Dissuade me from buying 9900K

[Jacky60]

I have an upgrade itch I have to scratch. Been rocking a 5960X (4.5Ghz, 4250Ghz cache) 32GB 2750mhz DDR4 for five years and it's still going strong but in the game I play the most (Arma 3 -6000hours) I'm typically getting 40-70 fps and one of my mates with a 9900K at 4.9Ghz/4000mhz 32GB DDR4 is getting 120fps. He's on Ultrawide 3840/1200 I'm at 4K but still the FPS discrepancy is annoying and his in game performance seems to reflect his super high FPS (he's on 2080ti I'm on 1080ti SLI).

ALL of my other games are GPU limited and performance is good enough (tbh performance is good enough in ARMA 3) but for something I've devoted far too much time to I want more FPS. YouTube benchmarks show 3900X being smashed by a 7700K in Arma 3 and I can't see any of the new Ryzens being a good option. My 5960X seems about on par with a 2700X in Arma 3 or possibly/probably even quicker using the YAAB (yet another Arma benchmark) which is about the best benchmark for this game (available in Workshop) The only thing holding me back from buying a 9900K is lack of PCIe lanes for SLI/NVME and the vain hope that AMD
might finally be able to kick Intel's arse sometime soon in this game.
Can anyone with a 3600X/3700X/3800X/3900X please run the Arma 3 YAAB benchmark (hit S when starting for standardised settings) and give me some idea what they get as it only takes 2 mins.
If I get 9900K now it looks like I'll get a significant uplift but I'm loathe to reward Intel's laziness and meanness with PCIE lanes. I've considered the 9700K but that seems like an even more annoying compromise.
Please advise.

 

[Jacky60]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cc074l/performance_report_9900k_vs_3700x_in_arma_3/

tl;dr

His $590 9900K system was 10% better than his $550 3700X system

Thanks I appreciate that, seems to back up what I've seen so far.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cc074l/performance_report_9900k_vs_3700x_in_arma_3/

 

[Jacky60]

Here's another reason to hold off.

Thanks, I'm desperate not to dive in yet but also really hungry for a 30% fps uplift https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-RgwbjypX8

 

[Jacky60]

Depends on your timing.. I have to make a purchase by end of Oct. for tax purposes.

I have pained over the 3700X v the 9900K. The only thing I do that would push either processor is gaming.

I would love to wait until the New Year for the next round of Intel chips, and the B550 mobos from AMD. But I can't wait that long.

So, as I run a silent build (outside of gaming), and I just don't like the fans on X570 (or the actual boards, for those that now support turning the fan off) or the still flaky state of the BIOSes, it's 9900K (of some form) for me. The 9900K still has the edge in gaming (although not by much, and it varies per game - so check the main games you play), and just seems to be a little more mature at this point. NB. I already run a Noctua NH-U12A, so cooling a mildly overclocked 9900K won't be a problem.

Whatever decision you make, you'll be happy with either a 9900k or 3700x.

I certainly won't be happy with a 3700X if a 7700K p*sses all over a 3900X in the one game I care about. I'm pretty sure I'd be livid with that outcome.
Thanks for the 'advice' but I've seen zero evidence that ANY of the new Ryzens can come up to snuff in Arma3. From what I've seen a 5960X at 4.5ghz/4.25ghz cache is about or nearly as quick as
any of the new Ryzens in Arma 3 and a lot of other games.

 

[Jacky60]

Get the 3800x - you will not notice the difference.
You also get a much newer chip, less security problems, less power, less heat produced ect.

I will notice the difference between 70 and 120 fps. The game isn't GPU limited as stated in the OP its CPU limited.

 

[Jacky60]

I would say keep cpu for a while sell both your 1080ti’s and buy a 2080ti have a much stronger gpu will give you better frame rates in games then a new will (that don’t support sli) which a lot of newer games don’t these days.

both you and your friend at chosen Rez of your monitors/tv would get minimal difference between amd and intel though paying extra for small gains the 9900k would give u is not there for you.

I have a 3900x and 2080ti and I game at 1440p 144hz and sometimes at 4K on my tv and in most games the difference between me and my friends is negligible and in greedfall borderlands 3 and code vein in acctully faster then there 9900k and 2080ti systems

but I still say 2080ti and going single card would be your best upgrade

You don't seem to have read the OP the ONLY thing holding me back is my CPU/memory. GTA 5 400 hours ARMA 3 6000+ hours, take a wild guess which I play and care about more! Yeah playing 4K/GTA 5 with 1080ti SLI /2080ti I'd be OK with 3700x/3800x BUT
I already have better than 2080ti performance in GTA5 and my 5960X is far from the limiting factor ergo a 3700X/3800X/3900X would make FA all difference and selling 1080tis for a 2080ti would be a downgrade in games I do play and an upgrade in games I don't play!

 

[Jacky60]

You don't seem to have read the OP the ONLY thing holding me back is my CPU/memory. GTA 5 400 hours ARMA 3 6000+ hours, take a wild guess which I play and care about more! Yeah playing 4K/GTA 5 with 1080ti SLI /2080ti I'd be OK with 3700x/3800x BUT
I already have better than 2080ti performance in GTA5 and my 5960X is far from the limiting factor ergo a 3700X/3800X/3900X would make FA all difference and selling 1080tis for a 2080ti would be a downgrade in games I do play and a downgrade in games I don't play!

I appreciate the good intention, don't get me wrong but your advice makes little sense.

 

[Jacky60]

Does Arma even utilise SLI ? since hes on a 2080ti and lower res I would be looking at that since if you are only using 1x1080ti then straight away he has about 30-35% more GPU power depending on clocks.

I would be tempted to wait for cascade lake and the new threadripper before making the plunge as I can see this as spending quite a bit of money for a disappointing upgrade imo.

Yes it does and quite efficiently too but it's always (unless you have an utterly pants GPU) CPU limited. I can easily max one 1080ti but struggle to max two in highest possible settings 4K with SLI. Both GPUs often get to 60-75%.

 

[Jacky60]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-RgwbjypX8 Here's a 3900X vs 7700K in Arma 3 benchmark. Pretty sure a 9900K at 4.8Ghz-5ghz with 4000 MHz memory (what I'll probs buy) will be a lot quicker than that 7700K. The 3900X with ABBA bios ups may mean a single core on the 3900X can hold 4.4ghz
but I'm not convinced from what I've seen. Seems without custom water useful Ryzen 2 boost clocks are about 200-300mhz below what it says on the box or vanishingly fleeting just to make sure that box is ticked.

 

[Jacky60]

I did read your original post and my advice was different to what you wanted you wanted but I did say if your cpu is not the factor holding you back the. Keep it

but my advice is on my experiance in most recent new release games borderlands 3 greedfall code vein etc all don’t support sli and I don’t see many more supporting it either even amd have dropped crossfire and only 3 or 4 new Nvidia gpu support the new nvlink.

but the other part of it is the newer games my 3900x 2080ti system is acctully faster in the newer games then my group of friends and most have 9900k with 2080ti altho a couple do have 2080 though.

I’m sorry my advice wasn’t good for you it more based on my experiences and I like to give advice based from my experiance and not from websites experiences

Thanks mate I appreciate any opinions/input. I'd be buying 3900X tomorrow if playing newer games and your advice is good advice. I'm clearly going to be playing newer games soon enough and current fps is good enough so depending on COD modern warfare/MS flight sim 2019/20/Cyberpunk 2077 etc I may well stick until early 20/20.
I have the money to up now annoyingly and I worry the cash will be frittered away otherwise.

 

[Jacky60]

And RAM. Old games like Arma 3, Crysis 3, Hitman or those base on the Total War engine, see up to 36% perf increase between XMP 3200Mhz and 3800C16 with IF 1900 and tight timings.
That perf gain cannot be obtained even if the Ryzen 3000 operated at 5.3Ghz.

Yeah that's the annoying thing, I really wanted Ryzen 2 and I just bought 32GB Patriot 4000mhz which is tomorrow going to be looking for a home. Newer games that use SLI I'm fine and even those that don't are bearable. I really don't know what to do, maybe a flight to Thailand!

 

[Jacky60]

It would be nice to see some game benchmarks with an optimised zen2 chip as there does seem to be some major increases there with overclocking.

I sort of agree but from the evidence in Arma 3 its 3800X=6700K. Maybe a little more but in this game AMD have always been a long way behind. It's all single thread, max clock speed max memory speed, newer Intel architecture.

 

[Jacky60]

Personally I’d just go for the 3700X and an X570 Aorus Elite. £500 all in. Keep £200 towards your next GPU upgrade.

