A 4930k @ 4.5Ghz vs i9 series how many more FPS will I get ?

[Turtle Rig]

Going to a 10980XE and Aorus Master x299x when they come out.  My question is how much more FPS will I gain with a 10980XE or 9900kS.  For example playing certain parts of map and lots of action Quake Champions goes to 105 ish then jump up to 140 then 128 fps.  Putting in a new mobo cpu and ram how much more FPS will I get, as I am really curious.  Thank you

[emosun]

28 minutes ago, Turtle Rig said:

playing certain parts of map and lots of action Quake Champions goes to 105 ish then jump up to 140 then 128

thats would have a lot more to due with server lag and other player lag than any sort of local issue. never use online games as some sort of machine benchmark

[Suika]

It'd probably be best to look at GPU and CPU utilization during offline gameplay. I can't imagine a 4930k at 4.5GHz holding back a 2080 by that much, especially if you're playing at a high resolution, but I have no way of confirming that personally.

[Turtle Rig]

19 minutes ago, emosun said:

thats would have a lot more to due with server lag and other player lag than any sort of local issue. never use online games as some sort of machine benchmark

Is there a realm of possibility I get 30fps more in any situation in the map ?  Ive seen RAM tests give 10fps more like a 4000Mhz vs 3200Mhz... So thats 10fps and CPU maybe another 20 more for 30fps more,, or am I dreaming ?

[BiG StroOnZ]

25 minutes ago, Turtle Rig said:

Is there a realm of possibility I get 30fps more in any situation in the map ?  Ive seen RAM tests give 10fps more like a 4000Mhz vs 3200Mhz... So thats 10fps and CPU maybe another 20 more for 30fps more,, or am I dreaming ?

Definitely possible, but it will be on a game by game basis. PCPer did a clock for clock comparison of Sandy Bridge compared to Skylake a few years back and there was a solid 25% increase in IPC. In your case being on an Ivy chip, at most you're looking at 5% more IPC than Sandy (give or take). 

 

 

Here you can see a nearly 51 fps disparity (25% increase) between Sandy arch and Skylake arch (highlighted in red; probably slightly less fps if clocks were equalized, but reality is if you also gain additional clockspeed with an upgrade you might as well tie that to the overall performance increase)

 

 

In your case, you will also see gains related to core and thread count increases as well; maybe even clockspeed gains if you can overclock higher than 4.5GHz (and of course if the game engine in question takes advantage of such increases). 

[Turtle Rig]

13 minutes ago, BiG StroOnZ said:

Definitely possible, but it will be on a game by game basis. PCPer did a clock for clock comparison of Sandy Bridge compared to Skylake a few years back and there was a solid 25% increase in IPC. In your case being on an Ivy chip, at most you're looking at 5% more IPC than Sandy (give or take). 

 

Here you can see a nearly 51 fps disparity (25% increase) between Sandy arch and Skylake arch (highlighted in red; probably slightly less fps if clocks were equalized, but reality is if you also gain additional clockspeed with an upgrade you might as well tie that to the overall performance increase)

 

 

 

In your case, you will also see gains related to core and thread count increases as well; maybe even clockspeed gains if you can overclock higher than 4.5GHz (and of course if the game engine in question takes advantage of such increases). 

Thank you soo much for that chart.  I really appreciated.  Looks like I could gain about 30 fps more after looking at this chart.  Also the 10980XE will be clocked at 4.8Ghz just fyi...

[BiG StroOnZ]

2 minutes ago, Turtle Rig said:

Thank you soo much for that chart.  I really appreciated.  Looks like I could gain about 30 fps more after looking at this chart.  Also the 10980XE will be clocked at 4.8Ghz just fyi...

 

You're very welcome! I also found the clock for clock PCPer benchmark, and added it to my post in case you missed it.

[schwellmo92]

6 out of your last 11 topics have been about the 10980XE, bro you need to chill

 

If you want utmost FPS it’s the 9900K. If you want an insane amount of cores it’s TR3 or if you want something in between its 3900X/3950X.

[Turtle Rig]

3 minutes ago, schwellmo92 said:

6 out of your last 11 topics have been about the 10980XE, bro you need to chill

 

If you want utmost FPS it’s the 9900K. If you want an insane amount of cores it’s TR3 or if you want something in between its 3900X/3950X.

