Thanks, I'm desperate not to dive in yet but also really hungry for a 30% fps uplift
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Dissuade me from buying 9900K
- Thread starter Jacky60
- Start date
Yeah, not really looking to hit 5GHz all-core on the 9900k. Tbh, the extra performance over, say, 4.7-4.9GHz isn't going to be noticeable in games.
I've looked at the benchies for the 9900k with all the security patches; it still seems to be the performance king, especially in the Ubi games, which I play a lot of.
As for easy overclock, I'll just use the same "auto overclock" in a new ASUS board as I'm using in my current ASUS rig. Works really well and is effortless.
Although the 3800x is £380, the same ASUS Hero X570 board v an ASUS Hero Z390 board is £120 more expensive, so negates the higher cost of the 9900k.
So, on balance, it's still looking like Intel for me this time around.
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Aug 2017
- Posts
- 2,209
Get the 3800x - you will not notice the difference.
You also get a much newer chip, less security problems, less power, less heat produced ect.
You also get a much newer chip, less security problems, less power, less heat produced ect.
Yeah, not really looking to hit 5GHz all-core on the 9900k. Tbh, the extra performance over, say, 4.7-4.9GHz isn't going to be noticeable in games.
I've looked at the benchies for the 9900k with all the security patches; it still seems to be the performance king, especially in the Ubi games, which I play a lot of.
As for easy overclock, I'll just use the same "auto overclock" in a new ASUS board as I'm using in my current ASUS rig. Works really well and is effortless.
Although the 3800x is £380, the same ASUS Hero X570 board v an ASUS Hero Z390 board is £120 more expensive, so negates the higher cost of the 9900k.
So, on balance, it's still looking like Intel for me this time around.
Like I pointed out before, the 9900k system is still more expensive. With the 3800x, CPU 380 and motherboard is 300. That's £680 for both, £780 if you get a good AIO. The 9900k is £500 and a cooler is £100-£150. Then the motherboard for £200. That's £800-850 and you are going to need that £150 AIO. Then there is the RAM, 9900k 4400 RAM or AMD 3800 maximum. It's just cheaper mostly with 3800x but the overclock does matter more than the 9900k for game performance.
In games I don't know if the 9900k is still faster as I cannot compare my system to review PC's easily but in benchmarks I got value for money. Even so I spent a lot on water cooling, just because I could.
You could get a 9900k and it won't even overclock past 4.8GHz. Same with a 3700x with an IF that can't get above 1733 and won't overclock past 4.1GHz all cores. The best processor will depend on a lot of luck.
Most 9900k's won't do above 4.8GHz with AVX instructions. Most 3800x won't hit 4.3GHz all cores like mine does. My 3800x is 4.4GHz all cores with safe voltage 24/7 and that is the top 20% of 3800x's. Some people got even more lucky and get 4.5GHz all cores with safe voltage.
The tables show just what you are up against. ABBA BIOS really boosted the 3800x's ST performance towards the 9900k @ higher clocks. MT performance is great but RAM speed and tight timings are needed to boost performance the most in games. This appears to be the most reliable part of overclocking. RAM will hit the speeds needed and RAM like Samsung B-die will do so with tight timings.
With the 9900k only a chip in the top 5% will truly have a chance at all cores 5GHz with AVX instructions. Because of the AVX offset and the fact time spy extreme uses SSE as default, this makes Intel processors look faster. They can get 200 MHz more for SSE loads than AVX.
At stock a 9900k will be beaten by a stock 3800x with an IF of 1900 and RAM @ 3800 with tight timings. The ambiguity of which one is faster is when you overclock. How much you spend on fast RAM, luck with the silicon lottery and time you spend tuning.
With AMD, you may find that with every BIOS update you have to tweak your overclock to become stable again. The issue is that there has been a lot of updates.
Last edited:
Depends on your timing.. I have to make a purchase by end of Oct. for tax purposes.
I have pained over the 3700X v the 9900K. The only thing I do that would push either processor is gaming.
I would love to wait until the New Year for the next round of Intel chips, and the B550 mobos from AMD. But I can't wait that long.
