High end system (not theoretical) - need some input

[lsstefan]

Greetings.

So as an amateur builder, one of my wishes finally came through. A friend with money wants a high end gaming PC. He wants to play racing simulators(he mentioned a new Asetto Corsa coming?), ARMA and some other stuff and he claimed that this system has to hold him 5 years.

I got most of the parts in my head, I just want to ask your opinion on CPU and GPU.

Budget is between 2.2k and 2.5k. I know the RTX will be available soon, so I'm definitely going for one of those. The difference between the TI and non TI is 400$ though, but I'm sure the TI will hold much longer and it's cheaper to change the CPU rather than the GPU, correct?

As for CPU, normally for gaming the 8700k would be the choice, but the AM4 iirc has more room to grow and also has more c/t in case a simulator in 2 years might require more cpu, maybe he'll get into streaming, who knows.

Games will be played on 2k ultrawide 144+ at least, I doubt I can find an ultrawide 4k with some higher refresh for less than a kidney.

 

Waiting for some opinions.

Thanks.

 

[Enderman]

Wait for 9900k.

[rcmaehl]

Assetto Corsa lists system requirements as:

 

OS: Windows Vista Sp1, 8, 8.1, 10.
Processor: AMD Athlon X2 2.8 GHZ, Intel Core 2 Duo 2.4 GHZ.
Memory: 2 GB RAM.
Graphics: DirectX 10.1 (AMD Radeon HD 6450, Nvidia GeForce GT 460)
DirectX: Version 11.

 

ARMA 3 lists system requirements as:

 

CPU – Intel Core i5 or AMD Athlon Phenom X4 or faster.
GPU – Nvidia Geforce GTX 260 or ATI Radeon HD 5770, shader Model 3 and 896 MB VRAM, or faster.
RAM – 2 GB.

DirectX  –  Version 11.

 

Any modern system you build with at least 4 or more cores, and a RX480 8GB or GTX 1060 6GB or better will be able to handle this.

 

CPU:
 

If you're looking for upgrade paths and future sustainability: Ryzen
If you're looking for maximum performance RIGHT NOW: Intel

 

GPU:
 

You've listed you're going for an RTX card. Feel free to do so. If you don't go with an RTX card, I'd recommend something with at least 8GB of VRAM for future games.

 

[brob]

GPU upgrades, while more expensive are much easier and likely than cpu changes. Upgrading just a cpu is rarely worthwhile.

 

AM4 has no more room to grow than other options. Consider, Intel has been using LGA1151 for several generations. When Ryzen 2nd gen were introduced, new chipsets, hence new motherboards were also announced.

 

I'd wait for the new Intel cpu announcements and reviews before committing to a particular cpu.

 

[lsstefan]

7 minutes ago, Enderman said:

Wait for 9900k.

Currently researching about this, but at the specified prices, it's kinda ridiculous, but since I need to wait for RTX, I'll see what 9xxx is like.

5 minutes ago, rcmaehl said:

Assetto Corsa lists system requirements as:

 

OS: Windows Vista Sp1, 8, 8.1, 10.
Processor: AMD Athlon X2 2.8 GHZ, Intel Core 2 Duo 2.4 GHZ.
Memory: 2 GB RAM.
Graphics: DirectX 10.1 (AMD Radeon HD 6450, Nvidia GeForce GT 460)
DirectX: Version 11.

 

ARMA 3 lists system requirements as:

 

CPU – Intel Core i5 or AMD Athlon Phenom X4 or faster.
GPU – Nvidia Geforce GTX 260 or ATI Radeon HD 5770, shader Model 3 and 896 MB VRAM, or faster.
RAM – 2 GB.

DirectX  –  Version 11.

 

Any modern system you build with at least 4 or more cores, and a RX480 8GB or GTX 1060 6GB or better will be able to handle this.

 

CPU:
 

If you're looking for upgrade paths and future sustainability: Ryzen
If you're looking for maximum performance RIGHT NOW: Intel

 

GPU:
 

You've listed you're going for an RTX card. Feel free to do so. If you don't go with an RTX card, I'd recommend something with at least 8GB of VRAM for future games.

 

He won't play only these 2 games, these are 2 that he told me about. An RX480 can't play 2k or 4k high refresh rate though and if he wants best performance, why not go for the biggest.

2 minutes ago, brob said:

GPU upgrades, while more expensive are much easier and likely than cpu changes. Upgrading just a cpu is rarely worthwhile.

 

AM4 has no more room to grow than other options. Consider, Intel has been using LGA1151 for several generations. When Ryzen 2nd gen were introduced, new chipsets, hence new motherboards were also announced.

 

I'd wait for the new Intel cpu announcements and reviews before committing to a particular cpu.

 

Labor doesn't concern me if that's what you're referring to. I'm thinking that a GPU will lose more value in time than a CPU, especially if miners would use them also, who will believe you it's untainted. 

I need to wait a couple of weeks for RTX anyway, will see what Intel delivers, but considering the companies usual prices, I might go out of budget and at 4k, a Ryzen and an i7 should perform the same, no?

[rcmaehl]

1 minute ago, lsstefan said:

Currently researching about this, but at the specified prices, it's kinda ridiculous, but since I need to wait for RTX, I'll see what 9xxx is like.

He won't play only these 2 games, these are 2 that he told me about. An RX480 can't play 2k or 4k high refresh rate though and if he wants best performance, why not go for the biggest.

Labor doesn't concern me if that's what you're referring to. I'm thinking that a GPU will lose more value in time than a CPU, especially if miners would use them also, who will believe you it's untainted. 

I need to wait a couple of weeks for RTX anyway, will see what Intel delivers, but considering the companies usual prices, I might go out of budget and at 4k, a Ryzen and an i7 should perform the same, no?

RX480 8GB plays 1440p 144hz just fine for casual gamers and there's no 4k 144hz monitors out currently. If you have other, more intensive games, please list them as it'll help provide better recommendations.

[lsstefan]

7 minutes ago, rcmaehl said:

RX480 8GB plays 1440p 144hz just fine for casual gamers and there's no 4k 144hz monitors out currently. If you have other, more intensive games, please list them as it'll help provide better recommendations.

I won't play on the system, I have no idea what else he will play, nor do I know what else will come out in the following years but since I have money to spend, why not get something better so that I won't need to upgrade his GPU soon because the older GPU can't handle?

[brob]

With respect to upgrading gpu being easier, I wasn't considering the labor involved. CPU upgrades simply don't make a lot of sense on a number of levels. By the time a cpu upgrade would offer a significant improvement, new chipsets and motherboards are available with better tech. So keeping an old motherboard, if that is even possible, is no longer an attractive proposition. Consider the 2nd gen Ryzen cpu. Already they require a motherboard replacement to make optimal use of the cpu. That pattern is not going to change any time soon.

 

At the moment gpu innovation seems to be happening at a higher rate than cpu. In addition, gpu are essentially self contained units and there is little outside the gpu that affects its operation.

 

[lsstefan]

13 minutes ago, brob said:

With respect to upgrading gpu being easier, I wasn't considering the labor involved. CPU upgrades simply don't make a lot of sense on a number of levels. By the time a cpu upgrade would offer a significant improvement, new chipsets and motherboards are available with better tech. So keeping an old motherboard, if that is even possible, is no longer an attractive proposition. Consider the 2nd gen Ryzen cpu. Already they require a motherboard replacement to make optimal use of the cpu. That pattern is not going to change any time soon.

 

At the moment gpu innovation seems to be happening at a higher rate than cpu. In addition, gpu are essentially self contained units and there is little outside the gpu that affects its operation.

