which is best for me ryzen 1950x vs i7 8700k

james_2k · 21 Mar 2018 at 17:09

indeed, or like yourself, the dacia.

7900 was the top cpu whern i bought it, i dont mind spending money, i do mind wasting it which upgrading would be.

looking at getting a titan z to replace my 1080 though so maybe im full of it

gavinh87 · 21 Mar 2018 at 17:09

james_2k said:
indeed, or like yourself, the dacia

humbug · 21 Mar 2018 at 17:11

What? that's all good

james_2k · 21 Mar 2018 at 17:13

haha, hey its reliable and will get you to your destination, what more do you need. my boxter may just get there quicker!

will get hotter and cost more in petrol though but hey!

Rroff · 21 Mar 2018 at 17:14

humbug said:
you also have to pay Intel another £200 for NVMe Raid

You only have to pay if you want the VROC features (and bootable NVME RAID) - you can still do it through the IRST controller as per normal without paying.

On the other hand since I last posted on this AMD have announced bootable NVME RAID on systems using ThreadRipper.

james_2k · 21 Mar 2018 at 17:15

there is no doubt amd is the value proposition. hopefully intels scalping days are numbered.

humbug · 21 Mar 2018 at 17:28

Rroff said:
You only have to pay if you want the VROC features (and bootable NVME RAID) - you can still do it through the IRST controller as per normal without paying.

On the other hand since I last posted on this AMD have announced bootable NVME RAID on systems using ThreadRipper.

A few weeks after launch. and with VRoc on Intel it only works on Intel drives.

Add to that Threadripper also has a lot more PCIe lanes, so higher bandwidth, 44 vs 64, Der8ouer got about 28GB/s storage performance, that's the highest possible so far.

@james_2k , its more than just Value, Threadripper is higher performance per cost, its also more fully features full stop and more efficient, as all rounders they are just better.

james_2k · 21 Mar 2018 at 17:33

humbug said:
@james_2k , its more than just Value, Threadripper is higher performance per cost, its also more fully features full stop and more efficient, as all rounders they are just better.

not for what i use it for, its behind in anything with less than 20 threads.

humbug · 21 Mar 2018 at 17:42

james_2k said:
not for what i use it for, its behind in anything with less than 20 threads.

For your very specific needs perhaps not, it doesn't change the fact that for what they are designed for its faster, better, fuller equipped.

Hell AMD's mainstream CPU's are not that far behind it, my £150 Ryzen is more than 60% as fast.

james_2k · 21 Mar 2018 at 17:45

humbug said:
For your very specific needs perhaps not, it doesn't change the fact that for what they are designed for its faster, better, fuller equipped.

Hell AMD's mainstream CPU's are not that far behind it, my £150 Ryzen is more than 60% as fast.

i don't disagree.

well i dont think your cpu is 60% as fast as mine at its current clocks, but there we go

Vince · 21 Mar 2018 at 17:57

I' buy the 1950x of the two, in fact I put my money where my mouth is and that is exactly what I did. Do I regret it? Not even a little bit, 1950x is an absolute monster and will handle everything you throw at it with room in the tank. Mind you if it's primarily for gaming you might get a few frames less at low res but who buys a 1950x and plays at 1080. At 4k (The great leveler) there really is little between the two in terms of fps so then your down to features/support and amd have this sewn up.

james_2k · 21 Mar 2018 at 18:01

4k schmoreK, 21:9 3440x1440p @ 100+ hz is where its at.

regardless, glad you are happy with your decision, so am i and also put my money were my mouth was. and the world keeps turning.

humbug · 21 Mar 2018 at 18:02

james_2k said:
4k schmoreK, 21:9 3440x1440p @ 100+ hz is where its at.

regardless, glad you are happy with your decision, so am i and also put my money were my mouth was. and the world keeps turning.

Hey you started this crap

james_2k · 21 Mar 2018 at 18:04

humbug said:
Hey you started this crap

no i just pointed out that amd should be paying you! you brought up my cpu ;-)

humbug · 21 Mar 2018 at 18:05

james_2k said:
no i just pointed out that amd should be paying you! you brought up my cpu

I wish they were, i'd like a 1950X of my own.

james_2k · 21 Mar 2018 at 18:06

haha, honestly you should have one, i'm sure you have made many many sales for them, seriously!

WhereHere1 · 21 Mar 2018 at 21:00

So if I purchased an i7 or 1950x, say in another 5 years, would the threadripper be better at games?because it can use more cores on the game? Or does it not work like that?

james_2k · 21 Mar 2018 at 22:25

May do. But I doubt it will be a few years. Probably more due to the consoles which although quite threaded aren’t nearly as fast in cpu terms as any of these CPU’s. In most cpu demanding games it’s still mainly ghz over cores.

Rroff · 21 Mar 2018 at 22:53

WhereHere1 said:
So if I purchased an i7 or 1950x, say in another 5 years, would the threadripper be better at games?because it can use more cores on the game? Or does it not work like that?

TBH there is no real way to know.

There is an inherent problem with games though that it is very hard to thread certain parts of them - but if a future game or popular engine used by came out that used massive amount of cores for advanced AI, full sound physics, full on environmental physics, etc. that could completely change the story.

james_2k · 21 Mar 2018 at 22:58

a simulation game most likely, one not bound by consoles. ironically though the current flight sims are all about single or double thread performance.