So, as I run a silent build (outside of gaming), and I just don't like the fans on X570 (or the actual boards, for those that now support turning the fan off) or the still flaky state of the BIOSes, it's 9900K (of some form) for me. The 9900K still has the edge in gaming (although not by much, and it varies per game - so check the main games you play), and just seems to be a little more mature at this point. NB. I already run a Noctua NH-U12A, so cooling a mildly overclocked 9900K won't be a problem.
Whatever decision you make, you'll be happy with either a 9900k or 3700x.
I certainly won't be happy with a 3700X if a 7700K p*sses all over a 3900X in the one game I care about. I'm pretty sure I'd be livid with that outcome.
Thanks for the 'advice' but I've seen zero evidence that ANY of the new Ryzens can come up to snuff in Arma3. From what I've seen a 5960X at 4.5ghz/4.25ghz cache is about or nearly as quick as
any of the new Ryzens in Arma 3 and a lot of other games.
I will notice the difference between 70 and 120 fps. The game isn't GPU limited as stated in the OP its CPU limited.
You don't seem to have read the OP the ONLY thing holding me back is my CPU/memory. GTA 5 400 hours ARMA 3 6000+ hours, take a wild guess which I play and care about more! Yeah playing 4K/GTA 5 with 1080ti SLI /2080ti I'd be OK with 3700x/3800x BUT
I already have better than 2080ti performance in GTA5 and my 5960X is far from the limiting factor ergo a 3700X/3800X/3900X would make FA all difference and selling 1080tis for a 2080ti would be a downgrade in games I do play and an upgrade in games I don't play!
Last edited:
I appreciate the good intention, don't get me wrong but your advice makes little sense.You don't seem to have read the OP the ONLY thing holding me back is my CPU/memory. GTA 5 400 hours ARMA 3 6000+ hours, take a wild guess which I play and care about more! Yeah playing 4K/GTA 5 with 1080ti SLI /2080ti I'd be OK with 3700x/3800x BUT
I already have better than 2080ti performance in GTA5 and my 5960X is far from the limiting factor ergo a 3700X/3800X/3900X would make FA all difference and selling 1080tis for a 2080ti would be a downgrade in games I do play and a downgrade in games I don't play!
Yes it does and quite efficiently too but it's always (unless you have an utterly pants GPU) CPU limited. I can easily max one 1080ti but struggle to max two in highest possible settings 4K with SLI. Both GPUs often get to 60-75%.
but I'm not convinced from what I've seen. Seems without custom water useful Ryzen 2 boost clocks are about 200-300mhz below what it says on the box or vanishingly fleeting just to make sure that box is ticked.
I did read your original post
and my advice was different to what you wanted you wanted but I did say if your cpu is not the factor holding you back the. Keep it 
but my advice is on my experiance in most recent new release games borderlands 3 greedfall code vein etc all don’t support sli and I don’t see many more supporting it either even amd have dropped crossfire and only 3 or 4 new Nvidia gpu support the new nvlink.
but the other part of it is the newer games my 3900x 2080ti system is acctully faster in the newer games then my group of friends and most have 9900k with 2080ti altho a couple do have 2080 though.
I’m sorry my advice wasn’t good for you it more based on my experiences and I like to give advice based from my experiance and not from websites experiences
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Jul 2016
- Posts
- 275
Like I pointed out before, the 9900k system is still more expensive. With the 3800x, CPU 380 and motherboard is 300. That's £680 for both, £780 if you get a good AIO. The 9900k is £500 and a cooler is £100-£150. Then the motherboard for £200. That's £800-850 and you are going to need that £150 AIO. Then there is the RAM, 9900k 4400 RAM or AMD 3800 maximum. It's just cheaper mostly with 3800x but the overclock does matter more than the 9900k for game performance.
In games I don't know if the 9900k is still faster as I cannot compare my system to review PC's easily but in benchmarks I got value for money. Even so I spent a lot on water cooling, just because I could.
You could get a 9900k and it won't even overclock past 4.8GHz. Same with a 3700x with an IF that can't get above 1733 and won't overclock past 4.1GHz all cores. The best processor will depend on a lot of luck.
The prices for that 9900K are massively inflated.
9900k - £460
Decent Mobo - £15.00
16GB 3200mhz RAM - £75 (Don't need anything above)
Decent AIO - £50.00
That's £735, and that's before even looking for offers/cash back. Could easily knock £30 off that, as well. I have a very similar setup to this one.
Plus, don't have to mess about with bios/timings etc.
For gaming, purely, 9900K/KF is the preferred option.
I allways like to see prices from people everyone allways have different ideas
But for me using ocuk prices
i9 9900k 499.99 ASUs rog mobo 300 pounds Corsair platinum 115i is 129.99 ram 3600 at cl16 169.99 1099.96
my system cost
479.99 ryzen 9 cpu ASUs rog mobo 389.99 and Corsair 115i platinum 129.99 ram 3600 cl16 169.99 1,169.96
going like for like the ryzen system is more due to the motherboard. Why compete either side with lesser parts if u want a ASUs rog mobo on amd side why not intel? And why factor into cooler price on intel and not on amd? If you was gonna buy a h115i or what ever aio etc for your i9 9900k and not for 3900x? Ram on the other hand whilst ryzen gets more from faster ram then intel on 3000 series isn’t as much as before and whilst intel doesn’t get any real boost no one will slump on it either
9900K + ASUS board I want is £455 + £260 = £715 (prices just now from a-rain-forrest-and-not-OCUK)
3800x + same ASUS board (but X570 version) is £740.
As I said, I already have a Noctua NH-U12A, which is more than good enough for a 9900K.
So the AMD system wouldn't save me any money.
Out of the bat your mate has better GPU, which matters at high resolutions and also you play on higher resolution. Last time checked the 64bit client of Arma 3 doesn't support SLI.
Secondly. RAM. Arma 3 is a game greatly benefiting from high speed ram. Your RAM speed is pretty low and it would hamper the performance even if you buy a 9900K let alone a Ryzen CPU. First thing to upgrade is get a good 3600C16 ram kit. Dual channel (2 sticks) preferably if you plan to go back to mainstream platform like this.
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/team...3600mhz-dual-channel-kit-black-my-08q-tg.html
However if you want 32GB you can buy GSKILL Trident F4-3466C16D-32GTZ for £150 as I write this message (2 x 16GB sticks).
And that would be my advice atm. Upgrade your ram before anything else and make a decision.
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Aug 2017
- Posts
- 2,209
Well if that one game is all you play and it runs better on intel then well... there you go.
I wouldnt be though as i want an all round good chip, not something that is a little better in certain limited titles and miles behind in other things. I cant see the 9900 being that much quicker than a 3800x that it matters unless its a really poorly coded game.
FOlk always big up the overclocking but remember you can get big performance gains by overclocking IF on zen2 as well - not all just headline Mhz.
I wouldnt be though as i want an all round good chip, not something that is a little better in certain limited titles and miles behind in other things. I cant see the 9900 being that much quicker than a 3800x that it matters unless its a really poorly coded game.
FOlk always big up the overclocking but remember you can get big performance gains by overclocking IF on zen2 as well - not all just headline Mhz.
And RAM. Old games like Arma 3, Crysis 3, Hitman or those base on the Total War engine, see up to 36% perf increase between XMP 3200Mhz and 3800C16 with IF 1900 and tight timings.
That perf gain cannot be obtained even if the Ryzen 3000 operated at 5.3Ghz.
that’s the thing with going like for like across amd and intel the prices come across very similar prices I know on launch day my 3900x upgrade was a good 60 pounds for me choice in motherboard I could have dropped down on either side to make it cheaper. But I had set stuff in mind and crosshair 8 hero was my choice which at the time was 80 pounds cheaper in intel for the maximus version but my 3900x cpu was cheaper then i9 9900k. But now the 3900x build is much more then that now
All prices are from overclockers. The AMD motherboard does not have too be x570, also more than £300 is pointless. See the motherboard I am using. You can also use cheap older am4 chipsets. AMD wins any price war with Intel but sure knock yourself out trying. Decent AIO is not £50. What you have built is a stock 9900k and a stock 3800x with decent ram and AIO. Will beat that build with IF 1800+.
Last edited: