1950x or i9 7900

[Tanvir777]

Hi. I can not get a decision between AMD threadripper  1950x and   Intel core i9 7900x.Please help me to choose. Thank you.

[Fasauceome]

It depends very strongly on the use case. Do you need thunderbolt? What workloads are you dealing with?

[NeverGoIntelKKThx]

amd all day Intel is overpriced and not worth the price.

[Metallus97]

AMD all the whay dude! Much more cores and performance for the $$.

And dont come up with gaming dudes. They are both more than enugh for games in therms of single core perf.

 

In the future you will have much more funn with AMD wich is a multitherading BEAST.

 

i9 is half assed "aw shiiit dudes AMD has 16cores... what we gonna do now?" "yehh fuck it slapt ten of our old cores on a single die"

 

i9 runs so fucking hot and consumes much more than Threadripper

[Guest]

You get 6 less cores for the same money, the threadripper seems like a no brainer.

[Tanvir777]

6 minutes ago, fasauceome said:

It depends very strongly on the use case. Do you need thunderbolt? What workloads are you dealing with?

Gaming,video editing (1440p), word,execel, nothing more.

[Metallus97]

2 minutes ago, Tanvir777 said:

Gaming,video editing (1440p), word,execel, nothing more.

There we have it! Vidoe edditing: No brainer get Threadripper and get MUCH faster rendertimes

 

Dude 100% nobrainer 6 cores for free?

[Sa1tama]

1950X:

pros:

+6 cores

+12 threads

Better value

 

Cons:

None

 

 

 

7900X

Pros:

non

 

cons:

Higher power draw

Worse performance

Higher heat output

[Quadriplegic]

8 minutes ago, Tanvir777 said:

Gaming,video editing (1440p), word,execel, nothing more.

Do you even need Threadripper for that? 

Just get a 2700x or 8700k and call it a day

[Fasauceome]

9 minutes ago, Tanvir777 said:

Gaming,video editing (1440p), word,execel, nothing more.

That's so light, a high end workstation processor like these would go to waste. You would be better off buying a core i7, unless you want to spend even more on exotic cooling to get your gaming performance up. Otherwise, an 8700k will do nicely, or a ryzen 7.

[Metallus97]

3 minutes ago, fasauceome said:

That's so light, a high end workstation processor like these would go to waste. You would be better off buying a core i7, unless you want to spend even more on exotic cooling to get your gaming performance up. Otherwise, an 8700k will do nicely, or a ryzen 7.

with i7 cs Ryzen R7 its the sme deal as this:

 

5 minutes ago, _SAITAMA_ said:

1950X:

pros:

+6 cores

+12 threads

Better value

Cons:

None

 

7900X

Pros:

non

cons:

Higher power draw

Worse performance

Higher heat output

please go AMD! For your workload BETTER!

[Fasauceome]

1 minute ago, Metallus97 said:

with i7 cs Ryzen R7 its the sme deal as this:

 

please go AMD! For your workload BETTER!

It also depends on that they're using. Adobe can use iGPU to accelerate video renders, so Intel is actually better.

[Metallus97]

Just now, fasauceome said:

It also depends on that they're using. Adobe can use iGPU to accelerate video renders, so Intel is actually better.

you talking about quciksync? Look up soime benchmarks
Yes it can but 6 additional cores crush the iGPU

[Fasauceome]

Just now, Metallus97 said:

you talking about quciksync? Look up soime benchmarks
Yes it can but 6 additional cores crush the iGPU

Yeah those 6 additional cores on a ryzen 7.

[Metallus97]

1 minute ago, fasauceome said:

Yeah those 6 additional cores on a ryzen 7.

whooops youre talking about ryzon 7, ok

still its faster look up some benchmarks

[Fasauceome]

1 minute ago, Metallus97 said:

whooops youre talking about ryzon 7, ok

still its faster look up some benchmarks

Again, depends on the workload. Whatever OP uses determines what processor is needed.

[Metallus97]

Just now, fasauceome said:

Again, depends on the workload. Whatever OP uses determines what processor is needed.

Gaming: Intel slightly faster but does not matter, AMD fast enugh

Everyday: Amd is more efficient

Vidoe eddit: AMD destroys intel

[O9B0666]

19 minutes ago, Metallus97 said:

with i7 cs Ryzen R7 its the sme deal as this:

 

please go AMD! For your workload BETTER!

This dudes perfect example of why you get multiple opinions on this forum. 

[O9B0666]

And the i9 on paper in benchmarks wins in more categories then thread ripper 12 Intel 10 amd in this one I'm looking at now. Another favors Intel in more categories too. 

[orbitalbuzzsaw]

For gaming neither, I'd get the i7-8700K cause of the higher clocks; games can't usually use more than 4 to 6 threads anyway

[Metallus97]

22 minutes ago, OrbitalBuzzsaw said:

For gaming neither, I'd get the i7-8700K cause of the higher clocks; games can't usually use more than 4 to 6 threads anyway

Yeha but for gaming both will be fine. Sure a i7 8700k is one of the best gaming chips today. But allso a 2700x will be ok.

As long as you have a nice GPU every CPU mentioned here will be sufficient. Sure some will get like 10fps more others wont but all will be perfectly playable.

Then it comes down to for example how much video editting OP does

[Jon Jon]

The type of video editing you are doing matters.

 

Intel may be better depending on the software you are running, regardless of cores.

Adobe After Effects, for example, scales horribly with cores and an 8700K will perform 10%~ better.

 

https://www.pugetsystems.com/recommended/Recommended-Systems-for-Adobe-After-Effects-CC-144/Hardware-Recommendations

 

This is just an example.

 

However, I would argue that overall, a 2700X is the best value for your money for a 4K setup, since the Wraith Prism does a great job at even supporting XFR to 4.2ghz (as I've seen in my friend's 4K video workstation I put together for him).

 

Quicksync really doesn't matter in professional applications, as you will want a real video card with dedicated VRAM for preview rendering as well as boosted exports in applications that support it for that.

 

Honestly, if you have the kind of money you have since you are considering HEDT, i would consider the following:

 

• AMD Ryzen 7 2700X w/ Stock Cooler
  • This will work splendidly and you really aren't going to go much higher than 4.2ghz anyway, so the stock cooler and allowing XFR to do its thing is fine.
• 64GB DDR4-3200 RAM
  • Video Editing applications gobble up system memory. If you have the money for HEDT, then I would say that you have the sweet spot money for the Adobe Suite, including After Effects and Premiere Pro
• Samsung 970 Pro For System
  • I push the Pro over the EVO strictly because of the high rated writes. Overall, the 970Pro/EVO is the fastest NVME M.2 on the market for this type of work.
• Samsung 970 Pro For Project Files
  • You want to idealy separate your project files from your OS and applications. I would recommend the Pro since this is where you are going to be reading/writing your project files. You could also put in a separate drive to write to if you want as well :).
• Geforce GTX 1070
  • 8GB VRAM for project rendering and preview rendering. Also, the faster graphics cards on the market do not scale relatively in video editing performance. Plus, the 1070 is still a beast for gaming, so this is the sweet spot if you are serious about video editing.

 

So to recap, RAM and Storage are probably far more important than everything else with the budget that you are insinuating that you have as they are the most expensive.

 

A 2700X is plenty for most software. Though an 8700K competes and is better in some applications due to poor optimization, the fact is that you are saving $100~ on a cooler, which can go into the other parts of your system.

 

I would stay away from Radeons for video rendering just because CUDA is widely supported, especially in the Adobe suite. OpenCL is supported too, but CUDA really does have a leg up.

 

I hope this helps :).