9600X vs 7900

[testcy]

By reading reviews and comparing 9600X and 7900 I am not sure about the performance difference between Zen5 and 6 cores and Zen4 and 12 cores. 9600X does not include a cooler, making its overall cost not a lot cheaper in comparison with 7900 that includes a cooler. Having little interest in gaming what would be better? 

[Hinjima]

4 minutes ago, testcy said:

By reading reviews and comparing 9600X and 7900 I am not sure about the performance difference between Zen5 and 6 cores and Zen4 and 12 cores. 9600X does not include a cooler, making its overall cost not a lot cheaper in comparison with 7900 that includes a cooler. Having little interest in gaming what would be better? 

With little interest in gaming, what is your average workload?

[Dedayog]

1 hour ago, testcy said:

By reading reviews and comparing 9600X and 7900 I am not sure about the performance difference between Zen5 and 6 cores and Zen4 and 12 cores. 9600X does not include a cooler, making its overall cost not a lot cheaper in comparison with 7900 that includes a cooler. Having little interest in gaming what would be better? 

Not sure how you can compare a 6 core cpu vs a 12 core cpu in general.

 

We don't compare a Civic with an F-150.  

 

Frankly, if you don';t know if you need a 12 core CPU... you don't need one.  9600X would be better for you.

[Tetras]

Prices in your region sound a little funky, but anyhow, if you're wondering if a 9600X can beat a 7900 in multithreading, despite having half the core count, the answer is NO (they're not even close).

 

We need details of your workload(s) to give more specific advice, as Hinjima has requested.

[testcy]

3 hours ago, Hinjima said:

With little interest in gaming, what is your average workload?

 

2 hours ago, Dedayog said:

Not sure how you can compare a 6 core cpu vs a 12 core cpu in general.

 

We don't compare a Civic with an F-150.  

 

Frankly, if you don';t know if you need a 12 core CPU... you don't need one.  9600X would be better for you.

 

2 hours ago, Tetras said:

Prices in your region sound a little funky, but anyhow, if you're wondering if a 9600X can beat a 7900 in multithreading, despite having half the core count, the answer is NO (they're not even close).

 

We need details of your workload(s) to give more specific advice, as Hinjima has requested.

I am not sure about the workload or if I need a 12 core CPU. I suspect a 6 core CPU such as 9600X is the minimum to consider for a new AM5 build, but I am wondering if a more expensive 8 or 12 core CPU for future need is worth it. And if I should buy a Zen5 and not a Zen4?

[Dedayog]

15 minutes ago, testcy said:

 

 

I am not sure about the workload or if I need a 12 core CPU. I suspect a 6 core CPU such as 9600X is the minimum to consider for a new AM5 build, but I am wondering if a more expensive 8 or 12 core CPU for future need is worth it. And if I should buy a Zen5 and not a Zen4?

Without knowing what you'll be using the PC for.... no idea?

 

Should you buy a Honda Civic or a Ford Explorer?

 

FYI, we don't do "future proofing" or "future need", since we don;'t know your future needs.

 

Also, 6 core CPUs have been more than enough for most people since the 8700K...

 

You're asking us to predict the future and especially YOUR future, without even any PAST or PRESENT information.  It's frankly kinda bullshit to ask us to.

[testcy]

8 minutes ago, Dedayog said:

Without knowing what you'll be using the PC for.... no idea?

 

Should you buy a Honda Civic or a Ford Explorer?

 

FYI, we don't do "future proofing" or "future need", since we don;'t know your future needs.

 

Also, 6 core CPUs have been more than enough for most people since the 8700K...

 

You're asking us to predict the future and especially YOUR future, without even any PAST or PRESENT information.  It's frankly kinda bullshit to ask us to.

I am not asking for prediction of the future, but opinions for a CPU that will be used for the next 5 or even 10 years. I could live with something older and slower than 9600X, but since I want a new build, I don't want to use anything that is already considered dead. Maybe I should have just asked what are the best budget options.

[Dedayog]

4 minutes ago, testcy said:

I am not asking for prediction of the future, but opinions for a CPU that will be used for the next 5 or even 10 years. I could live with something older and slower than 9600X, but since I want a new build, I don't want to use anything that is already considered dead. Maybe I should have just asked what are the best budget options.

