3900X or 3700X, even if you just game, because of the significant multicore advantage (whereas 5% gaming gap using a 2080 Ti @ 1080p is totally negligible) as well as longer platform longevity, lower power draw under load, and cheaper prices (considering the decent included coolers) of the Ryzen CPUs.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
9900k vs 3900x vs 3800x vs 3700x
- Thread starter Darr2cool78
- Start date
- Joined
- 28 May 2008
- Posts
- 346
Thanks all for the great replies, after much thinking have decided to go for the 3700x and I can always grab a 3900x or 3950x? (or will this one be a different socket?) later down the line if I am feeling fancy 
thanks again!
EDIT: I just saw on the website that 3900x is due in 8th August? Does this mean that there will be stock for all, or more likely just some to cover people waiting in the queue?
thanks again!EDIT: I just saw on the website that 3900x is due in 8th August? Does this mean that there will be stock for all, or more likely just some to cover people waiting in the queue?
Deleted member 209350
Deleted member 209350
You will definitely notice a performance increase in gaming, but the real benefit is the HUGE difference you notice in multithreaded workloads.
Though when considering a 3900x or 3950x, I do need to ask, what do you use your machine for? If its mainly for gaming and nothing else its better you save some money and go for the 3700x. If you create content and render, then by all means go for one of the other ones
Assuming you are gaming on the (1440p) Asus monitor & GTX 1080 in your sig then the difference will be either nil or so small that it won't be noticeable outside of benchmarks.
With a RTX 2080Ti the difference might be more noticeable, but with a 1080 you will be more than likely GPU bound in most scenarios.
A 4.6Ghz 8c/16t Haswell-E CPU isn't exactly a slouch.
Productivity you would notice a decent bump, especially with the 3900x.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,179
5960x will be more then capable, your GPU mentioned, The 2080 Super will usually be the limit thanks to visual quality and pixel count, that or you will be at 60 FPS (and I am assuming this is not the higher refresh rate 4k panels otherwise a 2080Ti should be on the radar). 5960x, more so at 4.6 GHz will not have an issue pushing 60 FPS. Sure in synthetics it may fall behind and similarly for productivity, but for 4k gaming, it will not often be the limit in pushing 60FPS.
sorry to ask this but what do amd have to do. Amd 3900x is a much better cpu in every area. But 1 limited scope and that 1080p gaming with a 2080ti. And even then the 3900x is within 5% of that so even going for a 3900x for gaming it’s still the clear choice.
very few people will notice the difference between a 3900x and 9900k with in many games and even less will actually own. A 2080ti and game at hd 1080p 1440p and 4K with a modern main stream gpu 2060 to 2080 let’s say the difference is non exsistance as with most games (ones that don’t just favour intel anyhow ) and currently on OCUK the i9 9900k is more then I paid for my 3900x
amd charge you more because it has more cores. And the performance of it for a cpu is way above intel i9 9900k. You give advice from such a warped view intel 8700k was faster single core then the 1700x but had less cores intel made the mighty 9900k and made a new mainstream skew to sell it at such a higher price then the 2700x was it faster yes was it worth the massive premium over the 2700x for same cores same threads (I will let other people answer that one )
it’s a simple fact that the 3900x is a better cpu allround then the 9900k now if your in the limited scope of people who own a 2080ti and game at 1080p then I feel sorry for you I really do but for everyone else the 3900x and 3700x and 3600 are better choices then the intel counterparts at there current prices although I must admit the 9900k at 400 pounds it was at one time is very tempting but at current prices amd are better choice
Last edited:
Get the Ryzen 3 series as there's some stock shortages on the 3900x and some people are having some issues but both will get solved in time.
The potential to also upgrade to a Ryzen 4xxx series at a later date is also a massive thing as it seems the z370/z390 isnt going anywhere.
The potential to also upgrade to a Ryzen 4xxx series at a later date is also a massive thing as it seems the z370/z390 isnt going anywhere.
Seen the 9900kf @ lowest £429.00. The 9900k is not worth £500 and I don't understand why it's over this price on overclockers. I could list the websites were you can get the 9900kf cheaper. No one that I know cares about the iGPU. The fastest CPU is the 3900k overall and will age better in the games to come. Also the 9900kf is likely to overclock higher than the 9900k but you can't get it via overclockers. You also have to turn HT off on the 9900k if you care about being safe and secure which hammers it multi core performance even more. Basically we are talking about the 9700k vs the 3900x, when we talk about the 9900k vs the 3900x. Note new security issues are being found in intel processors https://thenextweb.com/security/201...security-flaw-in-all-modern-intel-processors/ . I don't know why intel cpu's are worth the money they are selling them at. Who in there right mind would buy an insecure cpu, unless it was greatly reduced in price or they were stuck with one and are waiting to upgrade.
DF after their hit job on ryzen3000 with cooling, seriously like nothing happened and this lot are reliable or smth ? You couldn't make it up
If you’re buying now, Ryzen. Easily. If only because there’s still an upgrade path next year on the same motherboard. You could get yourself a 3700 this year and then upgrade to the latest release next, or pick up a cheaper 3900x and double your core count when supply is more plentiful. Performance wise they’re slightly behind on gaming, but there isn’t much in it, and ahead on productivity.
Associate
- Joined
- 13 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 708
For what I need a i9 9900k (cant believe I'm saying this) is the cheaper option, plus I can actually get one.... I game I do nothing else so my opinion is going to be on gaming not "productivity" I can literally plonk the I9 straight in my existing kit and off I go, I don't need to worry about changing motherboards,memory or psu. Is the 3900x better than an I9 overall?? it probably is but the I9 is actually cheaper (worlds gone mad)if having the best was the choice for "overall" I wouldn't be buying either of them. AMD for me to choose everything need to be better and cheaper and a lot less niche. In niche I mean you look up AMD on the forums you get , you need this memory, this revision of bios, these drivers, it's hotter runs wore wattage etc etc, most people ergo "me" just want to plug sh^t in and start gaming, I don;t want to be spending an afternoon of valuable "free time" just trying to get the thing to boot up and or not make the lights flickers outside of an evening.
All I need to change is the cpu if I stay with intel, if I come away from intel, I definately need to change motherboard and processor, I "might" have to change the Cooling system and memory on top of that. You actually think the majority of "gamers" are on 1440p or 4k? I would be surprised if it's even 40% most likely around 20%
Last edited:
For any GPU lesser than RTX2080Ti and resolution higher than 1080p the 9900K is a pointless CPU for the price. You can get a 3600X or 3700X for that matter. Or what ever is cheaper.
Having always the upgrade path all way to 3950X and the Ryzen 4000 series next year.
The Z390 is dead end and so is it's replacement next year. Because 2021 both Intel & AMD will have DDR5 PCIe 5.0 motherboards.
Except if you plan to play X4 Foundations which needs 10 cores (not simply threads) atm to play it, with more optimizations to support 16 core CPUs coming shortly.
The 3900X is the best overrall CPU on the market right now so I'd get that.
The only 12-core processor on the market that is just 3.8-5% behind the fastest gaming CPU (9900K) and obliterates that in everything else. Draws less power under load despite 4 more cores so far mote efficient, comes with a cooler. Also, 9900K is on a dead-end platform.
The only 12-core processor on the market that is just 3.8-5% behind the fastest gaming CPU (9900K) and obliterates that in everything else. Draws less power under load despite 4 more cores so far mote efficient, comes with a cooler. Also, 9900K is on a dead-end platform.