Question 9900k vs Ryzen 3rd gen

Fate05

Great
May 2, 2019
210
7
85
0
Heya,

I am building a gaming PC and a productivity rig soon and was wondering what CPU's I should go for. I was thinking about one of the 3rd gen Ryzen CPU's for the productivity but the 9900k is still better in terms of gaming from what I have seen. I was considering going with the 9900k for the gamign machine and the 3900x or 3950x (when it launches) for the productivity machine. Would you agree on this? I will be doing a custom loop with a 2080ti
 

xravenxdota

Prominent
Aug 26, 2017
245
24
715
9
Depends on your resolution tbh.If your a competitive gamer and need the fastest fps in 1080p then the intel is the way to go.If you play on 1440p or 4k then it doesn't really matter as your completely gpu bound.You will get maybe 10-15fps higher in some cases which are not worth it for a 500 usd cpu tbh.
 
Assuming you have or plan to buy any of those fancy 144/165/240hz monitor...
If you still game on 1080p and mainly play those eSport titles, 9900k is still the king. Pure single core performance of 9900k is the key, which is preferred by those games,.
However, the difference is not yet that great anymore to e.g. 3700x or even 3600x. in fact, the difference is quite small yet comes with premium price.
AMD Ryzen 3xxx is the better choice.
If you play more those games like Witcher 3 or if you game on 1440p or higher, the difference between 9900k to any of those Ryzen 3xxx becomes even smaller and smaller...practically ignoreable...which means..you pay extra almost for nothing.

If you have or plan to use only 60hz monitor...ignore any Intel processors! just pretend they did not even exist!
 

Fate05

Great
May 2, 2019
210
7
85
0
Depends on your resolution tbh.If your a competitive gamer and need the fastest fps in 1080p then the intel is the way to go.If you play on 1440p or 4k then it doesn't really matter as your completely gpu bound.You will get maybe 10-15fps higher in some cases which are not worth it for a 500 usd cpu tbh.
3440x1440 34" Ultrawide. I don't really care about money because that is all sorted. I just want one machine that can absolutely hammer any game at 3440x1440p {100 or 200hz} as that is the monitor I will be gaming on. The productivity machine I want to be able to get 80fps on a 27" 1440p 144hz machine
 
for 3440x1440, to get 80 fps or more, you need a more powerful graphic card, not processor.
3440x1440 is already really near to 4k, this will put a lot more strain to the GPU.
2080 or 2080ti arehere your best bet depending on your budget.

As for processor, the difference between Intel 9xxx and Ryzen 3xxx are even less noticeable here, thus this reduces the reason of buying Intel 9900k more. Forget 9900k and pretend it did not exist.
For gaming, 3600 or 3700 should be already sufficient but if need a work monster for work, I would rather jump directly to 3900x for the extra threads/cores.
 
Reactions: Major_Trouble
I would build 1 system and get the ryzen 9 3900x and get the best graphics card I could afford rather than spending so much money on two different systems. You could allocate 6 or 7 cores for production and 5 or 6 cores for gaming and get a dual monitor set up. That way you can game and do work at the same time.
 

Fate05

Great
May 2, 2019
210
7
85
0
I would build 1 system and get the ryzen 9 3900x and get the best graphics card I could afford rather than spending so much money on two different systems. You could allocate 6 or 7 cores for production and 5 or 6 cores for gaming and get a dual monitor set up. That way you can game and do work at the same time.
I did originally think of that but then I thought why not just get 2 systems. Money is no object, which is why I am going to get 2 rigs. I was thinking the 9900k in one and then the 3900x in another. The 3900x will be paired with a 2080 and running x2 1440p, 144hz 27" monitors and the 9900k will be with a 2080ti and x1 3440x1440 34" Ultrawide at 100-200hz.
 

nmb255

Distinguished
Aug 27, 2011
200
3
18,765
40
It depends on what and how much 'productivity' you are talking about.

My read on the whole situation right now is this:
o AMD 7nm as almost caught up with Intel 14nm technology
o For Gaming the 9900k is the best option
o With Ryzen you get more cores for the same money, more bang for buck

Whole 'productivity' angle is one that can skew things and causing confusion. It's based on benchmarks of dedicated multithread apps. What you need to balance is just how much rendering of 3D objects or creating content do you do. If you are making a living from such activities then the 3900x would be better. Though there are other high core CPUS to consider if you are in such a business situation. If you render 1 video a month as a hobby, then you won't go wrong with the 9900k, it's not like it can't do the task.

I hear people talk about gaming and streaming at the same time. This is where the mutitasking factor can swing towards the AMD processor. What we are missing is some benchmarks of both CPUs doing exactly that and the impact on the game and the steam quality under those conditions. I haven't seen such benchmarks. It they existed that might clear the water for that use case. The way its talked at times its like it won't work with a 9900k and you have to have a Ryzen to do such a thing.

I'm always surprised how many people talk about streaming their game playing. I really do think its a niche activity, but it seems that it is a decision factor for some. It's not for me. I don't stream my game playing, and I don't actually watch anyones live game playing. I prefer to spend my spare time playing games not watching someone else play!

It's a balance of what you are going to be doing the majority of the time and how much VFM that activity brings. Including personal happiness that you made the right choice. Right now, both are equally matched in price. One edges gaming, The othe edges Rendering. Neither is a bad choice.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS