ryzen 9000 counterparts.
U7 265K costs me €387.20
R7 9700X costs me €373.91
I have a feeling that you didn't read the formalities i wrote above. We do not have 4K monitors, but instead 1080p ones.
Our PC's workload is also written in the formalities above.
I'm not looking towards Godlike, ACE or Unify-X Z890/X870E MoBos from MSI. Those are the true extremely expensive MoBos. E.g:
MSI X870E Godlike - €1583.40
MSI Z890 Godlike - €1388.10
MSI Z890 Unify-X - €805.90
MSI Z890 ACE - €722.20
Instead, the MoBos i'm looking at, are in the middle of the pack;
MSI X870E Carbon Wi-Fi - €520.50
MSI Z890 Carbon Wi-Fi - €493.80
MSI X870E Tomahawk Wi-Fi - €374.20
MSI Z890 Gaming Plus Wi-Fi - €348.10
While even the cheapest options are costing quite a bit:
MSI X870 Gaming Plus Wi-Fi - €281.00 (the cheapest MSI option for AM5)
MSI Pro Z890-S Wi-Fi - €223.50 (the cheapest MSI option for LGA1851)
AsRock X870 Pro RS - €235.80 (the cheapest overall option for AM5)
Biostar Z890AX-E Pro - €185 (the cheapest overall option for LGA1851)
Latest MoBos are expensive, there's no way over it. Average MoBo today can cost more than the CPU you put into it.
I looked it up and it has proprietary fan mount. Something that i talked about in my initial post and when i can help it - will not get.
It may be cheaper for you, but in my area, there's 0 availability for it. So, can't buy it even if i wanted to.
I, for one, do not like it's appearance at all. It looks like a dull and tasteless box in the middle of the MoBo.
Look the current pics of our PCs, either from the pcpp links i gave above or builds.gg links from my signature and tell me, is our taste with our PCs minimalistic and simple, where such CPU cooler would please us aesthetically?
🤔
I reread your main post thoroughly before making any suggestions. You noted all your motherboard options use the x870e & z890 chipset, but there’s no mention of USB4 or Thunderbolt5. If you don’t need USB4, then x870e boards aren’t superior to x670e ones—would you prefer some x670e models? I’d recommend the x670e carbon. A gaming setup with Wi-Fi is also a solid choice, though it might feel a bit basic to you. After reviewing the images, I confirmed your preferred building style and it suits me well.
While true, that i haven't talked about USB4 or thunderbolt, reason why i'm looking for 800-series MoBos (both Intel and AMD), rather than 600-series MoBos (AMD) or 700-series MoBos (Intel) is due to the age.
X670E was released 27.Sept.22.
X870/E was released 30.Sept.24.
That's 2 year difference. Whereby if i were to buy X670E MoBo now, it could've very well been sitting on the shelf 2 years longer than X870/E MoBo. And since i do not plan to replace the MoBo anytime soon (never actually), component lifespan is important for us.
MoBos have caps on them, that will age regardless if MoBo is in use or not. And if cap blows on MoBo (has happened), MoBo is bricked.
In the same sense, why i don't look Intel 12th, 13th and 14th gen, which are actually better than Core Ultra 200 series. Again, there's some age to them that would cut into the overall component lifespan.
👍
I've considered it, but it's hard to say if the installation will actually function. And even if it does, there could be other issues later on. Plus, our licenses are OEM rather than retail, which adds more complexity.
I really struggled with upgrading the OS from Skylake to Win10 on my machine. If you're interested, feel free to discuss it further.
So, it might be even worse the second time (from Skylake from Win10 to Win11).
Excluding Win11, our hardware is also quite old—some components are nearly ten years old now. That makes a good opportunity for an upgrade too.
For example:
- The first PC (Skylake) had its core parts purchased in Q3 '16.
- The second PC (Haswell) got its core parts in Q2 '15.
That’s nine and a half years and ten years old, respectively.
Both have been used regularly since purchase (except a few vacation days).
While the CPU is reliable—lasting 10 or even 20 years—I’m more concerned about the memory module. If we keep both systems running for a long time, the first one would likely fail first due to age limits.
RAM can be replaced easily (I actually bought new RAM for the Haswell build in early 2019).
GPUs are also simple to swap out (both builds have had GPU upgrades before).
There’s also the issue of compatibility. Some games aren’t running on either system. Sure, I could install an RTX 5060, but CPUs would limit performance.
For instance, The Talos Principle 2 works perfectly on my Haswell build, while the Skylake version needed a GTX 760 to launch it.
Now The Talos Principle 3 is in development (demo available). Hogwarts: Legacy is another game we enjoy, but neither system supports it right now. The Skylake can run it at low settings, but 720p/30 FPS won’t be great.
That’s why upgrading makes sense: the Win10 version is ending, and our main hardware is over a decade old.
The third reason is that I want both builds to perform equally. My current build is better, but it makes me feel less confident.