Question Buy 5000 series cpu or waiting for am5 ?

[eslam.topsecret66]

These days I'm thinking of buying an amd Ryzen CPU 5900x, but I see that the company will launch a new cpu with a completely new socket. Should I wait or buy now? I know that the new platform will get improvements such as support for ddr5 , I already have b250m gaming 3 + i5 7400 + 16 gb ram 2400mhz , i wanted to upgrade my cpu and mb and rams like something 5900x or waiting for 12gen intel or waiting for am5 cpu im confused

 

[hotaru.hino]

Wait. Unless you absolutely need something right now.

 

[drea.drechsler]

These days I'm thinking of buying an amd Ryzen CPU 5900x, but I see that the company will launch a new cpu with a completely new socket. Should I wait or buy now? I know that the new platform will get improvements such as support for ddr5

At this point, all we really have is history to guide us about major new tech launches. So with that in mind, the "experts and enthusiasts" I've been reading who had first hand experience with DDR2, DDR3 and DDR4 launches are pretty uniform in saying not to jump in early. Wait a while before the true measure of the tech can be realized and costs come down.

It's not mine, but some have made the observation that launch memory performance was no better than the high end of the prior generation. It took a year or two before they were able to effectively, and affordably, push performance higher, both on the part of the DRAM mfr's and memory controllers.

Just underscores the wisdom in not waiting.

 

[JWNoctis]

In terms of performance, you may actually see more improvement with Zen 3+ and V-Cache, if professional and enthusiast parts for that do come out in maybe half a year.

Which might worth some wait, but only some.

 

[SamirD]

Depends on how much money you have and how badly you need it.

 

[eslam.topsecret66]

Depends on how much money you have and how badly you need it.

I already have b250m gaming 3 + i5 7400 + 16 gb ram 2400mhz , i wanted to upgrade my cpu and mb and rams like something 5900x or waiting for 12gen intel or waiting for am5 cpu im confused

 

[eslam.topsecret66]

In terms of performance, you may actually see more improvement with Zen 3+ and V-Cache, if professional and enthusiast parts for that do come out in maybe half a year.

Which might worth some wait, but only some.

I already have b250m gaming 3 + i5 7400 + 16 gb ram 2400mhz , i wanted to upgrade my cpu and mb and rams like something 5900x or waiting for 12gen intel or waiting for am5 cpu im confused

 

[drea.drechsler]

In terms of performance, you may actually see more improvement with Zen 3+ and V-Cache, if professional and enthusiast parts for that do come out in maybe half a year.
...

They should fit comfortably on current AM4 motherboards too.

 

[eslam.topsecret66]

So should go for am5 i would like 5900x and b550-f asus and 32 gb ram 3200mhz cl16 , or should waiting intel gen 12 or waiting am5 socket ?

 

[drea.drechsler]

.... i would like 5900x and b550-f asus and 32 gb ram 3200mhz cl16....

That will make up a high performing system for a long time coming so you can't go wrong there. If you need that kind of computing horsepower now there's no reason to wait. The only thing you need to be certain of is that what you are doing really needs 12 cores/24 threads of computing horsepower.

EDIT add: btw, not clear from your post but current gen, Ryzen 5000, CPU's fit on AM4 motherboards. AM5 will be needed for next-gen Ryzen CPU's.

 

[eslam.topsecret66]

That will make up a high performing system for a long time coming so you can't go wrong there. If you need that kind of computing horsepower now there's no reason to wait. The only thing you need to be certain of is that what you are doing really needs 12 cores/24 threads of computing horsepower.

EDIT add: btw, not clear from your post but current gen, Ryzen 5000, CPU's fit on AM4 motherboards. AM5 will be needed for next-gen Ryzen CPU's.

Yea sorry for that , ao u recommend me to go for 5900x not waiting 6000 series cpu ? Right and not waiting for ddr5

 

[drea.drechsler]

Yea sorry for that , ao u recommend me to go for 5900x not waiting 6000 series cpu ? Right and not waiting for ddr5

If you need the extra CPU horsepower right now, yes of course. So the decision depends on what you have right now and what your computing needs are.

If all you do is gaming a B550 motherboard with a 5600X CPU could be all you need to improve a lot. If you do demanding compute tasks, like video editing and transcoding or 3D graphics work with rendering, then a 12 core CPU like the 5900X would be an incredible improvement, no doubt, and remain a good performer for a long time.

 

[eslam.topsecret66]

If you need the extra CPU horsepower right now, yes of course. So the decision depends on what you have right now and what your computing needs are.

If all you do is gaming a B550 motherboard with a 5600X CPU could be all you need to improve a lot. If you do demanding compute tasks, like video editing and transcoding or 3D graphics work with rendering, then a 12 core CPU like the 5900X would be an incredible improvement, no doubt, and remain a good performer for a long time.

I want have some room because when i build last pc at that time 4 core that all we beed for gaming now i canly open anything else or multi task and yea i do some video editing i want have a smooth experience in games and all stuff even on multi task without worry

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

I agree with @drea.drechsler

What exactly are you going to be doing with your system? If it's gaming, then you don't necessarily need a 5900x. Heck even a 5600x is top gaming performance right now, and will drive any high end GPU pretty much to the max.

If you think by waiting for an Intel 12th gen or Ryzen 6 series, that you will somehow get massive amounts more FPS, then you are thinking the wrong way. Lets say you currently have a high end GPU (RTX3070/3080/3090 - AMD 6800X/XT/6900), having a 12th gen/Ryzen 6 CPU will not push your FPS much more. Current CPU's can already push any high end CPU's to their limits.

edit: At the clockspeeds, core counts, and FPS numbers you are talking about with higher end CPU's, the actual difference in performance is not hardly noticeable. You need synthetic benchmarks to show the perceived difference between CPU's.

You would do well to get a current Ryzen 5xxx/Intel 11thGen CPU. Both of which will serve you very well. Admittedly intel runs a little hotter this gen and for maybe the previous one or two gen too.

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

I want have some room because when i build last pc at that time 4 core that all we beed for gaming now i canly open anything else or multi task and yea i do some video editing i want have a smooth experience in games and all stuff even on multi task without worry

Then consider @drea.drechsler advice, and my last post. A 5600x based system, or max 5800x on AMD side, and Intel 11th Gen Rocket lake, like 11700k, will be like night and day from what you currently have. Both CPU's will give strong performance for a number of years given your usage type.

 

[drea.drechsler]

I want have some room because when i build last pc at that time 4 core that all we beed for gaming now i canly open anything else or multi task and yea i do some video editing i want have a smooth experience in games and all stuff even on multi task without worry

A less expensive alternative is a 5800X...8 cores for the video editing and transcoding tasks as well as unhindered multitasking in Windows. It's main problem is it just doesn't share the same 'price-performance' ratio that the 3800X it replaces had in relation to the rest of the product stack. And there's no '5700X' to take the value 8 core offering the 3700X provided.

People don't like that AMD stopped taking the value position and have really picked on that, so you'll find quite a bit of negativety aimed at the 5800X. But prices seem to be coming down, I've found 5800X's for under MSRP at my Microcenter.

 

[eslam.topsecret66]

A less expensive alternative is a 5800X...8 cores for the video editing and transcoding tasks as well as unhindered multitasking in Windows. It's main problem is it just doesn't share the same 'price-performance' ratio that the 3800X it replaces had in relation to the rest of the product stack. And there's no '5700X' to take the value 8 core offering the 3700X provided.

People don't like that AMD stopped taking the value position and have really picked on that, so you'll find quite a bit of negativety aimed at the 5800X. But prices seem to be coming down, I've found 5800X's for under MSRP at my Microcenter.

in my country egypt i going buy it new from someone shiping from amzon here 5800x so close price to 5900x like 2000EGP kind of 127us so i aiming for it i think worth right ?

 

[drea.drechsler]

in my country egypt i going buy it new from someone shiping from amzon here 5800x so close price to 5900x like 2000EGP kind of 127us so i aiming for it i think worth right ?

With a local price close enough I'd agree the 12 core part is only made more attractive.

 

[Zerk2012]

Yea sorry for that , ao u recommend me to go for 5900x not waiting 6000 series cpu ? Right and not waiting for ddr5

When you get a new generation of memory (DDR5) most of the time it takes it about a year to catch up to the speed of the older memory.

My old DDR3 memory was running 2400Mhz with 11 cas it took DDR4 a good bit of time to actually beat that.

 

[eslam.topsecret66]

When you get a new generation of memory (DDR5) most of the time it takes it about a year to catch up to the speed of the older memory.

My old DDR3 memory was running 2400Mhz with 11 cas it took DDR4 a good bit of time to actually beat that.

agree & will lanuch with higher price for sure

 

[eslam.topsecret66]

With a local price close enough I'd agree the 12 core part is only made more attractive.

yea i was thinking like that

 

[hotaru.hino]

When you get a new generation of memory (DDR5) most of the time it takes it about a year to catch up to the speed of the older memory.

My old DDR3 memory was running 2400Mhz with 11 cas it took DDR4 a good bit of time to actually beat that.

I'm not entirely convinced that this really matters anymore. A quick look at various benchmarks with RAM at different latency showed minimal performance differences on average. Also the official JEDEC spec so far for DDR5 shows that latency is within 1ns of JEDEC's official spec for DDR4's latency across the board. Plus there are few benefits going faster than DDR4-3600 for it to matter, whereas processors designed for DDR5 should happily gobble up bandwidth beyond those speeds without some sort of tradeoff (e.g., Zen no longer having a 1:1 mem clock ratio)

 

[drea.drechsler]

I'm not entirely convinced that this really matters anymore. A quick look at various benchmarks with RAM at different latency showed minimal performance differences on average. Also the official JEDEC spec so far for DDR5 shows that latency is within 1ns of JEDEC's official spec for DDR4's latency across the board. Plus there are few benefits going faster than DDR4-3600 for it to matter, whereas processors designed for DDR5 should happily gobble up bandwidth beyond those speeds without some sort of tradeoff (e.g., Zen no longer having a 1:1 mem clock ratio)

Not disagreeing...no basis to and that's what I've been seeing too. It may just be rationalization, of course, but I've no way of knowing.

But as I recall, there's a lot more going on with the move to DDR5. Like ultra-low power consumption. Low power consumption drives a lot of things these days. Not that it matters for the individual...but with installed base in the 100's of millions of DIMM's I guess it can make a difference.

 

[mamasan2000]

I'm not entirely convinced that this really matters anymore. A quick look at various benchmarks with RAM at different latency showed minimal performance differences on average. Also the official JEDEC spec so far for DDR5 shows that latency is within 1ns of JEDEC's official spec for DDR4's latency across the board. Plus there are few benefits going faster than DDR4-3600 for it to matter, whereas processors designed for DDR5 should happily gobble up bandwidth beyond those speeds without some sort of tradeoff (e.g., Zen no longer having a 1:1 mem clock ratio)

The issue with that is, no consumer is running JEDEC spec RAM. Jedec 3200 Mhz = 20-20-20 timings, 12-15 ns latency. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDR4_SDRAM
You can't even find that slow RAM on the market. The worst is like 16-18-18. And with DDR5, everything points to latency going up. 14-15 ns. https://www.techradar.com/news/corsair-teases-seriously-fast-ddr5-ram-and-its-coming-soon
Currently you are looking at 7-10 ns latency on DDR4. And overall 40-60 ns on Intel/AMD. DDR5 looks to have twice that. But it's still early days, engineering samples etc.
51 gb/s bandwidth? That is what? 3200 Mhz DDR4 today. You can reach 68-70 gig with top-end RAM.
And of course DDR5 wont be cheap. So you are paying the early adopter tax and buggy stuff for a year, basically being a betatester. Sounds worth it?

 

[RodroX]

Adding my two cents to what other said. So you have a Core i5 7400, If you need extra performance the Ryzen 9 5900X will be a really huge upgrade (heck anything above a Core i3 10100 included will be an awesome upgrade) over your current CPU and not only in the core/thread countm but raw performance.

And if history repeats, you are probably going to pay an extra for been a DDR5 first adopter. But who knows, we are ina crazy world right now so things may be different?