New CPU choice.

[MaXxBoulton]

I'd question how it is better, even if you run the CPU with MCE on an all cores at 4.1GHz that is still slower than an R5 3600 which will do 4.2GHz all-core, and we already know that the IPC in a clock for clock comparison situation puts the Zen2 architecture ahead, so I think you may have sold yourself a false truth there.

So if you run cinebench, win zip or rar all day your right the ryzen cpu is better

We all know hardware unboxed as been criticized for its load of crap testing. I would like to see the clock speeds during testing and ram speeds, the box cool with the 9400f is not good like they said, its poo the cpu will throttle, if you enable mce with a box cooler in would think you will be around stock clocks or lower all the time, I have a cooler on order I can post up some number before and after fitting if you want.

Box cooler is same as with the old i3's.. trying to cool 6cores.

 

[MaXxBoulton]

Ryzen 4000 launching in 2020 will likely still be on the AM4 socket since AMD says they will support the socket into 2020. Also DDR5 will probably be available to servers and such first before arriving to the mainstream market.

It's just a refresh though. Not a new cpu AMD said there will be a zen2+. And if things stay the same I will see 14nm+++, ++++, +++++, +++++++++s on the 1151 socket hahaha

 

[Poneros]

I think in the end you didn't make a bad choice considering the price, if you're positioning for a big upgrade once DDR5 et al hits (which is the real upgrade for really long term longevity).

 

[jigger]

I think in the end you didn't make a bad choice considering the price, if you're positioning for a big upgrade once DDR5 et al hits (which is the real upgrade for really long term longevity).

Is more about lower density. I think DDR4 and 5 will have a long crossover.

 

[Journey]

So if you run cinebench, win zip or rar all day your right the ryzen cpu is better

You literally missed the whole point, the R5 3600 runs at 4.2GHz, the 9400F runs at 4.1GHz, the 9400F has worse IPC, on a clock for clock basis. Please come back to me and explain what part of that statement is not true.

We all know hardware unboxed as been criticized for its load of crap testing. I would like to see the clock speeds during testing and ram speeds, the box cool with the 9400f is not good like they said, its poo the cpu will throttle, if you enable mce with a box cooler in would think you will be around stock clocks or lower all the time, I have a cooler on order I can post up some number before and after fitting if you want.

Don't really care, I edited my post as that video was uploaded 40 mins after my original comment, completely by chance. I was linking it to further show that you made a choice, and it wasn't the optimal one really.

As for the box cooler comment, they are 65w CPU's and the 'crappy' box cooler does fine at keeping it below 100°C TJunction even when pushing all core at 4.1GHz believe it or not 6 cores at that speed is not that high a power draw/useage for the 14nm++, the only difference is it will be loud.

Oh, you also wanted to know about the RAM speed? Well if you'd actually bothered to read or listed it was stated Z390 with 16GB 3200MHz RAM at CL14 on both platforms.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I think you made the right choice, especially getting the i5 at a bargain.

https://i.imgur.com/cwWOj95.jpg

He did say, though, that the i5 was not as smooth as the R5.

Spoiler

In the games they tested the Ryzen 5 2600 was about the same as the Core i5 9400F,and unlike in the US the Ryzen 5 2600 is cheaper here.

The two games which stuttered with the Core i5 9400F were BFV and Kingdom Come Deliverance,and I checked and some other people get the same issues.

We all know hardware unboxed as been criticized for its load of crap testing. I would like to see the clock speeds during testing and ram speeds, the box cool with the 9400f is not good like they said, its poo the cpu will throttle, if you enable mce with a box cooler in would think you will be around stock clocks or lower all the time, I have a cooler on order I can post up some number before and after fitting if you want.

Box cooler is same as with the old i3's.. trying to cool 6cores.

The Ryzen 5 2600 and Ryzen 5 3600 comes with the Wraith Stealth which is a thin aluminium heatsink which also comes with the Ryzen 5 2200G quad core.

This is what it looks like:
https://i.imgur.com/PPB8bmR.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/lGJ92Pw.jpg

The Wraith Spire does cost £5 on OcUK,so its not too much of an extra cost to get a much better cooler.

Spoiler

Better cooling will also cause the Ryzen 5 CPUs to boost higher too,as the Ryzen 5 3600 can boost upto 4.2GHZ but only stays at 4GHZ under heavy load. Its not like HUB are testing under better conditions for the Ryzen 5 3600.

Here is a video testing the Core i5 9400F with its stock cooler and liquid cooling:

It stays at a stable 3.905GHZ in the games tested with both forms of cooling and there is no fluctuations.

Here is a similar test,with the Ryzen 5 3600:

The clockspeed fluctuates between 3.975GHZ and 4.05GHZ,but it seems the average clockspeed is slightly above 4GHZ,as the CPU can't maintain 4.05GHZ for that long,and the better cooling gives you upto 100MHZ more clockspeed. This is not with PBO or any form of overclocking involved.

Even if you were to fix the cores of the Core i5 9400F at 4.1GHZ with all cores boost and better cooling,its only 200MHZ extra,which is close to the 150MHZ~200MHZ extra you get with the Ryzen 5 3600 if you use PBO with better cooling.

 

[MaXxBoulton]

You literally missed the whole point, the R5 3600 runs at 4.2GHz, the 9400F runs at 4.1GHz, the 9400F has worse IPC, on a clock for clock basis. Please come back to me and explain what part of that statement is not true.

9400f as a worse ipc.. but uses less power and is neck and neck in all none AMD games.

My system play game and movie's nothing more.
It turns on and runs. Xmp works at 3800mhz cl14. No bios problems. Drivers are all ok.

Amd having any problems right now? All the b450 board working well(the one I was told to buy is been very good.... I love that amd gave the b450(Am4)more life and not relisted a new board, 450Max? Oooh that must be the future proofing of am4) Bios been a pain in the ass?

 

[jigger]

9400f as a worse ipc.. but uses less power and is neck and neck in all none AMD games.

My system play game and movie's nothing more.
It turns on and runs. Xmp works at 3800mhz cl14. No bios problems. Drivers are all ok.

Amd having any problems right now? All the b450 board working well(the one I was told to buy is been very good.... I love that amd gave the b450(Am4)more life and not relisted a new board, 450Max? Oooh that must be the future proofing of am4) Bios been a pain in the ass?

I’ve just put together 4 systems and zero problems so far. Will be doing another three this week. X370, B350 and X570. At that point I will have used every chipset apart from A320 at least once.

 

[Journey]

9400f as a worse ipc.. but uses less power and is neck and neck in all none AMD games.

So you agree the 9400F is slower, as it is 4.1GHz and has lower IPC while the R5 3600 is faster and has better IPC.

Again I don't give two hoots what you bought, but no need to resort to purchase justification to defend that purchase. You bought what suited you at the price, but it was not the optimal setup moving forward.

 

[MaXxBoulton]

So you agree the 9400F is slower, as it is 4.1GHz and has lower IPC while the R5 3600 is faster and has better IPC.

yes, but for my needs the CPU's run neck and neck.

You bought what suited you at the price, but it was not the optimal setup moving forward.

why? really i am asking why and not been a smart ass, why do you think its not?

in the programs i run the 2CPU's are neck and neck on performance.
in the programs i run the intel use's about 33% less power.
in the programs i run the intel CPU is better optimized(for now)

future proofing, i can but a 9900k(or what ever 14nm++++++ brings).

 

[marms]

I think you made the right choice, especially getting the i5 at a bargain.

https://i.imgur.com/cwWOj95.jpg

He did say, though, that the i5 was not as smooth as the R5

If you look at the benchmark image it shows the 3600 is 17% faster than the 9400f in games, the 9400f is equal in gaming to a 1600x

 

[Journey]

yes, but for my needs the CPU's run neck and neck.

If you happen to not use many applications or games that use the extra speed, and you are bottle necked by the GPU then yes, and it remains true only while your usage doesn't change and the application and games do not change.

why? really i am asking why and not been a smart ass, why do you think its not?

If you'd have argued against the R5 2600(x) then I'd say you made the right choice, no questions asked. The 9400F is hobbled by the lack of HT, and the fact that it is on a dead end socket, which brings me to your last point.

future proofing, i can but a 9900k(or what ever 14nm++++++ brings).

You'll be able to put a 9900K in it if you have a good Z390 board to get the most from it, and that is it. There are going to be no more CPU's on the 1151 socket, which is one of those things you have to accept with the platform if you are buying into it now.


At the end of the day it makes no difference to me, but try and look at it objectively rather than at a frozen point in time where nothing ever changes.
Anyhow enjoy your system I am sure you'll love it, and you won't notice any difference for the time being (as you said).