Is the 3900x really worth it?

[Sam Joseph]

I've found myself posting here a lot recently due to the "recent" (it's been over a week and its been out of stock forever) release of the 3900x. I've been pretty certain on that being the purchase for my gaming PC (which I use for everything but 75% of the time its gaming), but all I hear is how much better intel is for gaming. I also hear that developers will be better optimizing for more cores in the next three years to bolster the new Ryzen cores. What would you more educated people do? Any opinions are welcomed.

[Mira Yurizaki]

I'd look at what options I can afford, figure out what I'd like to do with the PC, find as many benchmarks that are representative of what I want to do on said hardware, and make a decision based on that.

[Metallus97]

R9 for only Gaming? NOOOOOOOOOOOO (I want it to, bcause it is badass but makes ZERO SENSE! Get a better GPU form the saved money)

R5 is the sweetspot there

R7 when willing to spend some money and have a suuper nice one.

 

Some "real work" rendering, video editing, streaming etc...: R7

 

Intel: Dont buy  for pure gaming they are a little bit faster in some games, but with everything else Ryzen 2 kicks Intel in the B..ls.

 

Also for gaming an "consumer stuf": get a x470 Mobo with your Ryzen 2. I am 99,9% certain you won't need PCIe 4.0

[Princess Luna]

Not for gaming it is not... the R5 3600 is the value king for gaming, like stated the 3700X is nice if you can comfortably afford it.

 

Intel only makes sense if money is of no concern and you'll game at 1080p which is more CPU bound, then you can grab the i7 9700K.

[Metallus97]

Just now, Princess Luna said:

Intel only makes sense if money is of no concern and you'll game at 1080p which is more CPU bound, then you can grab the i7 9700K.

This is correct for sure, but would still remind Ryzen in this situation. The performance increase will only be there in some games and not be much. to be frank: with the right GPU OP won't even notice it. Therefor Ryzen, because everything else will be faster then

[Metallus97]

-fail, sry-

[MeatFeastMan]

If I was only gaming, the 3600 or 3700x are the best buys. 3700x gives you that extra bit of futureproofing.

 

HOWEVER, the battle between the 3700x and 9700k is fierce. If you are a gamer and you want to watercool your PC or get a high end air cooler(That removes the point of the AMD box cooler), then you'll find the 9700k edges out the 3700x in gaming alone. But the 9700k does have flaws, because of the lack of threads. 8 threads will end up causing major stutters in games as they start to optimize for 16 threads, and that isn't very far away. That's why, in my opinion at least, the 3700x is still the better buy.

 

If you're happy to use the 3700x box cooler (And most should be because it gets the job done pretty comfortably), then the 3700x is BY FAR the better buy over the 9700k.

 

Currently the gaming sweetspot is the Ryzen 5 3600 + RX 5700 non-XT.

 

In my eyes, the 9900k is dead. Nobody should be buying that. You're a gamer? Buy the 3600,3700x or 9700k. You do other work? Buy the 3700x or 3900x depending on how much horsepower you need. To me, the 3700x gives the best of both worlds while having great value. No other processor on the market does that really.

[Metallus97]

1 minute ago, MeatFeastMan said:

If I was only gaming, the 3600 or 3700x are the best buys. 3700x gives you that extra bit of futureproofing.

 

HOWEVER, the battle between the 3700x and 9700k is fierce. If you are a gamer and you want to watercool your PC or get a high end air cooler(That removes the point of the AMD box cooler), then you'll find the 9700k edges out the 3700x in gaming alone. But the 9700k does have flaws, because of the lack of threads. 8 threads will end up causing major stutters in games as they start to optimize for 16 threads, and that isn't very far away. That's why, in my opinion at least, the 3700x is still the better buy.

 

If you're happy to use the 3700x box cooler (And most should be because it gets the job done pretty comfortably), then the 3700x is BY FAR the better buy over the 9700k.

 

Currently the gaming sweetspot is the Ryzen 5 3600 + RX 5700 non-XT.

 

In my eyes, the 9900k is dead. Nobody should be buying that. You're a gamer? Buy the 3600,3700x or 9700k. You do other work? Buy the 3700x or 3900x depending on how much horsepower you need.

yahhh 9900k is dead period. But the 9700k makes so little sense to me!

Compare the benefits in Gaming over Ryzen to the benefits in everything else. In my mind you cant notice the few FPs extra you get in some games to the huge improvements in more multicore scenarios and tasks 

[Tom H]

16 minutes ago, Sam Joseph said:

I've found myself posting here a lot recently due to the "recent" (it's been over a week and its been out of stock forever) release of the 3900x. I've been pretty certain on that being the purchase for my gaming PC (which I use for everything but 75% of the time its gaming), but all I hear is how much better intel is for gaming. I also hear that developers will be better optimizing for more cores in the next three years to bolster the new Ryzen cores. What would you more educated people do? Any opinions are welcomed.

when it comes to gaming, the biggest gains you will make is getting a stronger video card. So if you want to future proof yourself more, i would only go 3900x if the budget allows. It doesn't really make sense as the reviewers have largely shown near identical performance when the ryzen 3rd gens have been clocked at the same speeds. 3600 is the sweet spot, and with the savings, i would put it towards more gpu and good ram. Ryzen loves fast ram with good timings (i.e., 3600mhz CL16). I have 2 new ryzen systems, both run ddr4 3200mhz CL14 @ 3600 CL16

[Mathieu9836]

The 3600 is the king of the hill right now money wise, keep the money to buy a better motherboard, faster storage OR A BETTER GPU!!!

[MeatFeastMan]

13 minutes ago, Metallus97 said:

yahhh 9900k is dead period. But the 9700k makes so little sense to me!

Compare the benefits in Gaming over Ryzen to the benefits in everything else. In my mind you cant notice the few FPs extra you get in some games to the huge improvements in more multicore scenarios and tasks 

Well what I was saying was...the only scenario where the 9700k makes sense is where you want the absolute best gaming performance AND want to overclock heavily with a high end cooler. The overclocked gap then makes the 9700k slightly more worth it. But if you just want to run either at stock, it then makes more sense to buy the 3700x because of the free cooler which makes it's value a clear winner when both are compared at stock.

 

There is definitely an argument for the 9700k but only in one specific scenario (And it isn't an uncommon scenario by any means). If you're a budget buyer stretching to an 8 core, you're gonna get the 3700x. But if you can afford the likes of a Noctua NH D15 or a h100i or whatever, then there is a case to be made for the 9700k. But they also have to consider whether the lack of threads and therefore future stuttering carries enough weight for them to get the 3700x instead.

 

 

[Tom H]

5 minutes ago, MeatFeastMan said:

Well what I was saying was...the only scenario where the 9700k makes sense is where you want the absolute best gaming performance AND want to overclock heavily with a high end cooler. The overclocked gap then makes the 9700k slightly more worth it. But if you just want to run either at stock, it then makes more sense to buy the 3700x because of the free cooler which makes it's value a clear winner when both are compared at stock.

 

There is definitely an argument for the 9700k but only in one specific scenario (And it isn't an uncommon scenario by any means). If you're a budget buyer stretching to an 8 core, you're gonna get the 3700x. But if you can afford the likes of a Noctua NH D15 or a h100i or whatever, then there is a case to be made for the 9700k. But they also have to consider whether the lack of threads and therefore future stuttering carries enough weight for them to get the 3700x instead.

 

 

i agree with this. There is absolutely a case that can be made to go 9700k, especially if you are running high refresh (e.g., 240hz, 165hz 144hz) monitors and you need those extra frames

 

but if you are going to get 9700k, I could make an argument to get a 9600k instead. Both will overclock to similar  clocks and both at 5ghz are deadly gaming cpus

 

The thing that gets me is that we are headed for a core revolution in games soon. For example, the next gen playstation 5 is powered by 8c/16t ryzen cpus and navi graphics. Game developers will power next gen games with more cores. The writing is on the wall. Many games that are out now have been in development for years so they are using outdated game engines that don't support as many cores. I fully expect this to change. Intel only shut off hyperthreading on the 9700k and 9600k because they wanted to create more products and keep prices on the 9900k expensive. I think it is a mistake to not buy more cores and threading now for the future