I apologize.  My system has been messed up for almost 3 years.  I get crashes everyday and no signal crashes,  WIth 3 video cards.  I work around it couple crashes a day and forget about gaming.  So I am desperatly in need of a system.  I just want to get something that will last time 8 to 10 years.  Will a 8 core be future proof for many years to come.  Or will 10980XE be future proof with all those cores.  Or 3950x be future proof many years from now... That is my concern.

[schwellmo92]

5 minutes ago, Turtle Rig said:

I apologize.  My system has been messed up for almost 3 years.  I get crashes everyday and no signal crashes,  WIth 3 video cards.  I work around it couple crashes a day and forget about gaming.  So I am desperatly in need of a system.  I just want to get something that will last time 8 to 10 years.  Will a 8 core be future proof for many years to come.  Or will 10980XE be future proof with all those cores.  Or 3950x be future proof many years from now... That is my concern.

3950X would be more “future proof” due to PCI-E 4.0 IMO and would also run cooler. The only reason you may choose the 10980XE is if you need tons of expansion that relies on PCI-E. The 3950X has fewer faster lanes and the 10980XE has more slower lanes. My only concern with the 10980XE in like 5 years time would be if devices saturate the PCI-E 3.0 x 16 slot which is only likely to be a graphics card requiring that amount of bandwidth.

[Turtle Rig]

1 minute ago, schwellmo92 said:

3950X would be more “future proof” due to PCI-E 4.0 IMO and would also run cooler. The only reason you may choose the 10980XE is if you need tons of expansion that relies on PCI-E. The 3950X has fewer faster lanes and the 10980XE has more slower lanes. My only concern with the 10980XE in like 5 years time would be if devices saturate the PCI-E 3.0 x 16 slot which is only likely to be a graphics card requiring that amount of bandwidth.

Thank you for that detailed explanation I appreciate it big time.  I hear you about the PCI 3.0 then the 3080 or 4080 is PCIe 4.0 Im faked.  I think Im gonna get the 3950x but I still wouldnt't mind seeing the 10980XE benchmarks at 4.8Ghz before I make my decision.  But not having PCIe 4.0 is not good for a future video card.. sighs. I on't know why install is hellbent on PCIe 3.0 and 4.0 have no speed difference,,, that is what Intel says.  Yet they said the will hae specs of PCIe 6.0 .. lol that is many years away. sighs.  But if a 4080 comes out as PCIe 4.0 I might be screwed your right...

[BiG StroOnZ]

1 hour ago, Turtle Rig said:

I apologize.  My system has been messed up for almost 3 years.  I get crashes everyday and no signal crashes,  WIth 3 video cards.  I work around it couple crashes a day and forget about gaming.  So I am desperatly in need of a system.  I just want to get something that will last time 8 to 10 years.  Will a 8 core be future proof for many years to come.  Or will 10980XE be future proof with all those cores.  Or 3950x be future proof many years from now... That is my concern.

 

Well, first and foremost. If you are experiencing problems with a current build - while the easy way out is always to build a new rig. It is sometimes best to troubleshoot with the current rig before you do anything. If this requires testing various setups/configurations, and replacing parts piece by piece (that isn't Motherboard, CPU); this is something to be considered before building an entirely new rig, as you might find out in the end you really don't need to upgrade (because you might have been leaving performance on the table because of the occurring malfunction).

 

Reality of the situation is, that there are many parts involved with a computer that allows it to function, and sadly, one faulty component can cause a multitude of issues. If you do build a new rig, and for instance, you plan on carrying over some or most of those old parts to the new rig. Wherein, that faulty component causing issues with the first rig is still present; the obvious issue is that it will continue to cause the same problem with the new build, and thus, you are back to square one. Even worse, depending on how many parts from the old rig you carry over to the new rig, might result in even more frustration, because you still won't even know which one it is that is causing the problem in the first place. Resulting in the replacement of parts one by one anyway (process of elimination).

