I'm returning a faulty 14700kf to a retailer and due to this I have an opportunity to swap to either a 14900k or swap my platform and grab an X670E board and 7800X3D but no matter how many videos I watch I cant seem to find a definitive answer with some people talking about the AMDip and system instability/lack of snappiness on the AM5 platform and low fps high temps and power draw and no upgrade path on intel platform. Looking to owners of both CPU's to see what your experiences are and what you would advise.
14900k or swap to AM5 platform and 7800X3D after return of faulty CPU
- Thread starter steverebo
- Start date
Depends a lot on what you do IMO - the 7800X3D is an excellent gaming CPU but it can really fall down outside of gaming use. Its main strengths come when coupled up with a 4090 playing at like 1080p resolution as well (though that might hold up a bit for future performance with faster GPUs at higher resolutions down the line) at higher resolutions with high or ultra settings, and/or with GPUs slower than the 4090, often the difference compared to the alternative CPUs around it on average is within margin of error, specific games aside.
Personally I think the power draw side is vastly overblown - yeah it isn't ideal on the Intel side but typically for gaming the whole system power consumption isn't vastly different despite the dramatic difference in pure CPU consumption. It is more demanding in terms of dealing with the CPU heat though.
The main hurdles I see on the Intel side is the lack of an upgrade path and mediocre PCI-e 5.0 support / PCI-e lanes in general. (EDIT: Personally I don't really hold too much to upgrade paths though - things can change down the line unpredictably).
Personally I think the 14700 is the best buy at the moment, the 14900 is quite a bit more money while not dramatically faster and uses quite a bit more power and produces even more heat than the 14700, the 7800X3D is similar money while it can fall down massively in uses outside of gaming.
Personally I think the power draw side is vastly overblown - yeah it isn't ideal on the Intel side but typically for gaming the whole system power consumption isn't vastly different despite the dramatic difference in pure CPU consumption. It is more demanding in terms of dealing with the CPU heat though.
The main hurdles I see on the Intel side is the lack of an upgrade path and mediocre PCI-e 5.0 support / PCI-e lanes in general. (EDIT: Personally I don't really hold too much to upgrade paths though - things can change down the line unpredictably).
Personally I think the 14700 is the best buy at the moment, the 14900 is quite a bit more money while not dramatically faster and uses quite a bit more power and produces even more heat than the 14700, the 7800X3D is similar money while it can fall down massively in uses outside of gaming.
Last edited:
I use my system for mainly gaming and a lot of 3d printing and then your everyday internet browsing
I think anyone is mad to go Intel rather than AM5 at the moment if they are moving to a new motherboard platform. You can cool AM5 with daft little coolers making your PC build far more flexible.
Performance wise, niche cases will perhaps mean a process takes marginally longer but if you game at all, it's simply not worth it.
IHMO - it's not even a debate.
Performance wise, niche cases will perhaps mean a process takes marginally longer but if you game at all, it's simply not worth it.
IHMO - it's not even a debate.
Last edited:
My experience is AMD>Intel very hard right now. 7800X3D is a no brainier for a desktop/gaming build. Its a double no brainier if using a highend Nvidia GPU as its the lowest priced CPU with enough horsepower to push it.
If it’s worth the money to switch, only you can answer.
If it’s worth the money to switch, only you can answer.
Last edited:
If moving to a new platform is a consideration then that is one thing. I can safely say from some posts on here though people haven't sat down with a 7800X3D side by side with a higher end 13th or 14th gen CPU though - for some non-desktop stuff the 7800X3D really is 1-3 generations behind performance wise and in some things it really shows - it isn't even debatable if you've done that - video encoding for example is 1.7-1.8x slower than a 14700K, even some game installs can show a significant difference in completion time, and for gaming with anything slower than a 4090 and/or a 4090 at higher resolution/quality there is very little in it outside of specific games which might go one way or the other - that might change down the line when 4090 performance is more baseline but by then most people will probably be looking to move on from either platform.
7950X3D is a much more balanced performance CPU but at a cost and there are still the odd edge cases where you have to mess about with making sure a game isn't utilising the wrong CCD, though likewise with Intel e-cores there are still edge cases where games don't like them - though I've not personally run into such a situation so far and haven't played a couple of titles like Star Citizen which apparently are still problematic.
Last edited:
I have a 12700 and 7800X3D and can say the 7800X3D isn’t any generations behind.
Anything over a A RTX 3080 = 7000 X3D I haven’t looked at anything Nvidia that’s slower the RTX3080.
For non-gaming stuff it averages about 30% behind a 14700K - some stuff like video encoding can be significantly slower, in gaming at 1440p ultra settings upwards only the 4090 shows any real difference compared to the CPUs around it some specific games aside, even the 4090 it largely only stretches its legs at 1080p.
With a 4080 Super at 1440p/4K ultra the difference is within margin of error.
Last edited:
Trust me the difference is real. For gaming/desktop build with a 3080 or faster, a 7000 X3D is the chip to go for. Literally not even a choice.
As for stuff like encoding it depends in what format, but the 7800X3D is a very fast all round desktop chip. Little question between the systems as to which is better hardware.
Last edited:
Soldato
If you main game, the AMD 7800X3D is a no brainer.
Thats even if you don’t take into account that the AM5 platform will still receive new CPUs.
Intel is in the process of moving to a new CPU socket AND they run hot.
Associate
Just the mere facts tell the tale of what each chip maker is doing with their current line up. In both gaming and productivity use cases, Intel has to pump high levels of power into their CPU's and have a complex architecture, in order to compete with AMD's equivalents. The heat that is generated off the intel high end CPU's is crazy and especially when performing intensive work, like rendering. This is clear evidence that illustrates how intel are having to push an old fabrication node to its limits in order for it to perform at the levels of its competitor. The trade off, unfortunately is a much higher power consumption and this equates to higher thermals, which even the best cooling solutions have trouble to keep at bay. Also, we have recently learnt in the mainstream media about intel's high end SKU's suffering from degradation due to excessive power tables being assigned as default in motherboard bios. So what does intel do. They go and blame the motherboard manufacturers. I find this very bizarre, as I have been a long standing intel platform user, going back to the Pentium one, right up to my last intel chip, being the 9900K. We always used "Multicore enhancement" which was on by default and if we decided to manually overclock the CPU, the advice was to always max out the power limits. I never suffered any degradation on all the intel CPU's up to my last one. So after much deliberation, I decided to go with the company that actually innovated and produced a new CPU architecture based on the latest fabrication nodes available from TSMC. I am more than happy with my 7800X3D. I play long sessions on FPS games and this CPU never goes above 65c and it is -30 curve optimiser under PBO, whereas my old i9-9900K would easily go into the 80c range. The more advanced processor will run more efficiently in both power and thermals and this is what you need to understand.
It is the equivalent of 20 year old turbocharged car being modified to heck in order produce 350 bhp, compared to a modern car using new technologies and producing the same output without the extra level of strain.
It is the equivalent of 20 year old turbocharged car being modified to heck in order produce 350 bhp, compared to a modern car using new technologies and producing the same output without the extra level of strain.
just get a replacement
Not really - for video encoding no format/profile gets close to the other CPUs at a similar price point - this is a typical scenario, some configurations are a little faster or slower:
Intel Core i7-14700K Review - Catching the 13900K
Intel Core i7-14700K is the only processor released today with an upgraded core configuration. Thanks to an additional four E-Cores, more cache and a 200 MHz frequency bump, the 14700K reaches performance quite close to the 13900K, at much better pricing.
For general desktop use the 7800X3D is around 30% slower than the likes of the 14700K which is a much more all around desktop chip.
As good as the 7800X3D is at gaming at least with the current line up of GPUs once you go to 1440p/4K with decent graphics settings most of the performance advantages disappear: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScrPuQH1Uoo
I'm not hating on the 7800X3D but it is living on a lot of forum hype compared to reality once the 14700 came along if you are just looking for performance and do anything outside of gaming at all - there are a lot of desktop tasks where the 14700 just straight up wrecks the 7800X3D.
Last edited:
Not really - for video encoding no format/profile gets close to the other CPUs at a similar price point - this is a typical scenario, some configurations are a little faster or slower:
Intel Core i7-14700K Review - Catching the 13900K
Intel Core i7-14700K is the only processor released today with an upgraded core configuration. Thanks to an additional four E-Cores, more cache and a 200 MHz frequency bump, the 14700K reaches performance quite close to the 13900K, at much better pricing.www.techpowerup.com
For general desktop use the 7800X3D is around 30% slower than the likes of the 14700K which is a much more all around desktop chip.
As good as the 7800X3D is at gaming at least with the current line up of GPUs once you go to 1440p/4K with decent graphics settings most of the performance advantages disappear: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScrPuQH1Uoo
I'm not hating on the 7800X3D but it is living on a lot of forum hype compared to reality once the 14700 came along if you are just looking for performance and do anything outside of gaming at all - there are a lot of desktop tasks where the 14700 just straight up wrecks the 7800X3D.
The format matters, but if your buying a chip primarily for its video encoding performance you have a lot options. If you want a gaming machine with solid encoding and all round desktop use the 7800X3D is a power house, particularly if you need to CPU run a highend Nvidia video card. The 7000X3D hype is real and deserved.
Last edited:
It is called denial - you've spent roughly the same amount of money for 3 generations back video encoding performance, 1-3 generations back general desktop performance and only really stretches its legs at 1080p on a 4090 while betting on future upgrade potential which may or may not happen. The 7800X3D hype is real but not as deserved as it first appears when you take a proper look outside of certain gaming scenarios.
lol denial, that’s funny. Enjoy your video encoding performance Rroff. You hold onto that.
Associate
If you are returning the 14700kf for a refund and not an exchange then it would be kind of insane to stick to LGA 1700, at least in my opinion. Switch to a Ryzen 7000 if you need it now, or wait for Zen 5/Arrow Lake.
Only it isn't just video encoding performance and you know that, when you've got to resort to petulant replies like that you know you are on the losing end.
It is an interesting one in this respect for sure - if someone needs/wants a build running now then waiting for Arrow Lake isn't really going to cut it.
Last edited: