3800x vs 9900k

[zx128k]

This is just a debate about these two cpu's.

To keep thing fair, I allowed the 9900k to have the same speed of memory as the 3800x but note the 3800x is more tighter timings (that is the 3800x's overclocking part). The 3800x is the cheaper system.

CPU: 9900k @5GHz - £499.99
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/inte...ocket-lga1151-processor-retail-cp-65j-in.html
RAM: G.Skill Trident Z RGB 16GB Kit DDR4 3600MHz RAM - 1.35 V - CAS 16-16-16-36-Timings £179.99
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/g.sk...hannel-kit-f4-3600c16d-16gtzkw-my-102-gs.html
Motherboard: Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. Z390 AORUS MASTER-CF £264.95
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/giga...cket-1151-ddr4-atx-motherboard-mb-576-gi.html
Operating system: 64-bit Windows 10 (10.0.18362)
Cooler Master MasterLiquid ML360R Addressable RGB CPU Cooler £149.99
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/cool...dressable-rgb-cpu-cooler-360mm-hs-080-cm.html

Total = £1,094.92

3D Mark Time spy CPU 11208. https://www.3dmark.com/spy/8579757

CPU: 3800x @ stock with Cooler Master MasterLiquid ML240R £489.94
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/amd-...ble-rgb-cpu-cooler-bundle-bu-016-cm.html#t=a5
RAM: 8,192 MB Team Group Inc. DDR4 @ 3,798 MHz (overclocked from 3600) £164.99
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/team...3600mhz-dual-channel-kit-black-my-08q-tg.html
Motherboard: ASRock X570 Taichi £308.99
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/asro...4-x570-chipset-atx-motherboard-mb-16m-ak.html
Operating system: 64-bit Windows 10 (10.0.18362)

Total: £963.92

3D Mark Time spy CPU 11314 https://www.3dmark.com/spy/8740622
3D Mark Time spy CPU @ 4.5GHz 11721 https://www.3dmark.com/spy/8734959

CPU-z
9900k @5GHz possible that this system is not patched.
A-Data Technology 8192 MB (DDR4-2662) - XMP 2.0 - P/N: DDR4 3600 2OZ
http://valid.x86.fr/fi7tdc

Single Thread: 554
Multi-thread: 5823

3800x @ stock ABBA BIOS
Team Group Inc. 8192 MB (DDR4-2400) - XMP 2.0 - P/N: TEAMGROUP-UD4-3600
https://valid.x86.fr/rdg41u

Single Thread: 550 (max is 551 @ 4.5GHz boost just hard to get it in cpu-z after the multi thread test)
Multi-thread: 5829

This is not to say the 3800x will beat all 9900k system builds, the first main issue with the 3800x is the clock speed and RAM speed limit. Your maximum clock is 4.5GHz all cores, I have not seen a 3800x that can run safe voltage above this frequency. Also maximum IF most people can get is 1900 which leaves maximum RAM speed at 3800. With PBO set to motherboard limits, 10x scaling and +200MHz then 11400 cpu is possible in time spy, remember 11700 is approx. the maximum. You can hit over 26k in fire strike. https://www.3dmark.com/fs/20577914

The 9900k can add faster RAM and score higher. Note that most 9900k's can't go above 5GHz and of those 5GHz 9900k's most won't do much above 4.8GHz with AVX instructions. If you are very lucky you can get a 9900k that can do AVX instructions @ 5GHz all cores. Also things can get very hot with the 9900k and you need a very good AIO or full custom water loop for overclocking. The 9900k has no cooler, so you have to buy one yourself.

The 3800x is faster than a stock 9900k with IF 1800 and RAM 3600 with tight timings. This is possible with almost every 3800x I have seen.

9900K just has more overclocking headroom if you are lucky and get a good chip. Faster RAM with tighter timings allow for speeds possibly above the 3800x maximum.

It would seem that the 3800x could be as fast or faster than most 9900k's. Only when you get a very good overclocking 9900k with much more expensive RAM with good timings will you pull ahead.

Overall the 3800x is a cheaper opinion but is only better than the 9900k if most other games see the same performance I have seen above. Even so raw performance looks like it could be the same.