Yes, because the prices vary and you haven't stated a budget yet either.

 

If you want to know what *I* would buy, then sure I can tell you.  But we're trying to figure out what YOU should buy.  Just need more info for that.

 

But...If I were buying right now, a utility machine, non gaming....I would get a 9700X as the 7700X I had was stellar all around.  But that's me, and I am vastly different than you in personality, quirks, laziness, living space, income, cat count, dog count, kid count, golf tee times, all over money needs, etc etc etc.

 

But yeah, if it's non impactful wallet-wise... get the 9700X, 32GB RAM (can add more later), 2TB SSD, etc etc.

[freeagent]

I would do the 9600X over 7900. 

 

People have been saying 6 cores are dead for damn near a decade. My 5600X still games just fine.

 

9700X would be better though..

[Tetras]

1 hour ago, testcy said:

I am not asking for prediction of the future, but opinions for a CPU that will be used for the next 5 or even 10 years. I could live with something older and slower than 9600X, but since I want a new build, I don't want to use anything that is already considered dead. Maybe I should have just asked what are the best budget options.

What we're trying to get at here, is what exactly do you use the PC for?

 

You said you don't use it for gaming, but what then?

 

Without this information we can't help you.

[testcy]

12 hours ago, Tetras said:

What we're trying to get at here, is what exactly do you use the PC for?

 

You said you don't use it for gaming, but what then?

 

Without this information we can't help you.

Video and audio editing, 4K playback and streaming, compression and transfer of large amounts of data, office applications etc.

[Dedayog]

1 hour ago, testcy said:

Video and audio editing, 4K playback and streaming, compression and transfer of large amounts of data, office applications etc.

Maybe a 9950X would be more relevant to you.

 

Though I am unclear why you didn't share this in the first place, it's incredibly impactful on your CPU choice.

[Tetras]

1 hour ago, testcy said:

Video and audio editing, 4K playback and streaming, compression and transfer of large amounts of data, office applications etc.

If the choice is only between the 9600X and the 7900 in your first post, then with that usage you'd get the 7900.

 

The 9600X can't compensate for the loss of 6 cores and several of those tasks are meaningfully multithreaded (and where they are not multithreaded, the performance loss is not significant enough to justify losing the 6 cores).

[testcy]

47 minutes ago, Dedayog said:

Maybe a 9950X would be more relevant to you.

 

Though I am unclear why you didn't share this in the first place, it's incredibly impactful on your CPU choice.

9950X is too expensive and I tried to be specific with what I am willing to pay for.

10 minutes ago, Tetras said:

If the choice is only between the 9600X and the 7900 in your first post, then with that usage you'd get the 7900.

 

The 9600X can't compensate for the loss of 6 cores and several of those tasks are meaningfully multithreaded (and where they are not multithreaded, the performance loss is not significant enough to justify losing the 6 cores).

What about 9700X vs 7900 for about the same cost? Actually 7900 will cost a little less if I use the stock cooler, but maybe I should also consider 9700X even if I have to pay extra for a cooler?

[Dedayog]

13 minutes ago, testcy said:

9950X is too expensive and I tried to be specific with what I am willing to pay for.

What about 9700X vs 7900 for about the same cost? Actually 7900 will cost a little less if I use the stock cooler, but maybe I should also consider 9700X even if I have to pay extra for a cooler?

I'd personally build a DDR4 setup with a 5900XT, with it's 16c/32t awesomeness.  DDR4 is cheap, so you can rock 64 or 128GB in it.

[Tetras]

20 minutes ago, testcy said:

What about 9700X vs 7900 for about the same cost? Actually 7900 will cost a little less if I use the stock cooler, but maybe I should also consider 9700X even if I have to pay extra for a cooler?

They're way more closely matched than the 9600X was, but the 7900 still has more raw power with the 4 extra cores and that often pulls it ahead in anything greater than lightly threaded.

 

I'd consider what the balance is in your usage, how much you're heavily multithreaded (e.g. waiting many minutes, maybe even hours for tasks to complete) versus lightly threaded. Note that the 9700X does have some improvements (e.g. with AVX-512) that can make Zen 5 very fast in those workloads. I believe something like AV1 uses AVX-512.