Are you an AMD or Intel guy?

[Niner51]

I can't see upgrading from my 8700k at the moment. The 9700k and 9900k just don't seem to be a big jump according to everything I have read. I may look at the new Ryzens once the official benchmarks come out.

 

[keljian]

I can't see upgrading from my 8700k at the moment. The 9700k and 9900k just don't seem to be a big jump according to everything I have read. I may look at the new Ryzens once the official benchmarks come out.

It completely depends on what you're doing.

The 9700k has 8 cores and runs faster than the 8700k - if you're using single threaded software, or up to 8 threads, it will be quicker than the 8700k by a margin. It's when you get to 12 or more threads that it's within 10%

The 9900k has 8 cores and 16 threads, and runs faster than the 8700k - It is about 20-25% faster than the 9700k in applications that can use the threads (eg productivity/content creation), which in turn is about 10% faster than the 8700k, so 35-40% faster overall for this sort of software.

For me, as a productivity user, the difference depends on the software I'm using. Compiling uses all of the threads you can throw at it and more compiles means more time to debug, faster single thread performance means that the bits that can't be multithreaded are faster.

In CAD you can get more renders per minute of compute with more threads.

In real world terms for AutoCAD inventor:
If an 8700k will give me 1000 passes in 5 minutes,
A 9700k will give me 1100 passes in 5 minutes
A 9900k will give me 1400 passes in 5 minutes

This means for the same 5 minutes, I can end up with a 40% superior render, or spend 40% less time doing the render to get the same result.

If I'm doing a job which requires me to do a demo, being able to spin up a render quicker gives me more time to focus on other things.

Those other things, in my case as a contractor, include spending more time with family, more sleep (8 hours), or spending time with friends all of which are very important.

 

[Niner51]

It completely depends on what you're doing.

The 9700k has 8 cores and runs faster than the 8700k - if you're using single threaded software, or up to 8 threads, it will be quicker than the 8700k by a margin. It's when you get to 12 or more threads that it's within 10%

The 9900k has 8 cores and 16 threads, and runs faster than the 8700k - It is about 20-25% faster than the 9700k in applications that can use the threads (eg productivity/content creation), which in turn is about 10% faster than the 8700k, so 35-40% faster overall for this sort of software.

For me, as a productivity user, the difference depends on the software I'm using. Compiling uses all of the threads you can throw at it and more compiles means more time to debug, faster single thread performance means that the bits that can't be multithreaded are faster.

In CAD you can get more renders per minute of compute with more threads.

In real world terms for AutoCAD inventor:
If an 8700k will give me 1000 passes in 5 minutes,
A 9700k will give me 1100 passes in 5 minutes
A 9900k will give me 1400 passes in 5 minutes

This means for the same 5 minutes, I can end up with a 40% superior render, or spend 40% less time doing the render to get the same result.

If I'm doing a job which requires me to do a demo, being able to spin up a render quicker gives me more time to focus on other things.

Those other things, in my case as a contractor, include spending more time with family, more sleep (8 hours), or spending time with friends all of which are very important.

That's great information. I wasn't judging you on your choice. It's always good to see a real world point of view of performance.

 

[[H]orrorshow]

I see a 3700X in my near future..

EDIT: I see some of you guys are posting your CPU history again -

Pentium 90
Pentium 166
AMD K6-2+ 300
Duron 700
Athlon XP 1900+
Athlon 64 3200+
Athlon 62 X2 4400+
Core i5-750 @ stock, then 3.6
Xeon X3470 @ 3.8
i7-2600k @ 4.2

 

[ThreeDee]

..as of now .. More AMD (3 PC's) vs Intel (1 server)

 

[SeymourGore]

Mostly been an AMD guy for the past few builds. I had built my son a budget Pentium G3258 gaming build a few years ago, but my personal builds have all been AMD since a Pentium 4 based system I made for myself in high school.

I'd like to say there was a special reason for my AMD bias but it was just because I'm cheap.

 

[Richard Gouge]

I've been an Intel guy forever, even with Athlon was kicking Intel's ***, I built a Prescott P4. My main PC is a 6800k...

That said the last 2 PCs I've built for the house are Ryzen, and they all will be for the foreseeable future. Not just because of value, I'm sick of Intel's BS. Yup, my 6800k was faster than an 1800x.... keyword is WAS, after all the lovely performance crippling security patches, I'm sure it's no longer the case.

I honestly have 0 desire to build another Intel machine. Built the wife a new PC for her birthday 2 days ago... Ryzen. Built myself a new racing PC since my old motherboard gave up the ghost... Ryzen. And when the time comes where I have the funds to replace my 6800k machine.. Threadripper (I really don't need the cores, but quad channel memory is too **** sexy to not have on an eATX board.)

 

[Zarathustra]

I've owned every brand of x86 CPU in most generations.

Whatever does best for the money when I am looking for an upgrade is what gets my money.

Brand loyalty in general, in any industry, is kind of foolish. It is drinking the marketing departments Koolaid.

These companies don't care about you in the slightest. They are just in it for the money. Treat them the same way they do you.

That said, I am hoping AMD is successful with their comeback long term. It would be nice to have some real competition in the marketplace.

 

[Dan_D]

..as of now .. More AMD (3 PC's) vs Intel (1 server)

Currerntly, I still have more Intel systems in service. One Intel desktop, two Intel laptops vs. two AMD desktops. However, its primarily the AMD's that get the most use. Those are the gaming PC's. There is an 8700K that's a gaming PC for friends that come over.

 

[rautrey]

I've stuck with AMD because back when I was a E nothing making $100 and nothing a month in the military, a K6-2 with a voodoo banshee was all I could afford to play Quake 2 lans with my buddies. Good times.

 

[ThreeDee]

There is an 8700K that's a gaming PC for friends that come over.

...wow.. you're one of those "cool" friends i see, lol.

Back when Vista was still pre release . I was working at a school for troubled teens as the Jr. IT guy. They had a bunch of old Dell Optilex's (Pentium II's I think they were)for a computer lab with Win98 on all of them.

I scavenged the best parts I could from around the facility and from my own collection of parts and was able to setup 10 or 12 computers (I forget anymore) that were good enough to play Halo on. They were mostly AMD XP and 64 chips and Installed Vista on all of them.. I had some pretty good Halo LAN games with the kids and they really loved it.

I re-purposed the old Optilex's and utilized their PXE booting capabilities .. got the funding and built an AMD Athlon 64 x2 setup.. Installed Fedora on it and turned the Optilex's into Thin-Clients.

..that was the funnest job I ever had .. didn't pay very good, but alotta good times.

 

[Dan_D]

...wow.. you're one of those "cool" friends i see, lol.

Back when Vista was still pre release . I was working at a school for troubled teens as the Jr. IT guy. They had a bunch of old Dell Optilex's (Pentium II's I think they were)for a computer lab with Win98 on all of them.

I scavenged the best parts I could from around the facility and from my own collection of parts and was able to setup 10 or 12 computers (I forget anymore) that were good enough to play Halo on. They were mostly AMD XP and 64 chips and Installed Vista on all of them.. I had some pretty good Halo LAN games with the kids and they really loved it.

I re-purposed the old Optilex's and utilized their PXE booting capabilities .. got the funding and built an AMD Athlon 64 x2 setup.. Installed Fedora on it and turned the Optilex's into Thin-Clients.

..that was the funnest job I ever had .. didn't pay very good, but alotta good times.

I used to work at the Art Institute of Dallas. One of their activities for students was a game night. The school actually got a bunch of games from a few of the gaming developers on the cheap to set up this activity. So I actually had to install games on whatever our best machines were at the time, which was awesome. I had to restrict them to work only from specific accounts. The machines were set up for computer animation classes so they had GPU's which were capable of playing games.

So students could come in and play Age of Empires, Total Annihilation, Team Fortress, Unreal Tournament 2004, Warhammer Dawn of War, and a few others. We even bought new games and changed them out from time to time.

At that job I did a bit of everything. The pay was crap but it was the most challenging and fun job I ever had from a technical perspective. This was back before IT was typically compartmentalized to a point where you do whatever your specialized area is and pass the buck whenever anything appears outside of your realm of responsibility. Of course, local IT at the Art Institute of Dallas was a 3-4 man shop with a couple of student workers on top of that. After that I transitioned to big *** corporations where its all CYA, high security and all that.

 

[Cranky 1970]

Man, i have run both over 20 years...and i will have to say bring me the best performance for money.

 

[Terminus]

I've been using AMD for my personal PC since Athlon 64. Each time I have upgraded platforms the AMD has always been more affordable. Especially since I do not need top end CPU horse power. When building or making CPU recommendations for friends looking for performance with a decent budget, I always pointed them towards Intel. Things maybe changing soon with AMD's x570 chipset and higher mobo prices...

 

[Dan_D]

After X570 launches, you might be pointing them towards Intel to save some money.

 

[[H]orrorshow]

I'm really hoping a 3700X/X470 combo will serve me well for the foreseeable future..

 

[leezard]

I buy whatever is best for the amount of money I have to spend, I also dont upgrade with every new generation. I'm almost always 2 gens behind, sometimes more. When my hardware starts having trouble keeping up with whatever task I'm giving it, then I start looking to upgrade a generation or so.

 

[Dan_D]

I'm really hoping a 3700X/X470 combo will serve me well for the foreseeable future..

I don't see why it wouldn't. It took a long time for games to be able to do anything useful with CPU's with more than four cores. Even then, there aren't too many that do. Even for productivity, unless you really need some serious multi-threading, 8c/16t should be plenty. My old 5960X is still fantastic. In fact, my move to a 12c24t Threadripper 2920X really felt like a lateral one.

 

[Strelok]

I've had way more Intel than AMD CPUs, next chip will most likely be AMD though unless Intel pulls a rabbit out of their hat

 

[ThreeDee]

With the new AMD line up out now .. I'll be sticking with team Red for a bit longer now ..