 

Now onto the original topic. Future proofing is really dependent on the needs of the user. Many people will be fine with a CPU, Motherboard, and Memory configuration/combination for 7-10 years. Maybe upgrading the video card 2-3 times as time progresses, or expanding storage and memory as they see fit. Most of the CPUs available today will be more than fine for 8-10 years, and would require the majority of users to only upgrade their GPUs as needed. On AM4, you have tons of great options, that are more than capable; with superb expandability if necessary. 9900k or 9900ks are absolute gaming monsters, but realistically on a completely dead end platform (somewhat unimportant if you aren't planning on upgrading for 8 years anyway). 10980XE, again, more than adequate as you can see from the benchmark I posted also displaying the performance of its predecessor - the 7980XE (9980XE). And while prices will be better on Cascade Lake, the obvious concern for most people. Is that for the money, AMD's offerings are considerately better; which is why the 3900x or 3950x are better choices for upper echelon chips (and the upcoming new Threadripper parts as well). Then, not even mentioned, is also the approaching Comet Lake chips from Intel. That are going to be a better value than what we see currently, and on an entirely new platform.

 

Coming back again full circle, is, regardless of what you go with. Nearly all of the choices mentioned will easily last 8 years without even touching the CPU (especially the choices you seem to be interested in and have been recommended). Unless what you use your computer for changes, and the amount of processing power you need changes. The majority of users out there are able to keep a CPU and its corresponding platform for substantially longer than something like a GPU. In this instance, I feel the best advice given is to always get the absolute best you can afford to get (meaning within your budget). This allows for the future proofing concern to be less of an issue. The better parts you get initially when you purchase them, means the less upgrades you have to do later on down the road. 

[Mister Woof]

Brb let me get my crystal ball

[Turtle Rig]

2 hours ago, BiG StroOnZ said:

 

Well, first and foremost. If you are experiencing problems with a current build - while the easy way out is always to build a new rig. It is sometimes best to troubleshoot with the current rig before you do anything. If this requires testing various setups/configurations, and replacing parts piece by piece (that isn't Motherboard, CPU); this is something to be considered before building an entirely new rig, as you might find out in the end you really don't need to upgrade (because you might have been leaving performance on the table because of the occurring malfunction).

 

Reality of the situation is, that there are many parts involved with a computer that allows it to function, and sadly, one faulty component can cause a multitude of issues. If you do build a new rig, and for instance, you plan on carrying over some or most of those old parts to the new rig. Wherein, that faulty component causing issues with the first rig is still present; the obvious issue is that it will continue to cause the same problem with the new build, and thus, you are back to square one. Even worse, depending on how many parts from the old rig you carry over to the new rig, might result in even more frustration, because you still won't even know which one it is that is causing the problem in the first place. Resulting in the replacement of parts one by one anyway (process of elimination).

 

Now onto the original topic. Future proofing is really dependent on the needs of the user. Many people will be fine with a CPU, Motherboard, and Memory configuration/combination for 7-10 years. Maybe upgrading the video card 2-3 times as time progresses, or expanding storage and memory as they see fit. Most of the CPUs available today will be more than fine for 8-10 years, and would require the majority of users to only upgrade their GPUs as needed. On AM4, you have tons of great options, that are more than capable; with superb expandability if necessary. 9900k or 9900ks are absolute gaming monsters, but realistically on a completely dead end platform (somewhat unimportant if you aren't planning on upgrading for 8 years anyway). 10980XE, again, more than adequate as you can see from the benchmark I posted also displaying the performance of its predecessor - the 7980XE (9980XE). And while prices will be better on Cascade Lake, the obvious concern for most people. Is that for the money, AMD's offerings are considerately better; which is why the 3900x or 3950x are better choices for upper echelon chips (and the upcoming new Threadripper parts as well). Then, not even mentioned, is also the approaching Comet Lake chips from Intel. That are going to be a better value than what we see currently, and on an entirely new platform.

 

Coming back again full circle, is, regardless of what you go with. Nearly all of the choices mentioned will easily last 8 years without even touching the CPU (especially the choices you seem to be interested in and have been recommended). Unless what you use your computer for changes, and the amount of processing power you need changes. The majority of users out there are able to keep a CPU and its corresponding platform for substantially longer than something like a GPU. In this instance, I feel the best advice given is to always get the absolute best you can afford to get (meaning within your budget). This allows for the future proofing concern to be less of an issue. The better parts you get initially when you purchase them, means the less upgrades you have to do later on down the road. 

The motherboard is shot,,  I couldnt boot up etting red light on CPU and or RAM ,, then say ram is bad,, ever since then problrms and I bought my motheroard used ad it came out to have issue.  I need a new system trust me there no fixinf this problem. I put everting st stock defaults and same thing,, hardware is ad its ok Im geting a new system soon.