 

Hmm so it might make more sense to get a 9900k and an RTX2080 than a 8600k and an RTX2080TI (just an example, trying to put a worse CPU because of the 400$ difference between the RTXs) and in 2 years upgrade the GPU and keep the CPU?

When I made the pricing math, I did manage to get the 8700k and the TI, but I could get the non TI and keep the money for a new upgrade in 2 years. I went straight to the TI because idk what kind of racing high end simulators are out there and it'd suck to buy a GPU that won't handle it.

[brob]

17 minutes ago, lsstefan said:

Hmm so it might make more sense to get a 9900k and an RTX2080 than a 8600k and an RTX2080TI (just an example, trying to put a worse CPU because of the 400$ difference between the RTXs) and in 2 years upgrade the GPU and keep the CPU?

When I made the pricing math, I did manage to get the 8700k and the TI, but I could get the non TI and keep the money for a new upgrade in 2 years. I went straight to the TI because idk what kind of racing high end simulators are out there and it'd suck to buy a GPU that won't handle it.

Yes, buy the best cpu that the budget permits. Of course, gpu cost has to be a factor. Once the reviews come in for RTX you should be able to figure out which gpu would be a good fit. Knowing that in two years time gpu tech may have advanced significantly enough to make an upgrade attractive.

[EsaT]

2 hours ago, brob said:

AM4 has no more room to grow than other options. Consider, Intel has been using LGA1151 for several generations. When Ryzen 2nd gen were introduced, new chipsets, hence new motherboards were also announced.

AM4 gets Zen2 architecture CPUs made on 7nm node and tweak of that year later.

While every Intel since 6th gen Skylake has same architecture, with newer ones being clock speed tweaks and slapping in more cores.

Not yet sure if Intel is actually going to HW fix its speculative code execution vulnerabilitites in "9th" gen.

 

First gen AM4 motherboards hadn't implemented all features intended for AM4, so in that second gen motherbaords had something.

Next chipsets likely just update PCI-e lanes coming from chipset

Which doesn't matter to home user, unless you're using some high end HW RAID controllers or PCI-e SSDs.

[brob]

3 hours ago, EsaT said:

AM4 gets Zen2 architecture CPUs made on 7nm node and tweak of that year later.

While every Intel since 6th gen Skylake has same architecture, with newer ones being clock speed tweaks and slapping in more cores.

Not yet sure if Intel is actually going to HW fix its speculative code execution vulnerabilitites in "9th" gen.

 

First gen AM4 motherboards hadn't implemented all features intended for AM4, so in that second gen motherbaords had something.

Next chipsets likely just update PCI-e lanes coming from chipset

Which doesn't matter to home user, unless you're using some high end HW RAID controllers or PCI-e SSDs.

Decide what matters. If PCIe lane updates don't matter to "home users", do you really think 7nm matters?

 

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13301/spectre-and-meltdown-in-hardware-intel-clarifies-whiskey-lake-and-amber-lake. But again, neither vulnerability is a threat to "home users".

 

Regardless of how much Intel core architecture has not changed, it still has higher IPC than AM4 cpu. It really doesn't matter how that is achieved. 

 

I think there are cases where Ryzen is the optimal choice. None of those cases are because one might be able to use a three year old motherboard with a new cpu.

 

 

[EsaT]

8 hours ago, brob said:

Decide what matters. If PCIe lane updates don't matter to "home users", do you really think 7nm matters?

 

Regardless of how much Intel core architecture has not changed, it still has higher IPC than AM4 cpu. It really doesn't matter how that is achieved. 

There's more than enough PCI-e bandwidth for normal user who has only graphics card in PC.

It simply makes zero difference what bandwidth all those unused slots have available for them.

Possible sound card doesn't need any more bandwidth than what's been available for years.

 

And if Zen2 architecture's IPC improvements and other improvements don't matter then why should Intel's small current IPC advantage matter?

Except for things like AVX-512 (not really usefull in games) IPC difference is small.