[SOLVED] 8700K versus 9900K

dg27

Distinguished
Nov 7, 2010
338
7
18,815
7
I'm finalizing specs for a build for a machine that will be used for music production (Pro Tools). Pro Tools depends more heavily on the number of threads, which is why I'm shying away from the 9700K (8 cores/8 threads) and am considering either the 8700K (6C/12T) or the 9900K (8C/16T). This machine is being built; I'm trying to keep the cost within my budget without skimping on the motherboard (Gigabyte Designaire), RAM (64 GB G.Skill Ripjaws) or the PSU (Corsair HX850).

The total cost is $140 more if I opt for the 9900K over the the 8700K.

Would this be worth it?

For the record, my current machine is an i7 960 @ 3.2.
 

xxxlun4icexxx

Honorable
Jun 13, 2013
519
5
11,065
41
Thanks for your replies.

AMD is not recommended for Pro Tools by users and Avid (PT's developer) doesn't recommend it either.

I guess I'll go with the 9900K. Thanks.
I don't know why someone straight out posted a lie "Intel is only good for gaming". That's not true at all.

To me the 140.00 is worth it. If you aren't planning on OCing you also don't have to spend an arm and a leg on a premium motherboard and cooler.

Can take these results for what they're worth: https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i9-9900K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-8700K/4028vs3937

I can't find a specific percentage speed difference atm between the two.
 
If your program needs as many cores as possible, i wouldnt concider intel.

Amd has these offerings:
$199 Ryzen 5 3600 6c/12t
$329 Ryzen 7 3700x 8c/165
$499 Ryzen 9 3900x 12c/24t

Single threaded performance is within 5-10% of intel and AMD offers many more cores per $

In other core dependent applications and even some games the 3600 beats the 8700k.

If you must have intel:
The i7 9700k outperforms the 8700k in thread dependent workloads even at same clockspeed. Hyperthreading has an overhead and doesn't increase performance as much as adding a couple nore real cores.
Id go with the 9900k if possible (or preferably the 3900x), but the 9709k still performs well.
 

dg27

Distinguished
Nov 7, 2010
338
7
18,815
7
Thanks for your replies.

AMD is not recommended for Pro Tools by users and Avid (PT's developer) doesn't recommend it either.

I guess I'll go with the 9900K. Thanks.
 

xxxlun4icexxx

Honorable
Jun 13, 2013
519
5
11,065
41
Thanks for your replies.

AMD is not recommended for Pro Tools by users and Avid (PT's developer) doesn't recommend it either.

I guess I'll go with the 9900K. Thanks.
I don't know why someone straight out posted a lie "Intel is only good for gaming". That's not true at all.

To me the 140.00 is worth it. If you aren't planning on OCing you also don't have to spend an arm and a leg on a premium motherboard and cooler.

Can take these results for what they're worth: https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i9-9900K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-8700K/4028vs3937

I can't find a specific percentage speed difference atm between the two.
 
"Intel is only good for gaming". That's not true at all.
It isn't 100% true, but its not 100% incorrect either.

For gaming, Intel wins.

Intel is still good for other things than gaming, but for most core dependent applications AMDs 3rd gen chips offer better performance than Intel's comparably priced offerings. So for a lot of pricepoints, the only win Intel has is gaming.

I suspect the "AMD is not recommended for Pro Tools by users and Avid (PT's developer)" statement was made before ryzen 3rd gen came out. Before 3rd gen, AMD chips did not perform nearly as well as Intel in applications from developers like Adobe.
Due to architectural changes, 3rd gen Ryzen chips absolutely dominate Intel in adobe software, so I suspect your software would now perform well on AMD as well.

If you do want intel to play it safe, the 9900k is a great processor and will certainly perform many times better than your old I7.
 

dg27

Distinguished
Nov 7, 2010
338
7
18,815
7
I suspect the "AMD is not recommended for Pro Tools by users and Avid (PT's developer)" statement was made before ryzen 3rd gen came out. Before 3rd gen, AMD chips did not perform nearly as well as Intel in applications from developers like Adobe.
Due to architectural changes, 3rd gen Ryzen chips absolutely dominate Intel in adobe software, so I suspect your software would now perform well on AMD as well.
Avid updates their system requirements regularly and from what I've seen the 'avoid AMD' advice still holds true.

Other evidence I've taken into account is that builders who focus on builds for Pro Tools never list AMD as an option, from what I've seen.

If you do want intel to play it safe, the 9900k is a great processor and will certainly perform many times better than your old I7.
That's what I was hoping to hear. I tend to keep machines a long time. I want this build to be as future proof as possible.

Thanks.
 
Reactions: NightHawkRMX

dg27

Distinguished
Nov 7, 2010
338
7
18,815
7
To me the 140.00 is worth it. If you aren't planning on OCing you also don't have to spend an arm and a leg on a premium motherboard and cooler.
I'm planning on the Gigabyte Z390 Designaire because it seems to be the Gigabyte board mentioned most for "creatives" as opposed to gamers (I've never played a video game) and the Noctua NH-U12S cooler (my case can't accommodate anything taller). The case will have a fan in the front and back and 2X 140 mm on top. I think this should be good enough.

Can take these results for what they're worth: https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i9-9900K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-8700K/4028vs3937

I can't find a specific percentage speed difference atm between the two.
Thanks for posting this. Pretty convincing argument to go for "the battleship."
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY