3900x or 5900x

[Dallies]

Is the 5900x worth the extra £120 over the 3900x? Can't really find any benchmarks that compare the two.

Thanks.

 

[rare]

Depends how much that £120 is of value to you (I don’t mean that rude, but if £120 is no big deal to you then go for it). The improvements between 3xxx to 5xxx were pretty strong, in the region of 10-20% (depending on application).

 

[mickyflinn]

Depends on what your doing, 5900x gaming about 10% to 20% faster depending on resouloution , is faster at rendering and supports pcie4 .

If time is money then the £120 diffrence is minuscule

 

[EsaT]

If you're playing games, then improvements are in general toward that 20%.
In pure fully multithreading workloads performance improvement isn't as big.

 

[Harnser]

If you're playing games, then improvements are in general toward that 20%.
In pure fully multithreading workloads performance improvement isn't as big.

So the 3900x could be a way to put together a cheaper programming/developer system, with similar (within 10%) performance of the 5900x?

 

[EsaT]

So the 3900x could be a way to put together a cheaper programming/developer system, with similar (within 10%) performance of the 5900x?

5900X is simply more often limited by TDP and memory bandwidth when every core/thread has 100% load.
Of course if load isn't completely multithreaded and has critical more important than others main thread or two, or memory bandwidth isn't needed much then difference grows.

 

[jigger]

So the 3900x could be a way to put together a cheaper programming/developer system, with similar (within 10%) performance of the 5900x?

You are working with 4x16mb vs 2x32mb chunks of cache. You could offset the the performance a little with fine tuning the IF but probably not enough to get within 10% of the 5900X.

 

[silvagti]

Yes IMO if your already contemplating spending 3900x money (~£400) on a CPU then the 5900x is worth the extra cost.

Alternately if you don't need the multi core performance I'd personally buy a 5800x over a 3900x for the improved single core speed.

 

[555BUK]

3900X is plenty for anything except serious productivity work. The 5900X shows great gains within gaming, assuming you play at lowish-res with a monster-GPU. When mated to a normal GPU & normal-res there will only be a few FPS difference. I owned a 3900X and now own a 5900X. TBH I wouldn't be able to tell them apart without benchmarks.

So, technically you'd be better off saving the £100 and spending it elsewhere (better GPU, RAM, monitor etc), but it's always nice to have more than you need. The 5900X will also have better resale-value in a year or two, so you'll probably get £50 of that £100 difference back.

 

[Tetras]

What are you using the PC for?

 

[itchy]

I would spend the extra for future proofing. If you make the right purchase on a CPU it can last a very long time.

 

[sgoaty]

Any 5000 series CPU over the 3900x if your primary use is gaming IMHO

 

[Harnser]

What are you using the PC for?

Work - software development. I have multiple VMs running, plus Docker containers if I can't avoid them, and they need CPU simultaneously. Plus software compilation/incremental recompilation and single-core-but-cpu-hogging nodejs crap, Java-based IDEs running and too many Chrome tabs open. So... sort-of ideal for multiple cores, but I assume task scheduling will queue it nicely on fewer cores.

And occasional LOTRO gaming sessions. But RSI normally permits work or gaming but not both, so work wins.

Edit: at work on a BH so doing some monitoring. While my current CPU (i5-4590) is maxing out, so is the SSD according to Resource Monitor

Edit 2: **%$ knows what Resource Monitor is saying about the SSD. The numbers don't make sense.

 

[pcuser]

Some benches here:
https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-amd_ryzen_9_5900x-1748-vs-amd_ryzen_9_3900x-931

 

[philo-sofa]

Get the 5900X if you can afford it. The improvement is worth it.

 

[Dallies]

It's basically for 4k gaming. The only other thing the pc is ever used for is watching tele oh and recording gaming. I'm going to sell my 3070 and get a 3080. I can get the GPU and a 3900x and a motherboard for 2k which is already over budget. I'm not looking for 100+FPS just a smooth 60fps will do nicely.

Thanks.

 

[jigger]

I’d personally take 5900X, but either system should hit 60FPS.

 

[alec]

Work - software development. I have multiple VMs running, plus Docker containers if I can't avoid them, and they need CPU simultaneously. Plus software compilation/incremental recompilation and single-core-but-cpu-hogging nodejs crap, Java-based IDEs running and too many Chrome tabs open. So... sort-of ideal for multiple cores, but I assume task scheduling will queue it nicely on fewer cores

A third option: go for 5800X.
It will be equal or faster compared to 3900X in multithreaded work (extra IPC cancels out extra cores), equal to 5900X in single threaded.

Looking at your use case, I would go for more/faster memory, 32GB or 64GB DDR4-3600. Could make a big difference.

 

[Quartz]

Work - software development. I have multiple VMs running, plus Docker containers if I can't avoid them, and they need CPU simultaneously.

A fourth option: Threadripper Pro if you have the money. That will let those VMs and containers breath.

 

[pcuser]

Get the 5900X if you can afford it. The improvement is worth it.

Second that.