This looks like a great little solution, not too expensive, though that can depend on the drives I get for it. I'm assuming proper NAS drives is probably a good call.
New build PC - Upgrading from 8yr old pc
- Thread starter MrKrane
- Start date
This looks like a great little solution, not too expensive, though that can depend on the drives I get for it. I'm assuming proper NAS drives is probably a good call.
Kind of depends how you're going to set up your nas. If you're going to use raid levels then yes. If it's just a bunch of disks then not so much. One of the differences between normal and nas disks is that dekstop drives will try longer to read a damaged or otherwise unreadable section as that is the only copy of the data. Nas drives should mark the section as unreadable sooner because the data should be either mirrored somewhere else or can be calculated from a checksum.
sorry, was trying to wait for my son's friend to sdend pic of the c5, but he's still out and about..18yrs old..he'll get round to it. ahh, to be that young again. anyway, turned my lights to pink..at least you'll get an idea of a dark case like that..not quite the same thing though
as for nas, sure they'll be a thread somewhere about it...I read the below which is a way of choosing what you need. qnap website also has a chooser to help you. guess one of the great things about nas is having a raid. Raid 5 would be great where you could loose a hdd and still function fine (you'l;l really want a 4 bay nas for that). and you can get nas's now that can take a m.2 ssd as well as the hhd. that way it can cache what you want to transfer at m.2 speed, while then slowly transferring onto the ssd at it's own pace, so to speak.
NAS 101: How to Configure the Best NAS Device For Your Needs
How do you evaluate the differences between NAS vendors or even within a single company’s product line? We’re here to help.
www.backblaze.com
Last edited:
I currently use the 2 in my system as mirrors, but I do it manually rather than having them in raid, I've never done raid before but it makes sense to do it considering I'm just manually doing it anyway lol
Snip
Looks great, probably more contrast between the black and pink than you'd get with white, though it'll be in a dark corner so how much I don't know lol
Thanks for the nas info link, very useful. My use is pretty simple so maybe raid 1 would be enough, depends on how many disks I'd like though, will have to think about it since that'll drive the cost up quickly.
So I'm considering different models of the 9000x series. My first choice was 9950x, but I'm also curious about the 9900x, the 9800x3d or even the 9700x.
I've watched a bunch of reviews comparing them but its hard to know just how much difference is between them when I'm coming from an 8 year old 1700x. This is why I dread getting new pc parts because it screws with my adhd and I can't make a choice
I've watched a bunch of reviews comparing them but its hard to know just how much difference is between them when I'm coming from an 8 year old 1700x. This is why I dread getting new pc parts because it screws with my adhd and I can't make a choice
If the primary purpose of the PC is gaming, you'd just get the 9800X3D and you're good. The 9800X3D is only an 8 core CPU (same as the 1700X), but the uplift in single and multithreaded performance is still very strong, so it would still be a great upgrade for both types of usage.So I'm considering different models of the 9000x series. My first choice was 9950x, but I'm also curious about the 9900x, the 9800x3d or even the 9700x.
I've watched a bunch of reviews comparing them but its hard to know just how much difference is between them when I'm coming from an 8 year old 1700x. This is why I dread getting new pc parts because it screws with my adhd and I can't make a choice
The 9700X is a good all-round CPU, gaming, single and multithreaded, particularly if your productivity usage is heavy on single threaded, because the 9700X is very strong there. If you're building a higher-end PC for gaming, you'd normally just go 9800X3D and a cheaper PC something like the 7600X, so the 9700X is really what I'd call a mixed usage CPU, rather than just for gaming.
The 9900X is a good productivity CPU, since you get 12 speedy cores for multithreaded work, but for gaming the 12 core CPUs are not optimal (due to the 6x6 configuration) and not a CPU I'd recommend for gaming when the 9800X3D is not much more.
The 9950X is a very strong CPU for productivity, as you'd expect (16 cores), but you'd sacrifice the extra performance that X3D CPUs get in gaming.
The 9950X3D is like the ultimate CPU for mixed usage, since it has strong productivity AND great gaming performance. Though obviously that comes with a high price.
For me, you're looking at something like (for the choice to make sense):
30% gaming, 70% productivity: 9950X (or mainly multi threaded workloads)
50% gaming, 50% productivity: 9900X
70% gaming, 30% productivity: 9700X (or mainly single threaded workloads)
90% gaming, 10% productivity: 9800X3D
Money no object / supreme at both: 9950X3D.
Thanks for the write up, the % break down between gaming and productivity helps a lot. Based on that I am learning towards either the 9900x or the 9700x.
Could you expand more on the 6x6 configuration you mentioned, I've not heard of that before so I don't know what that entails.
Mainly I'm aware of it just because the 12 core CPUs benchmark slightly slower in games than the 8/16 core CPUs.
The 12 core AMD CPUs effectively have 2 CPUs in 1, since they're 6 cores and 6 cores.
That's not an issue for most workloads, but because gaming is latency sensitive, you don't want cross-communication between the two. AMD can address this by using core-parking, which ensures that gaming threads are loaded on only one of the CPUs (i.e. 6 of the cores), otherwise there's a small performance penalty, depending on which cores the threads land.
I'm not sure if core parking is enabled by default on non-X3D CPUs or not, but X3D CPUs have a bigger issue with it because only half the 9900X3D/9950X3D gets the 3D cache.
Thanks for explaining that. How much is that actually going to be an issue for someone coming from such an old system at this point? As someone who isn't a enthusiast, am I likely to notice slightly lower performance because of it? If it is just slightly lower framerates then that's fine, but if it causes stuttering or other things like that then that would be an issue, I need stability in both gaming and production over the absolute best performance.
Since I'm not willing to use an AIO, I worry that any air cooler wouldn't be up to the task of the 9950x chips. The OC guys commented on this too, but until they test it we don't know. If an air cooler can handle those chips then I could be convinced to just get the 9950x3d and call it a day, but if it can't then I'm fine with dropping down to another chip, just need to know what would serve me best at that point.
I don't own a 12 core CPU, so I couldn't tell you from user experience, but in benchmarks they're usually just a little bit behind (e.g. 1-2%), though in a few games the difference is larger (3-5%).
In productivity you shouldn't notice anything.
I'd only buy the 9900X over a 9700X/9800X3D if you spend a significant amount time waiting around for long run (e.g. 30 minutes, 1 hr+) tasks to complete, since then you'll be thankful for the 4 extra cores.
The 9700X/9800X3D are roughly twice as fast in single and multi thread as your previous CPU, so you should notice a good uplift in anything that isn't storage bottlenecked. If you have the budget for it, I'd get at least the 9800X3D for the higher gaming performance.
My general rule of thumb is that 150 watts is the point that air coolers are not a big fan (pun unintended). Sooo, if you do long-run workloads with the CPU pegged @ 100% a lot, fan noise is likely to be an issue. If you have a lot of tasks that are short bursts, it could also cause the fan to ramp up/ramp down a lot, unless they're mainly single threaded.
A big AIO is easier for these CPUs, but a peerless assassin can definitely do it. It is just a question of how much you want to micro-manage.
also worth noting that with the 7700x and the 7800x3d, the x3d L3 caches was stacked on top of the cores. As it was more sensitive to heat, the cores were downclocked to protect the l3 cache layer, with the result that for productivity the 7700x beat the 7800x3d by a decent amount
With the 9000 series though, the x3d cpu's had the l3 cache layer placed below the core layer, with a insulating layer between them. This meant the core layer didn't need to be downclocked, so the 9800x3d actually outperforms the 9700x in productivity (as the L3 cache can be useful for that too)...so if you have the money and you're looking at those two, just get the 9800x3d. It's the reason I upgraded to the 9800x3d from the 7800x3d, the work side of things (helped I had a son to give my 7800x3d to though)
With the 9000 series though, the x3d cpu's had the l3 cache layer placed below the core layer, with a insulating layer between them. This meant the core layer didn't need to be downclocked, so the 9800x3d actually outperforms the 9700x in productivity (as the L3 cache can be useful for that too)...so if you have the money and you're looking at those two, just get the 9800x3d. It's the reason I upgraded to the 9800x3d from the 7800x3d, the work side of things (helped I had a son to give my 7800x3d to though)
Is it completely unreasonable to be disappointed in those chips only being twice as fast as one that is 8 years old? lol
I want to micro manage zero amount, I do not like micro managing, I like set and forgetting. Personally not bothered about fan noise since I'm partially deaf and wear headphones anyway, so more concerned about any performance issues and throttling etc.
The main issue I have now where I'm seeing a lot of slow down is went working in clip studio paint and I either have a ton of layers or working on a larger canvas, normally both. It freezes a lot just moving the view around or zooming in and out and that's just terrible for workflow. Saving larger files is also a minutes long affair sometimes, and as someone who compulsively saves that quickly turns into a nightmare.
I'm hoping a better cpu and a huge amount of ram (currently only have 16gb) will fix these issues. I've been told that CSP is mainly a single core (or thread, I'm not sure) program.
Interesting, that is definitely getting deeper into these things than I understand properly so I'll have to take your word for it
Do you have a trusted source you like that shows this is action?Interesting, that is definitely getting deeper into these things than I understand properly so I'll have to take your word for it
RIP Intel: AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D CPU Review & Benchmarks vs. 7800X3D, 285K, 14900K, & More | GamersNexus
CPUs RIP Intel: AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D CPU Review & Benchmarks vs. 7800X3D, 285K, 14900K, & More November 7, 2024 Last Updated: 2024-12-03 We test the 9800X3D’s frequency, thermals, gaming performance, efficiency, and more The Highlights The 9800X3D is a follow up to the 7800X3D but runs on Zen 5...
Blender (lower time better)
9800x3d completes in 12.5mins
9700X in 14.9 mins
7700X in 14.7mins
7800x3d in 15.9min
7 zip compression (higher is better)
9800x3d 127733
9700X 113339
7700X 114929
7800x3d 112865
7 zip decompression (higher is better)
9800x3d 145824
9700x 132518
7700X 141378
7800x3d 132326
chromium compile lower time better
9800x3d 130.4 mins
9700x 149.1
7700x 157.3
7800x3d 159.8
Adobe premier (puget score) higher better
9800x3d 10050
9700X 9161
7700x 8950
7800x3d 9143
Adobe photoshop (higher better)
9800x3d 11937 (beats all cpu's)
9700X 11588
7700X 10391
7800x3d 10162
AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D Review - The Best Gaming Processor
The Ryzen 7 9800X3D establishes AMD as the leader in gaming performance. This Zen 5-based X3D chip is not only fast, it also comes with full support for overclocking. Besides gaming, application performance is considerably improved over the 7800X3D, but that comes at a price.
below section from above link, though if you yt it, you'll find vids on it...actually allows the 9800x3d to have a higher base clock speed than the 9700x
While overclocking was disabled on previous X3D processors, this is fully supported on the 9800X3D. One important development for this ability is that AMD has now placed the 3D V-Cache tile under the CCD with the CPU cores, instead of on top of it. This improves thermals, because heat doesn't have to travel through the X3D's cache silicon anymore.
actually below he explains the v cache change
Thank you for all the info, very insightful, it seems the 9800x3d is a bit of a special chip because of what you mentioned. It would be reasonable to say that my use case is probably 50/50 between gaming and production, and the production the majority of the time isn't crazy intense. Ultimately I'd just like a faster, smoother experience while trying to do my damn work.
I was thinking if I went down to the 9800x3d, I could swap out the 5070ti for a 5080, but looking around it generally doesn't seem to be good value on price vs performance over the 5070ti. Daniel Owen has a pretty good video on it, if it was maybe £100 more it would be worth it but £200 plus doesn't feel good.
I dunno, what's reasonable?
It is hard to say for sure, since we don't know the CPU, but if you're going with a 9800X3D then the peerless assassin (or similar cooler) is fine. You might need to adjust the fan curve a little when you first get it, but should be fine after that. In the circumstances, you might prefer to set a higher RPM and then leave it, rather than have the fan ramping up/down on demand.
The easiest way to check is to run something like task manager or hwinfo (sensor tab) in a window or minimised alongside your program and when you have the slow downs look at exactly what's happening (i.e. what part of your rig is at 100%).
In some cases in these kind of situations (can't say if that's this one) the problem is actually the program itself and throwing more money at it might not fully resolve the problem. More single thread performance can certainly help in poorly optimised programs, but it also can't overcome bottlenecks that are innate to the programming.
I dunno, what's reasonable?
8 times faster, one for each year?
I dunno, was hoping for something higher than 2x though but that's just my unreasonable expectation I guess lolI'm ok with setting up a fan curve and then just leaving it after that is figured out, I just don't want to have to constantly mess with things over a longer period of time.
Thanks for the tip, I'll have to do that and keep an eye on what is happening, based on what CSP uses I reckon it is most likely the cpu and possibly ram bottle neck, so fingers crossed those get solved with a better cpu and much higher ram. Would be so lame if it was just bad code
It seems that unless there are some surprising results with air cooling for the 9950x/3d then I'll most likely go for the 9800x3d, I'd rather have stability with air cooling than not. Can can put the money saved towards the nas stuff instead.
Last edited:
No, not generally. It would only be faster when the app was heavily multithreaded. It would be easier to cool in those circumstances though, yes.
Haha, yeah, those days are long gone I'm afraid. Doubling the single/multi core even though it has the same number of cores is actually pretty impressive.8 times faster, one for each year?
If your usage is pretty static (i.e. you do the same stuff over and over) then that's easy enough to do, yep! The only reason to adjust it would be a new more demanding app, or a summer heatwave.
Single core can do A LOT to brute force it, but ultimately, yes, sometimes the app just bogs down in heavy use and there's not much that can be done.Thanks for the tip, I'll have to do that and keep an eye on what is happening, based on what CSP uses I reckon it is most likely the cpu and possibly ram bottle neck, so fingers crossed those get solved with a better cpu and much higher ram. Would be so lame if it was just bad code
If you're exceeding the limits of this app I don't know, since I don't know much about it, but this is something I see with e.g. somebody learns how to do something for a hobby and there comes a point that they outgrow the software and unfortunately it starts to choke under the workload.
Hopefully you can let us know what task manager shows and we'll have a clearer idea what you're best off throwing money at.
Found an interesting write up regarding eco mode, it seems like it isn't too shabby: https://www.techspot.com/review/2965-amd-ryzen-9-9950x3d/ But maybe I'm just misunderstanding XD
Did a brief test with HWinfo, opened a large file I know will cause issues and I think the ram is the issue if I understand it right (says physical memory, show max 16gb so that seems like ram to me) And that is constantly max out at like 95%+ usage. Need to do a proper test though while actually working over a longer period of time though cause just opening and switching on and off layers and zooming in and out isn't all that happens. The file did freeze and lag a lot while doing that though.