Yes but for me that would be very little more than a sidegrade=money spent zero tangible gain where I care.

 

[Jacky60]

Why not the 9700k it's just as good.

Yeah I've seriously considered that it just seems so pathetic and weak to be buying an 8 core without HT and way too few PCIE lanes in 2019. My 5960x will prod me and keep me awake at night with the betrayal.
I'd already have jumped if Intel had a 9900K without the onboard GPU and 40PCIe lanes that could comfortably do 4.8-5ghz WITH HT (for the future, possible video editing etc).

 

[Jacky60]

Because it’s a rubbish overpriced desktop chip and it will send the wrong message to Intel.

That's genuinely a message I can relate to. Intel are and have been turds for ages as have Nvidia and still I have a PC with over £2k of their products. Maybe I'll do something else for a while
as neither deserve my patronage.

 

[Jacky60]

Yea just wait for the new batch in a few months and re-evaluate.

Yes I think I'll have to do that. Here's hoping I can get my new Patriot DDR4 stable on X99!

 

[Jacky60]

No-one should be buying an old 9900K 14nm relic when the 3900X is on the market. The only problem is the 3900X is out of stock constantly.

According to TechPowerUp, the much vaunted 'gaming gap' is 3.8% after all the chipset drivers. They're virtually neck and neck in gaming. Now remember, to witness this 'gap', TPU had to bench with a 2080 Ti @ 1080p. They also use a mix of old and new games in their game bench suite.

It's no contest, 9900K shouldnt even be considered at current prices. Lop £100 off the price and it might be something.

Yes but the gap in the game I play and own a PC for and have devoted 6000+ hours is 30%. 3900X is great in everything except MY primary gaming use hence the OP. I know all that you've quoted and at 4K the difference seems negligible and GPU limited in the vast majority of games
(mostly because they don't test with anything better than 2080ti) but I'm not after a general 'what should I upgrade' bit of advice. In games with 4000Mhz memory the 9900K at peak clock is still 15%-30% faster than the 9900K and my current 5960X 'relic' trades blows with the 3700X/3900X when overclocked.

 

[Jacky60]

You bet right, on two instances average gaming performance has gone up since release. The first with the chipset driver about 2 months back. Secondly, more recently with the boost clock fixes that improved boost behaviour.

Meanwhile, nearly every bench of the 9900K is carried out with no security patches installed which cumulatively slow down performance and then some.

I agree its pathetic not doing the security patches and Ryzen2 can only get better but we're still only looking at 3-5% gains for Ryzen 2 vs 20-30% deficit at both chips (9900K/3800X/3900X) max clocks in Arma 3.

 

[Jacky60]

Out of the bat your mate has better GPU, which matters at high resolutions and also you play on higher resolution. Last time checked the 64bit client of Arma 3 doesn't support SLI.

Secondly. RAM. Arma 3 is a game greatly benefiting from high speed ram. Your RAM speed is pretty low and it would hamper the performance even if you buy a 9900K let alone a Ryzen CPU. First thing to upgrade is get a good 3600C16 ram kit. Dual channel (2 sticks) preferably if you plan to go back to mainstream platform like this.
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/team...3600mhz-dual-channel-kit-black-my-08q-tg.html

However if you want 32GB you can buy GSKILL Trident F4-3466C16D-32GTZ for £150 as I write this message (2 x 16GB sticks).

And that would be my advice atm. Upgrade your ram before anything else and make a decision.

I ordered Patriot DDR4 32GB 4400Mhz earlier today before OP so good advice! It will do for the future and hopefully will make a small difference now (tmrw). I get both cards doing 50% or more so it does support SLI. Not only that but when the GPU/S is at 50-70% and one CPU thread at 98% then that's where the bottleneck is. RAM speed and cache speed also matter a lot as you've stated. As stated earlier I can max one GPU not two and I guess there is a CPU overhead for running SLI although given one thread is already maxed in the game regardless of GPU it's a moot point. Pretty sure the much newer platform makes a difference too and I have no idea of mate's
cache speed (yet).

 

[Jacky60]

3700x @4.4 16GB 3800MHz

Thankyou very much, that's a lot better than I can manage with the 5960X! I typically get 46-50fps in YAAB and it's a good argument for not bothering with 9900K.