 

[zx128k]

Just would be nice to see if the game performance is closer. The 3800x could be a bargain if all you have to do is overclock the IF to 1900 and get decent 3800 ram with manual tight timings. Then you get decent 9900k @5Ghz game performance. Sure you can spend a lot more with the 9900k and get better RAM and performance. I understand the limited scope of the data above and the limits of drawing a conclusion from them. What I did try was to get two systems that were very close to one another. Same RAM speed etc and not base it on cost. The better cooler for the 9900k is because I believe it needs one once you overclock. The 3800x is cooler and performs very well on its stock air cooler. I gave it a AIO so that I could get better all core boosts. 3800x does not need one.

 

[zx128k]

It seems amd can’t do right for doing wrong

whilst I think amd line up is stronger then intel at the moment and I own a 3900x myself.

but both processors get the same benifit from ram speeds after a certain point amd have made the IF not allways tie to ram speed and manual adjusting of the IF to the max you can means u can still have faster ram in but you don’t see as much benifit proberly on par with intel scaling

clock speed on the 3800x is indeed lower then intel at stock and o.c and whilst a few amd cpu can hit 4.5ghz is the Exception rather then the rule though 4.3 is about the expected ghz on amd cpu anything above that is a lot more rare.

but whilst ryzen ipc is higher then intel the intel cpu is still quicker core for core though and intel i9 9900k is better cpu then the 3800/3700x

the main thing that goes against i9 is price and if the i9 was priced the same as 3800x currently is intel i9 would be the clear winner.

don’t get me wrong I think the 3800x is also a very good chip but currently the 3800x is priced vs the 9700k not the 9900k and against the 9700k the 3800x is allround the better chip but I think i9 9900k is a stronger chip then the 3800x

It's a matter of games performance. If you get that great overclocking 9900k and have that expensive RAM kit that does the fastest speed possible with the tightest timings. Then the 9900k is faster but other than that system the 3800x seems faster. I say seems because I have not bench marked apple for apples in real world PC games yet.

 

[zx128k]

The 9900k at 5GHz and the 3800x stock cores (AIO) with tight ram timing. Both with 3600 RAM kits. The 3800x overclocked via IF to 1900 and ram speed to 3800. The RAM then has its timings tuned for lower latency. This alone closes the gap between the 3800x and a 9900k @ 5GHz with 3600 C16 RAM. They both are equal in 3D mark time spy. Same total score. Both graphics and CPU.

Most website benchmarks don't do the 3800x's overclock correctly. If I was to compare my scores I find that the review systems are far slower than my system even when overclocked.

Example: https://img.purch.com/r/711x457/aHR...BLzkvODQ1MzYxL29yaWdpbmFsL2ltYWdlMDAzLnBuZw==

Their 3800x system does @ 4.3Ghz 11044 but by setting up the system correctly and overclocking the RAM/IF only I get 11300. Turning on PBO I get 11400. Overclocking to full 4.5GHz all cores I get 11700. It's not worth overclocking to all cores 4.3GHz-4.4Ghz. Take a 4.4GHz all core overclock, in time spy its 11504 https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/39889618?
4.3GHz all core overclock, in time spy is 11368 https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/39889679?

Here at another site, https://bit-tech.net/reviews/tech/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-3800x-review/5/

The overclocked 9900k is 11316 and the overclocked 3800x is 10467. For memory, they used 16GB (2 x 8GB) of Corsair 3,466MHz Vengeance Pro RGB DDR4 for all CPUs. This makes the 9900k come out on top, they know it will as well. Yet my correctly overclocked 3800x is 11300.

Maybe more accurate? https://img.purch.com/r/711x457/aHR...BLzkvODQ1MzYxL29yaWdpbmFsL2ltYWdlMDAzLnBuZw==

 

[zx128k]

3700X, B450 motherboard, 3600C16 ram. That would set you back ~£600, £650 with 3800X. It comes with a cooler but you can upgrade to what ever you like.

AMD has a lot of opinions to save money. The AMD system I used is basically very close to my own. So I picked the same RAM and motherboard.

 

[zx128k]

I am destiny 2 as well. I can run 60fps solid @ 4K highest settings with depth of field low and motion blur off (I just don't like motion blur). I am using a 2080.

 

[zx128k]

68-85fps in that area. Highest settings hit the GPU the hardest. Really you need a 2080ti for these settings.

 

[zx128k]

@z10m 1080p is 148 varies between 130-155fps.


This is the latest game build running on stream. There have been lots of changes.

Some interesting information on AMD vs Intel, https://imgur.com/gallery/9edvLSn

So the price war we wanted is starting, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08sLzjWAtPQ

Nothing wrong with what I am getting. https://www.pcinvasion.com/destiny-...-a-sight-for-sore-eyes-in-more-ways-than-one/

1070ti

I promised myself I wouldn’t get a 4K display, but I ended up taking the plunge anyway. I’m glad I did because Destiny 2 is quite a visual treat at 4K.

With the aforementioned specs up top, these were my average FPS rates using different presets:

• Highest – 45-50 FPS
• Medium – 60-70 FPS
• Low – 80+ FPS

Anyway, when I down-scaled to 1080p, these were the results:

• Highest – 130-140 FPS
• Medium – 140-150 FPS
• Low – 150+ FPS

 

[zx128k]

for a 5GHZ AVX clock I needed one of these, the AIO had to go in the bin :

Spoiler

I am very happy with it as well.

omg that is epic in every way possible. My water cooling somehow seems mundane now.

 

[zx128k]

A few points on the 9900k that might need updating:

- A 5ghz 9900k gets ~12,800 in timespy. Maybe that's a stock score?
- You can run 5ghz without an AVX offset. Most of us do. You can use OCCT and x264 stress tests to test avx stability
- Your cooler needs to able to handle out 230w/150a *On a 9900k* to be effective for stress loads. However, you'll not see those loads in gaming or normal workload. Doing a ton of rendering being the only exception thus the x264 stress test

You need a full custom water cooling loop for that build. Most 9900k's don't go above 5.1GHz and 4.9GHz AVX. Sure the top 1% is faster but you will spend £300+ on water cooling and more on fast ram.

 

[zx128k]

I don't get why the 3800x exists. All it appears to be is a 100mhz faster 3700x for a extra £50. Surely the 3700x makes more sense or if you want more then bite the bullet and get a 3900x.

The 3800x is faster in every way to the 3700x. It's better binned. With IF 1900 + 3800 fast tight timing, with PBO and auto OC +200MHz. You will be 4.4GHz all cores in games, boosting to 4.574GHz in game as well. The only time it drops in under heavy loads, like benchmarks. The 3800x this way is faster than stock 9900k's and most OC'ed 9900k's as well. It's only the top binned chips, fast RAM and expensive custom water cooling that is faster. Most builds don't spend £500 on the best ram and cooling.

Most of the time my 3800x uses 70-80 watts in games fully overclocked. Hits a maximum of 51c.



The issue hear is that an extreme overclocked 9900k is faster. The elephant in the room i that all 3800x's will hit IF 1800+ with tight RAM timings 3600+. This mean almost all 3800x's will see close to their maximum gains. A stock 9900k is about 10k time spy and a stock 3800x with 3600 RAM that has tightly tuned timings and IF 1800 will hit 11k time spy. At stock this is the scores, https://hexus.net/media/uploaded/2019/8/78005056-1fb3-4a05-9e7a-1b726717d602.png
https://eteknix-eteknixltd.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Ryzen-7-3800X-Benchmark-1.png
https://eteknix-eteknixltd.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Ryzen-7-3800X-Benchmark-2.png
October 22, 2018 review of 9900k, not 11k in time spy stock. Not 12k @5GHz Then came the security patches in 2019. Free 30% off performance.
https://img.purch.com/r/711x457/aHR...FLzYvODA1MzI2L29yaWdpbmFsL2ltYWdlMDAzLnBuZw==



Overclocking the Core i9-9900K was not as fruitful. The best bit about this overclock is the 4.7 GHz value: by using our own voltage settings, we reduced power consumption by 41W, almost 25% of the total power, and also reduced temperatures by 24ºC. That's a safe idea. Even 4.8 GHz and 4.9 GHz was reasonable, but the temperatures at 5.0 GHz might not be for everyone. When all cores and threads are loaded, this is one warm chip.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13400/intel-9th-gen-core-i9-9900k-i7-9700k-i5-9600k-review/22

 

[zx128k]

It's this that gets me, without massive RAM overclock. Default ram speed for 9900k
Memory Types DDR4-2666 https://www.intel.co.uk/content/www/uk/en/products/processors/core/i9-processors/i9-9900k.html

3dmark 5.1GHz 11573 (3000 RAM) 64-bit Windows 10 (10.0.17763)

https://www.3dmark.com/spy/8140427

Review with Memory 16GB (2 x 8GB) Corsair Vengeance Pro RGB 3,466MHz DDR4, just fast enough to pull the 9900k ahead but slow enough to keep the 3800x behind. Here a 9900k hits the speed of a 5GHz all cores 9900k and this is stock. No wonder the 3800x can't keep up.

https://bit-tech.net/reviews/tech/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-3800x-review/5/

Take here were a 5.1 GHz 9900k is stock. The 3800x is so much slower.
https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_ryzen_7_3800x_review,20.html

Here is a 3800x RAM 3800 IF 1900 PBO on +200 MHz scale 1x
https://www.3dmark.com/spy/8766792
CPU score 11321

 

[zx128k]

Yeah that's a beast. I'm on a lowly Alphacool 360LT which can handle about 150a/230w in normal conditions and goes upto 165a/255w on a very cold night like last night with the window open. Basically cheating ambient.

My 9900k scales well. No avx offset on below:
50/47x = 1.30v
51/47x = 1.35v
52/47x = 1.40v

All those tested with OCCT Large + AVX2 2 hours and 10-30 loops of x264 stress test. For the 52/47x I had to open the windows to keep from temp throttling. I'm daily at the 5.1 settings.

Prime 95 fft 8k avx and watch what happens.

 

[zx128k]

That's a low Timespy score for a 9900k. I wonder if he was throttling or the poor ram is holding him back.

very high 12's or low 13's is normal for 9900k with decent ram. https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/33358882 < mine before ram tuning I think.

Stock RAM for the 9900k is 2666, not the 3600 ram you have. The ram speed increase is bigger than the clock speed. https://www.intel.co.uk/content/www/uk/en/products/processors/core/i9-processors/i9-9900k.html You mean an overclocked 9900k, with a RAM overclock and not a stock 9900k which is not that fast compared to a 3800x. Both being near to equal.

Some 9900k, are able to overclock far higher than the 3800x in performance, that's the difference. A 5.1GHz overclock is top 5% of chips. 95% of 9900k's can't reach your speeds and your build is hugely more expensive than a 3800x build. So saying 9900k faster than the 3800x because your 9900k is a outlier, is a flawed argument.

https://ibb.co/0n0954T

 

[zx128k]

I'm confused. You linked an overclocked Timespy score?

People who buy a 9900k are not buying cheapest ram possible. They are also likely to be enthusiast class consumers inclined to all core OC out of their chips. One platform having OC headroom over another isn't the fault of that platform.

The benefits of a 3800x over a 9900k are the cost savings (lower MSRP + free cooler) and overall lower cooling requirements. The 3800x is a great chip and awesome value but it doesn't have the pure performance of a 9900k precisely because the 9900k does have headroom built in.

What I am showing is the 3800x is able to match the 9900k for performance within reason. Apart from the top 30% of 9900k the 3800x is not slower.

This is what an average 9900k system looks like, https://www.3dmark.com/spy/8230671 which is 4.9GHz 3400 RAM (overclocked from 3200) and CPU points 11440. Prue clock speed does not put the 9900k ahead, a RAM overclock is needed. With the 3800x you hit the hard wall at 3800MHz IF 1900. The 9900k you could keep going if the chip lets you.

This is what happens if you take the RAM overclock away.

https://www.3dmark.com/spy/8034395 which is 5.0GHz 3,008 RAM and CPU points 10913.

https://www.3dmark.com/spy/8696801 which is 4.9GHz 2,666 MHz RAM and CPU points 10041. This is a 9900k at all cores 4.9GHz with stock RAM speed. Remember that £100-150 AIO you need.

https://www.3dmark.com/spy/8633001 which is 4.8GHz 2,138 MHz RAM and CPU points 10041.

Stock 3800x is faster than the 9900k clocked at 4.9GHz all cores and below with stock RAM.

Stock 9900k https://www.3dmark.com/spy/8317919 with 3600 RAM and CPU points 9782.

