Ryzen 3rd Gen vs Intel 9th Gen

[Varus]

A friend is looking to upgrade their computer and can't decide whether to go with Intel or AMD. He will primary use it to play games while occasionally using Autocad/Blender but will not be recording or streaming. I've suggested him to get the i5-9600K for $240 as I got the previous version (i5-8600K) and was able to easily overclock it to 4.8Ghz. However, he has been looking at reviews on YouTube and right now everyone is talking about AMD 3rd Gen and because of this, is looking to get a Ryzen 5 3600 for $200 or 3600X for $250. The 9600K and the 3600X both have 6 cores but the 9600K can overclock to 4.8Ghz while the 3600X has a max boost clock of 4.4GHz. [Overclock on Ryzen sees to be much more difficult and can't be pushed far passed its base clock. Furthermore, the max boost can can be held as long as needed unlike Intel's turbo boost so I don't see the point of overclocking.] Another difference is the i5 doesn't have hyper threading and the 3600X does (Ryzen's version of it) but I don't think this benefit outweighs the lower clock speed. In fact, for the past few years, I have yet to find any program besides benchmarks that noticeably benefits from hyper threading. At most, It only reduced the render time by 2% and did not fix any dips in frame rate. I'll admit I'm not an expert on any of this and I'm just basing this decision on passed experiences so I would like to see what others think about this decision and what experiences you had with Ryzen and hyper threading.

[The Torrent]

Tldr 

 

intel 9th gens better if u ignore price/take little notice.

[Fasauceome]

The clock speeds are lower but the instructions per clock are higher, therefore AMD processors this generation are a tiny fraction behind Intel in performance. As of now, AMD is basically cheaper for the same thing.

[5x5]

We've discussed this countless times. The third gen Ryzen CPUs have higher IPC than Intel Coffee Lake thus you need 5Ghz on an intel CPU to match the 4.4-4.5 on an AMD Zen2 processor. In addition, the benefit of hyperthreading is massive in the applications you mwntioned - Blender and CAD. It can result in a 30-% performance improvem by easily. In addition to that, the 3600 both uses less power and runs cooler than the 9600K while performing the same or better. It's also not affected by the 6-7 severe security vulnerabilities in intel CPUa that have been discovered.

 

In short, Ryzen is currently a superior product with a proper upgrade path and better single core performance per clock and efficiency. Intel 1151 socket is also end of life so the b at upgrade for an i5 is the space h after known as the 9900K whereas AM4 supports 16 core CPUs with potential support for Z n3 next year.

 

47 minutes ago, The Torrent said:

Tldr 

intel 9th gens better if u ignore price/take little notice.

No, not at all. Intel CPUs make no s name at the time of writing this..please consult here https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/1094079-what-cpu-should-i-get/?page=2&tab=comments#comment-12808204

 

46 minutes ago, fasauceome said:

The clock speeds are lower but the instructions per clock are higher, therefore AMD processors this generation are a tiny fraction behind Intel in performance. As of now, AMD is basically cheaper for the same thing.

With recent AGESA updates and software improvements, they're on par or faster in games as well so yeah, with Zen younger better performance for the same money or the equivalent performance for less money.

[The Torrent]

1 minute ago, 5x5 said:

No, not at all. Intel CPUs make no s name at the time of writing this..please consult here https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/1094079-what-cpu-should-i-get/?page=2&tab=comments#comment-12808204

Don’t understand.

 

the comment u sent me even says “comes close” and then takes about price. But as I said ignoring price.

[5x5]

@Varus check out GNs review of the 3600. It's 8700(k) performance for much cheaper.

 

42 minutes ago, The Torrent said:

Don’t understand.

the comment u sent me even says “comes close” and then takes about price. But as I said ignoring price.

Theb hole thread. I've listed multiple benchmarks on page one from various sources including ltt, GN, SS and more.

[The Torrent]

10 minutes ago, 5x5 said:

Theb hole thread. I've listed multiple benchmarks on page one from various sources including ltt, GN, SS and more.

Userbenchmark i9 9900k vs 3900x

[GoldenLag]

Get a 3600 and a decent memmory kit. Dial in some manual timing using the ryzen Ram calculator and you should be set. 

 

9600k really does not make sense anymore. Same with the 9700k.

[5x5]

30 minutes ago, The Torrent said:

Userbenchmark i9 9900k vs 3900x

Okay, you are now using the meme benchmark. Next.up CPU boss? Look in the news section, we have a whole thread laughing at them and Linus stated on the latest wan show that it is"utter garbage"

PS: according to userbenchmakr the I3 9100F is superior to the i9 7980XE

[Varus]

@5x5 About Blender/CAD have a 30% performance increase with hyper threading. Before I decided to get the i5-8600K that I currently use, I tested the i7-8700K with and without hyper threading (disabled in bios) and my renderings with it enabled only took between 60-80 seconds less than with it disabled. The average run time of the renderings is 60 minutes so a 1 minute decrease was not worth it for me. Maybe other applications can achieve a greater performance or maybe Ryzen's version of it is better but I did not get a 30% performance increase.

[The Torrent]

1 minute ago, 5x5 said:

PS: according to userbenchmakr the I3 9100F is superior to the i9 7980XE

Just checked no it isn’t...

 

anyway they wre were close according to the ‘overall score’ but just don’t look at overall look at other stuff.

[GoldenLag]

6 minutes ago, The Torrent said:

Userbenchmark i9 9900k vs 3900x

Are you really gonna use that site?

 

After they royaly screwed around their benchmark weighing? And even then they were only a site that could be used for VERY rough comparisons? Especially when it comes to CPUs. 

 

Besides, the 3900x is a better pickup in a lot of scenarios. For the usecase of OP, going for something without HT does not make sense. 

 

@Varus get an r5 3600 and a x570 board or a B450 tomahawk/pro carbon to save some money.

Then pick up a decent 3200mhz cl14/15/16 kit of Ram. Instead of overclocking the CPU, play around with the Ram instead.

 

[5x5]

26 minutes ago, Varus said:

@5x5 About Blender/CAD have a 30% performance increase with hyper threading. Before I decided to get the i5-8600K that I currently use, I tested the i7-8700K with and without hyper threading (disabled in bios) and my renderings with it enabled only took between 60-80 seconds less than with it disabled. The average run time of the renderings is 60 minutes so a 1 minute decrease was not worth it for me. Maybe other applications can achieve a greater performance or maybe Ryzen's version of it is better but I did not get a 30% performance increase.

Ke p in mind intel suffered perfoance degredation due to the security patches and Ryzen SMY was already a better implementation by default. You WILL see bigger gains with SMT on Zen Vs HY on core i

 

25 minutes ago, The Torrent said:

Just checked no it isn’t...

 

anyway they wre were close according to the ‘overall score’ but just don’t look at overall look at other stuff.

I guess intels 18 core is only 8% faster than thwirbquad core then

[melete]

@Varus 9600k is a 6C/6T CPU so I would never pay what Intel is asking for that component. If Ryzen 3600 is even remotely the same price, go for Ryzen 3600 imo.

 

9700k's two extra cores make it more defensible in my opinion, though. Your CPU usage won't be quite as high in CPU-intensive games, and I worry less about future 100% usage and frame drop/stuttering problems.

 

The Intel CPUs do have a performance advantage of around 10% in many games at 1080p, which is the only reason I won't say 9700k is completely outclassed.

[Fasauceome]

13 minutes ago, The Torrent said:

Userbenchmark i9 9900k vs 3900x

8:00

 

[Varus]

I created a build in pcpartpicker. My friend is still debating between GPU's so I left it out. Let me know what you think.

PCPartPicker Part List

Type	Item	Price
CPU	AMD Ryzen 5 3600 3.6 GHz 6-Core Processor	$198.90 @ OutletPC
Motherboard	MSI B450 TOMAHAWK ATX AM4 Motherboard	$114.99 @ Best Buy
Memory	Corsair Vengeance LPX 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200 Memory	$84.99 @ Amazon
Storage	Samsung 860 Evo 1 TB 2.5" Solid State Drive	$139.99 @ Amazon
Case	NZXT H500 ATX Mid Tower Case	$69.99 @ Best Buy
Power Supply	SeaSonic 520 W 80+ Bronze Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply	$41.98 @ Newegg
	Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts
	Total (before mail-in rebates)	$670.84
	Mail-in rebates	-$20.00
	Total	$650.84
	Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-08-14 19:08 EDT-0400

 

[Fasauceome]

3 minutes ago, Varus said:

CPU AMD Ryzen 5 3600 3.6 GHz 6-Core Processor $198.90 @ OutletPC Motherboard MSI B450 TOMAHAWK ATX AM4 Motherboard $114.99 @ Best Buy

hard to knock the Tomahawk, solid VRM and feature set, prominently the BIOS flash feature. but:

 

3 minutes ago, Varus said:

Power Supply SeaSonic 520 W 80+ Bronze Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply

this is pretty crap. Aim for the Corsair CX550 or 550M instead, slightly higher price tag but it goes a long way.

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/FdRFf7/corsair-cx-2017-550w-80-bronze-certified-atx-power-supply-cp-9020121-na

The CX450 and 450M are similar price for better quality but only have one 8 pin PCIe connector.

[5x5]

Change the PSU to a CX550W or Vengeance Silver. It's better quality. Other than that, looks golden. Get a USB stick and use the BIOS flashback to update the bios, tighten timings as per today's LTT video and you're good to go.

[GoldenLag]

2 minutes ago, Varus said:

Power Supply SeaSonic 520 W 80+ Bronze Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply $41.98 @ Newegg

Nope. Pick up a cx550 instead or a tx550m or a formula gold 550w or a bequiet pure power 11 cm 500w, or a MWE Gold.

 

The PSU you picked there is not good.

3 minutes ago, Varus said:

debating between GPU's

How much is he spending on a GPU?

4 minutes ago, Varus said:

Storage Samsung 860 Evo 1 TB 2.5" Solid State Drive $139.99 @ Amazon

Swao for a ex920 1TB. Its faster and overall better drive. 

[5x5]

1 minute ago, GoldenLag said:

Nope. Pick up a cx550 instead or a tx550m or a formula gold 550w or a bequiet pure power 11 cm 500w, or a MWE Gold.

 

The PSU you picked there is not good.

How much is he spending on a GPU?

Swao for a ex920 1TB. Its faster and overall better drive. 

I'd go with the EVO personally tbh. The Magician suite is quite useful and the nand/controller on the Samsung is top notch.

[The Torrent]

20 minutes ago, 5x5 said:

I guess intels 18 core is only 8% faster than thwirbquad core then

Bro now ur pissing me off cuz u can’t read.

i said who uses effective speed anyway u look at all the actual benchmarks forget effective speed.

[5x5]

1 minute ago, The Torrent said:

Bro now ur pissing me off cuz u can’t read.

 

i said who uses effective speed anyway u look at all the actual benchmarks forget effective speed.

Thanks for the insult but the facts remain the same. Userbenchmakr is unreliable drivel and has no place in a proper forum discussion.

[Fasauceome]

2 minutes ago, The Torrent said:

Bro now ur pissing me off cuz u can’t read.

 

i said who uses effective speed anyway u look at all the actual benchmarks forget effective speed.

It really doesn't matter what userbenchmark says, it's wrong.

[GoldenLag]

4 minutes ago, 5x5 said:

I'd go with the EVO personally tbh. The Magician suite is quite useful and the nand/controller on the Samsung is top notch.

The ex920 is NVMe. I woudlnt bither overpaying for a more expencive, while also worse drive.....

3 minutes ago, The Torrent said:

Bro now ur pissing me off cuz u can’t read.

 

i said who uses effective speed anyway u look at all the actual benchmarks forget effective speed.

Then why reffer to userbenchmark? And not like reviewers?

[The Torrent]

4 minutes ago, 5x5 said:

Thanks for the insult but the facts remain the same. Userbenchmakr is unreliable drivel and has no place in a proper forum discussion.

No. the effective speed is drivel but no one is telling u to live by that.

 

no insult. I simply said your pissing me off and you can’t read as it’s the third time I’m making the above point and your still not acknowledging it.

 

3 minutes ago, fasauceome said:

It really doesn't matter what userbenchmark says, it's wrong.

Why is it wrong? Effective speed maybe wrong but benchmarks are still benchmarks.