[SOLVED] 9600K, 9700K or 8700K?...or wait for Zen2?

[vwcrusher]

Rethinking (possibly) the choice I made regarding CPU for a new system. The goal of the system is for Adobe Lightroom, and some occasional gaming. Near the point where I start pulling out what little hair I have left.....lol.

I have been bouncing around between the above CPUs trying to decide. Budget for this is not a major concern, fwiw. On one hand I want to get the best performance, but also understanding that a fps, or a few milliseconds in LR here or there will never be noticed by me. On the other hand, don't want to penny-wise and pound-foolish....zen2?

Perhaps it really doesn't matter that much which of the above I choose?
Please help me decide based on your experience with CPUs.

Thank you.

 

[NightHawkRMX]

Rule out the 9700k and 9600k for workloads since they only hage 8 and 6 threads respectively. The 12 threads of the 8700k are great for gaming and great for work. Currently the best performance for some workloads is with ryzen, although adobe favors intel. A 2700x or zen 2 cpu will be the fastest for non adobeworkloads, but be a bit behind the intel cpus for games and adobe. Ryzen can still game well, but i think the 8700k is best for gaming and your particular work. Also a 500buck 9900k would beat all of these cpus.

 

[vwcrusher]

Thanks for the reply....Hmm, I was lead to believe that cores were favored over threads, which was why the 9700K in particular was on the short list. This is wrong?

And yeah, I understand the 9900K is better, but really don't need that kind of performance.....

So if the best solution for me is the 8700K, would a Z390 MB still be the best choice, or should I go with a Z370?

 

[NightHawkRMX]

The more cores and threads the better. The i5 is not good for this. The 9700 does have 2 more cores than the 8700x, but 4 less threads.

 

[vwcrusher]

Ah....so more cores are not necessarily favored over threads?

Thanks....

I was thinking a Z390 MB (Gigabyte Aorus Pro).....still a good choice?

 

[Math Geek]

a core is preferred over a "hyperthread" but with the workloads you want, the ability to use more threads is a good idea. so a 6 core cpu vs a 6 core/12 thread one would put the 12 thread cpu on top even though they have the same number of cores.

consider that the Ryzen 2000 series has more cores and threads and only gives up a small amount of performance for a ton less money. so i wonder why you don't have a ryzen 5/7 on the list as well? a ryzen 7 with 8 cores and 16 threads is about the same price as the intel chips you are considering.

so to answer your question it seems you've already ruled out AMD cpu's and nothing they produce in a couple of months is gonna change that, so go for the current intel cpu and don't wait. you're not considering them now with more cores/threads for same money, why would you all of a sudden consider them months from now?

 

[NightHawkRMX]

Adobe favors intel so id avoid amd, even though they have much better value and more threads for the money.

 

[vwcrusher]

Thanks for the comprehensive reply.

Actually, I have not ruled out anything....the only 'vote' against AMD CPUs was the 'fact' that Adobe applications seem to run faster on Intel CPUs....I do not know this for a fact, which is why I posed the question, and why I added Zen2 to the subject line.

Again, looking for advice based on this community's knowledge/experience with CPUs and applications.

: )

 

[Math Geek]

"favors" is such a subjective term. here's tom's review with all the mentioned chips in it

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i5-9600k-coffee-lake-cpu,5922-7.html

looking at the adobe CC tests, the Ryzen 7 lags behind by half a second here, 3-4 seconds there and similar all the way across. don't think that merits "i'd avoid them" when the price is right. think i'd word it more like "if that 3-4 seconds is gonna make or break your day, then by all means spend the extra money for it"

it's tough to work through the wording used by folks. "favors" seems to be used in such a way as to suggest "gets it done in half the time" when the reality is the results in the test above i linked.

 

[NightHawkRMX]

That is true. You could even get a 2700 and overclock it for closer to 2700x performance for a lot less money.

 

[13thmonkey]

Lightroom also loves cuda cores from nvidia GPU's, my lightroom runs like a dog if I turn off GPU acceleration.

 

[NightHawkRMX]

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/QpLcnH
Heres a quick list. I put a 2070 in there since this gigabyte model is at a good price and the fact that should perform well in lightroom, leveraging the cuda cores.

 

[vwcrusher]

"favors" is such a subjective term. here's tom's review with all the mentioned chips in it

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i5-9600k-coffee-lake-cpu,5922-7.html

looking at the adobe CC tests, the Ryzen 7 lags behind by half a second here, 3-4 seconds there and similar all the way across. don't think that merits "i'd avoid them" when the price is right. think i'd word it more like "if that 3-4 seconds is gonna make or break your day, then by all means spend the extra money for it"

Thanks....I did see that study. This issue I had with it was the vast majority of the applications tested I will never use. I use Lightroom. I did see a study by Puget Systems that detailed out the various functions and how each CPU perform that function (see link below).

https://www.pugetsystems.com/pic_disp.php?id=52033

While I am certainly not an expert at these things, it seemed that the Intel CPUs performed better than the AMD.....

 

[vwcrusher]

Lightroom also loves cuda cores from nvidia GPU's, my lightroom runs like a dog if I turn off GPU acceleration.

Very true....I am currently using a GTX 1070 ti overclocked in a FD Define R6 case and new PSU.....next step is CPU, MB and RAM...hence the questions.

thanks

 

[vwcrusher]

So...I am now confused.
Is the consensus to go with Intel or AMD?
Please explain the rationale.....again, if one reads through the data from Puget, it seemed like Intel performs better...am I missing something?

Again, thanks all for sticking with me here ... really appreciate the help.

 

[NightHawkRMX]

Puget is very well know for their research. If they said intel is better, id trust them. I also would also concider the cheapness of amd tho. Although theu may perform worse, they are half of the money. I would choose nvida for your gpu tho. Whats your budget?

 

[Math Geek]

same type results as other reviews. intel wins by 1 sec here and 2 sec there and so on. i'd look at total budget and what you can get to decide. sounds like nvidia is the way to go for GPU. start there and then see what kind of cpu/mobo combo you can get for intel and amd. i'm willing to bet you'll be able to get a better gpu going with ryzen7 with the same overall money spent. normally you can step up 1 gpu tier by going with amd.

if lightroom uses the cuda cores so well, then an extra tier of GPU should be the goal over 1-2 seconds of cpu time. something tells me you'll see more benefit for the money with a better GPU than a slightly better CPU.

what kind of budget are you looking at? we can easily help see what you can get for it either way been a while since i've done such a comarison and i'm curious now what a given budget can do going amd vs intel

 

[vwcrusher]

Puget is very well know for their research. If they said intel is better, id trust them. I also would also concider the cheapness of amd tho. Although theu may perform worse, they are half of the money. I would choose nvida for your gpu tho. Whats your budget?

Yes, but I also consider the folks here to quite knowledgeable, and not an Intel integrator, if you know what I mean. Since they sell system primarily with Intel CPUs, there might be a tendency.....

Anyway, I have been upgrading my system over the past several months....see build status below: Items with $0 are already purchased.

Keep in mind the reason for the initial question on my part was to determine the best CPU for my specific set of needs (Lightroom and occasional gaming). I only chose Intel based on earlier feedback/guidance and the Puget testing. If there is a better solution, I am all for it. For example, buy a 2700X now with 470MB, and upgrade when Zen2 is fully baked.

thanks

PCPartPicker part list: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/7JJgWD
Price breakdown by merchant: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/7JJgWD/by_merchant/

CPU: Intel - Core i7-8700K 3.7 GHz 6-Core Processor ($379.89 @ Amazon)
CPU Cooler: Scythe - Mugen 5 Rev. B 51.17 CFM CPU Cooler (Purchased For $0.00)
Motherboard: Gigabyte - Z390 AORUS PRO ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($182.88 @ Walmart)
Memory: G.Skill - Ripjaws V Series 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200 Memory ($110.98 @ Newegg)
Storage: Samsung - 970 Evo Plus 500 GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive ($127.99 @ Amazon)
Storage: Western Digital - Caviar Black 1 TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive (Purchased For $0.00)
Video Card: EVGA - GeForce GTX 1070 Ti 8 GB FTW2 GAMING iCX Video Card (Purchased For $0.00)
Case: Fractal Design - Define R6 Black TG ATX Mid Tower Case (Purchased For $0.00)
Power Supply: SeaSonic - FOCUS Plus Gold 650 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply (Purchased For $0.00)
Monitor: Auria - EQ276W 27.0" 2560x1440 60 Hz Monitor (Purchased For $0.00)
External Storage: Western Digital - My Book 4 TB External Hard Drive (Purchased For $0.00)
Total: $801.74
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-03-03 15:01 EST-0500

 

[13thmonkey]

but how much better, on the kinds of things that you'll be doing, and is it worth the cost, 10s slower on something you'll do once in a session? or 10s on something you'll be doing every few minutes, some intel processors are worse than the AMD chips, I'd expect the 3000 series to be better. Wait and see with 3000 is my position

 

[vwcrusher]

same type results as other reviews. intel wins by 1 sec here and 2 sec there and so on. i'd look at total budget and what you can get to decide. sounds like nvidia is the way to go for GPU. start there and then see what kind of cpu/mobo combo you can get for intel and amd. i'm willing to bet you'll be able to get a better gpu going with ryzen7 with the same overall money spent. normally you can step up 1 gpu tier by going with amd.

if lightroom uses the cuda cores so well, then an extra tier of GPU should be the goal over 1-2 seconds of cpu time. something tells me you'll see more benefit for the money with a better GPU than a slightly better CPU.

what kind of budget are you looking at? we can easily help see what you can get for it either way been a while since i've done such a comarison and i'm curious now what a given budget can do going amd vs intel

Thanks for the reply.

As I noted in a post a few minutes ago, I have been purchasing parts over the past few months as I find solid data and recommendations...including PSU, Case, Cooler, GPU (GTX 1070 ti overclocked).

My budget is somewhat flexible given I've spread the purchases over months, but I do plan on buying CPU, RAM and MB all at once (most of the system cost, btw), which is why I posted today.

As I noted earlier, I am certainly looking for the best performance value. I don't need the very fastest, nor do I need the least expensive. If the Ryzen 7 will provide very similar performance to the, say 8700K for less money..sign me up.
Especially, that will give me a less expensive path to Zen2. However, if the performance difference is ...say more than 5-10% for similar $$, I'd go with Intel.....does make sense?

 

[vwcrusher]

but how much better, on the kinds of things that you'll be doing, and is it worth the cost, 10s slower on something you'll do once in a session? or 10s on something you'll be doing every few minutes, some intel processors are worse than the AMD chips, I'd expect the 3000 series to be better. Wait and see with 3000 is my position

Yeah, and there is the rub....I really can't wait realistically until late summer....which is why perhaps going with a 2700X now and upgrading down the road with a more stable Zen2?...with the same MB?

Attached is a truncated data from Puget....it seems that in the vast majority of operations Intel is faster than AMD (in some cases by a minimal amount)...I did a test build for the 2700X and I don't see the vast difference in cost ($80)....what am I missing?

PCPartPicker part list: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/CZhjZR
Price breakdown by merchant: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/CZhjZR/by_merchant/

CPU: AMD - Ryzen 7 2700X 3.7 GHz 8-Core Processor ($299.99 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: Asus - Prime X470-Pro ATX AM4 Motherboard ($161.89 @ OutletPC)
Memory: G.Skill - Ripjaws V Series 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200 Memory ($110.98 @ Newegg)
Storage: Samsung - 970 Evo 500 GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive ($149.99 @ Samsung)
Total: $722.85
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-03-03 15:33 EST-0500

 

[13thmonkey]

Yeah, and there is the rub....I really can't wait realistically until late summer....which is why perhaps going with a 2700X now and upgrading down the road with a more stable Zen2?...with the same MB?

BTW, any comments on the build?

It's a tough choice, the older i7 with HT, or the newer without, gut feel 6C12T is better than 8C8T

Is 16GB really enough? buying 32 now will be less painful than trying to get another 16 to work with your existing 16.

I wouldn't go 2700 now and upgrade later, i'd go lower down the stack and then upgrade. The 3700 is proported to have 12 cores 24 threads and will be faster than the 2920x in all likelihood has it's 4.3 turbo vs 50 turbo, probably.
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-3000-specification-price,38731.html

Why can't you wait for ryzen 3? What's the factor that's forcing you to do it now?

 

[vwcrusher]

It's a tough choice, the older i7 with HT, or the newer without, gut feel 6C12T is better than 8C8T

Is 16GB really enough? buying 32 now will be less painful than trying to get another 16 to work with your existing 16.

I wouldn't go 2700 now and upgrade later, i'd go lower down the stack and then upgrade. The 3700 is proported to have 12 cores 24 threads and will be faster than the 2920x in all likelihood has it's 4.3 turbo vs 50 turbo, probably.
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-3000-specification-price,38731.html

Why can't you wait for ryzen 3? What's the factor that's forcing you to do it now?

Hmmm...you are right....another 16 will be much more difficult later on...good catch!!

The reason I seem to have a fire under my butt is that my current system is 7 years old and has a tough time just typing here while LR is open. (i7-3770). If the general availability date is truly June/July I can certainly wait, but how solid will that be? and what will availability be? Just trying to think all this through.

 

[13thmonkey]

Ok that's not just age, my 3570k is only just starting to struggle in some games, but lightroom open on one screen webpages on another is fine.

 

[vwcrusher]

Ok that's not just age, my 3570k is only just starting to struggle in some games, but lightroom open on one screen webpages on another is fine.

Really? Well during one of the messages, while typing Chrome just froze up all on one screen. I closed LR and all seem ok now. 16GB RAM here, maybe the diff?

Also, it has lots of trouble with Fallout 76....have to be on high setting.