If you spend a fortune on your 9900k build you can become faster than the 3800x. Most builds won't be faster, that's the point. This is why Intel needs 5GHz all core fast. To be ahead they need 5GHz all cores and fast RAM.

This is likely to be a decent comparison to the 3800x I have. Remember the price difference.

https://www.3dmark.com/spy/8175621 which is 9900k 5GHz 3200 RAM (£110) and CPU point 11140. 3800x I have is 11300 approx.

It's only the top 9900k systems that are faster than the 3800x in 3d mark, all the rest are on power with the 3800x overclocked as AMD advised.

 

[zx128k]

Your two links at the bottom are 4.8 vs 4.9 btw, not 5.2.

It's not reasonable to assume that anyone buying a 9900k is buying bottom of the barrel ram. It's a worth "what if" scenario but not a realistic one. I'd say the same for a 3800x owner who would suffer greatly from running ram that low also. It's not limited to intel so I'm not sure how this is a selling point.

I don't believe my Z390 Pro board is any more expensive than a X570 pro. RAM is interchangeable. You do need a good cooler for the 9900k which is a notable cost you can avoid on the 3800x. Again this "fortune" is limited to the MSRP delta and the cost of a cooler.

You have to remember that the 9900k build is more expensive and this is without the faster RAM. The 3800x build can be cheap by £100's and still have the best RAM. AMD's market share is going to grow massively. Notice how the reviewers are playing down the true worth of the 3800x. Intel needs a 9900k at 5GHz all cores for the same price as the 9900k for the price to hold. Even then without faster RAM the 3800x will be faster with an IF 1800 and 3600 ram.

 

[zx128k]

I'm a little confused by the comments about pricing.
In the OP, the 3800 system appears to only have 8GB of ram, so there's no wonder that it's cheaper.
Give them the same level of ram, and the CPU cost saving is more than made up for by the additional cost for the motherboard.

Dual kit so two 8GB ram sticks in the kit for 16GB.

 

[zx128k]

I'm confused. You linked an overclocked Timespy score?

People who buy a 9900k are not buying cheapest ram possible. They are also likely to be enthusiast class consumers inclined to all core OC out of their chips. One platform having OC headroom over another isn't the fault of that platform.

The benefits of a 3800x over a 9900k are the cost savings (lower MSRP + free cooler) and overall lower cooling requirements. The 3800x is a great chip and awesome value but it doesn't have the pure performance of a 9900k in part because the 9900k does have headroom built in.

It's the faster RAM, the 9900k is just the same as the 3800x with ram overclocking. With the stock RAM speed an overclocked 5GHz 9900k is nothing to write home about. Remember how few 9900k's get to 5GHz. The 3800x will reach an IF of 1800 and a RAM speed of 3600. With RAM tuning that will hit performance above a stock RAM 5GHz all core 9900k. 9900k approx. 10913 vs. 3800x stock core IF 1800 RAM 3600 approx. >11k.

It's just the 9900k can keep overclocking the RAM to well above 4000MHz fast timings. At equal cost a overclocked 3800x will win. The more you spend on ram and cooling the better the 9900k will be and the more it will pull ahead of the 3800x. There is a point in the spectrum were they are both equal.

 

[zx128k]

For the longest time I was using cheap low clocked ddr4 ram on my 8700k. Then I found out how good fast RAM is, I went from 2400mhz CL16 to 3200mhz CL14 and my CPU scores improved by 12%

Really is a big part of system performance. Remember this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_Yt4vSZKVk

 

[zx128k]

hah well, many of us on here are old gits mate, we came here to overclockers in 1999 to buy binned AMD k7s with delta fans which were so loud your ears bled.

20 years on, on this forum at least, we can’t use the outlier argument on this very basis as the people on here are outliers by default, by virtue of being here.

Both AMD and Intel have wild variations in silicon quality, as core counts go up,
binning will be more important.

Should Intel have binned the 9900k better? Yes.

Does it make much of a difference to those here, in the know? not really.

This battle won’t last long anyway as we have yet another round of chips
and motherboards heading our way, get your wallets ready

Thank to AMD Intel cut there prices in half. Anyway what I was saying was an item outside of +2σ of the standard deviation of a normal distribution cannot be an example of the mean +/- 2σ normal distribution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation#/media/File:Standard_deviation_diagram.svg