CPU/Motherboard opinions for gaming PC

[RichardS]

Hi All

I'm in the process of building a Gaming PC for my son for Christmas. Due to some good fortune at work and being a generous Dad it's going to be a fairly high spec build. I have already acquired the following components:

GPU: 3090 FE
PSU: Corsair RM850x
Memory: Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3600 2 x 16Gb
Storage: Samsung 980 Pro PCIe 4.0 Nvme 1tb
Case: Sahara P35

The case was his choice - I would have gone for a higher spec model but it fits the bill. In addition he has 2 existing SSDs (512gb each) that will be included in the build. OS is already taken care of.

I was fairly sure I was going to go with a Ryzen 9 5900x (having already upped spec from a 5800x) for the CPU but I am also considering a 5950x. A motherboard will also be needed and for that I've been thinking MSI MAG X570 Tomahawk Wifi and, because I like Noctua, an NH-D15 (which I've seen included in a build using the P35 so know it will fit).

What I don't really know is what practical difference 5900 vs 5950 would bring? I'm not budget constrained on this decision but on the other hand I don't want to chuck an extra £200 into it for 1% gain. Knowing my son I highly doubt anything other than games will ever grace this PC.

So I'd welcome thoughts and opinions on this...

 

[dfour]

if hes just gaming and not streaming/photo editing or rendering then both are pointless over the 5800x. Most modern games barely use 6 cores/12 threads let alone twice the core/thread count or more. Also with the incoming 3d cache versions set for early next year that could give a 10%+ frame boost over the current ones they are a waste of money.

The same goes for the 32 gig of ram.

The x570 tomahawk is a good board unless your looking to overclock a 5950x then you should look elsewhere and the cooler is awesome.

 

[Haz123]

The main benefit for gaming with the 5900/5950 over the 5800 comes with the increased cache and not the core count. There are no bad choices in the Ryzen 5000 range because all the chips are amazing.

I went for 5900x because when I purchased it was only £100 more than 5800. I am not disappointed in anyway with my decision to not get 5950x and I do not think I have ever seen over 50 percent CPU utilisation when gaming.

Edit - cannot criticise choice of mobo and CPU cooler is overkill but will last many many builds so not a waste in the long run.

 

[EsaT]

What I don't really know is what practical difference 5900 vs 5950 would bring? I'm not budget constrained on this decision but on the other hand I don't want to chuck an extra £200 into it for 1% gain. Knowing my son I highly doubt anything other than games will ever grace this PC.

Is he going to run two games simultaneously?
Without that even 5900X is overkill for huge majority of games.

And £43 Alpenfohn Brocken 3 would be more than good for any AMD CPU.

Also B550 boards would be fine for use without aim to add many NVMes etc.
Unlike from scam to OK VRM B450 boards, B550 boards have widely modern design strong VRMs.

 

[Joxeon]

Maybe wait 2 weeks and see what the new Intel Alderlake CPUs + DDR5 are like especially if your planning to go with Windows 11 for the new build.

 

[EsaT]

The x570 tomahawk is a good board unless your looking to overclock a 5950x then you should look elsewhere

X570 Tomahawk's VRM is good for LN2 cooled overclocking!
With stock CPUs controller would have to shut down like third of the phases to even approach best efficiency and half of that VRM would be still perfectly good for any stock CPU.

The main benefit for gaming with the 5900/5950 over the 5800 comes with the increased cache and not the core count.

Cache in other chiplet can't be accessed directly by thread running in first chiplet.
IIRC it needs another thread of the same process running on other chiplet to be able to "share" it.
And even then there's higher communication latency from going through IF bus.

 

[EsaT]

Maybe wait 2 weeks and see what the new Intel Alderlake CPUs + DDR5 are like especially if your planning to go with Windows 11 for the new build.

While fully multithreading code without dependancies between threads is going to see major performance jump for Intel, there's less and less reason to expect much for gaming.

First of all DDR5's access latencies plain suck for gaming. (+no doubt price)
And so does big.little with its issues for scheduling.
In fact its complications suck so hard that there's going to be problems even just with DRMs of the games:

Intel has confirmed in the document that Alder Lake, which is supposed to compete with the best CPUs for gaming, will have compatibility issues with DRM solutions unless the provider issues a special update for the protection in question.
https://www.tomshardware.com/uk/news/intel-alder-lake-cpus-may-not-work-with-older-games​

if Intel, who knows PR/marketing shenanigans, had actually improved gaming performance meaningfull amount there should be now "leaks" happening left and right to turn people away from AMD.
Instead all we have is generic hype about how awesome big.little is and how good Win11 with its broken for Ryzens scheduler is.
(Now we know what Intel's advertising of close cooperation with MS for Win11 means:Crippling AMD)

 

[Joxeon]

While fully multithreading code without dependancies between threads is going to see major performance jump for Intel, there's less and less reason to expect much for gaming.

First of all DDR5's access latencies plain suck for gaming. (+no doubt price)
And so does big.little with its issues for scheduling.
In fact its complications suck so hard that there's going to be problems even just with DRMs of the games:

Intel has confirmed in the document that Alder Lake, which is supposed to compete with the best CPUs for gaming, will have compatibility issues with DRM solutions unless the provider issues a special update for the protection in question.
https://www.tomshardware.com/uk/news/intel-alder-lake-cpus-may-not-work-with-older-games​

if Intel, who knows PR/marketing shenanigans, had actually improved gaming performance meaningfull amount there should be now "leaks" happening left and right to turn people away from AMD.
Instead all we have is generic hype about how awesome big.little is and how good Win11 with its broken for Ryzens scheduler is.
(Now we know what Intel's advertising of close cooperation with MS for Win11 means:Crippling AMD)

With 2 weeks to go for proper benchmarks on productivity and gaming I don't see why anyone who is planning to invest in a PC wouldn't wait regardless of the outcome.

 

[RichardS]

Thanks everyone - I appreciate the replies.

I have some time so don't need to make a decision straightaway.