Question i7 9700 vs Ryzen 3700x

XSR

Distinguished
Aug 10, 2012
334
0
18,780
0
Do not try the integrated graphics with Ryzen 3700x, for that is impossible, only see that there is no integrated graphics with Ryzen 3700x.
And what about igpu with i7 9700?
should it be enough for Cubase and Kontakt?
or should I go for 3700x with GT/GTX/RTX card?
 

my_pc_build

Great
Nov 17, 2019
104
15
95
2
And what about igpu with i7 9700?
should it be enough for Cubase and Kontakt?
or should I go for 3700x with GT/GTX/RTX card?
I know nothing about these products, but from what I've seen on the pages listed below using the i7 9700 and its integrated graphics only would be more than enough - neither lists specific graphics requirements, implying that the integrated graphics with the listed minimum CPUs is sufficient.

Bear in mind that if you bought the i7 9700 you might need to buy a better cpu cooler - the stock cooler that comes with it has been said to be totally inadequate, whereas the stock cooler that comes with the 3700x is fine ( https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/dff0a4 View: https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/dff0a4/do_not_use_the_stock_cooler_on_i7_9700/
).

Do you have a budget, and are these (plus internet surfing, emails ...) your only uses?

I would think for a given budget for these uses, you could get ryzen packages that would beat comparable intel packages.
Is there a reason you only want to compare these 2 CPUs?
There are other CPUs that could meet your needs with these.

All the best.
=====================
info re system requirements:
----------------------------
KONTAKT 6 PLAYER

SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
macOS 10.12, 10.13, 10.14 or 10.15 (latest update), i5, 4 GB RAM

Windows 7, Windows 8, or Windows 10 (latest Service Pack), Intel Core i5 or equivalent CPU, 2 GB RAM
4 GB RAM (6 GB recommended for large KONTAKT Instruments)

System requirements for Steinberg software
Minimum System Requirements
CPU minimum
64-bit Intel or AMD multi-core
CPU recommended
Intel i5 or faster
RAM minimum
8 GB
RAM recommended
16 GB
Hard disk free space
100 GB
Display resolution minimum1366 x 768
 

my_pc_build

Great
Nov 17, 2019
104
15
95
2
And what about igpu with i7 9700?
should it be enough for Cubase and Kontakt?
or should I go for 3700x with GT/GTX/RTX card?
Just to add to the above: the key group of mainstream users benefiting from intel right now are gamers wanting to squeeze the maximum FPS out of AAA games - for most other users, as far as performance and value for money goes it's AMD all the way. (There are other less discussed PC users who might have particular reasons for wanting the highest possible clock speeds on indivual cores, but I'm not familiar with those groups.)

I'm not really confident I know enough about this software to say which CPUs are overkill, vs CPUs above minimum requirements but delivering a better experience than rival (lesser) CPUs because of their performance.

From what I've seen about Cubase and Kontakt I suspect you'll get better value for money with AMD but I don't really know.
 
And should I buy a GPU for cubase or is a integrated graphics card enough?
You would need a discrete GPU for a Ryzen 3700X. If Cubase runs well using the integrated GPU in an Intel processor I would suspect a fairly low-end GPU would suffice, like an RX 560 or 1030 or even less. But getting something much better (RX5700, RTX2060) will open up a lot more use cases...including games.

As with others, I'm not that familiar with either Cubase or Kontakt so not sure how demanding they are on CPU's but you could easily find a Ryzen 3600 or even 1600-AF would be more than adequate. That would offer even better value for money.
 
Last edited:

my_pc_build

Great
Nov 17, 2019
104
15
95
2
Thank you!

Is the Antec A30 good enough for i7 9700?
Hi XSR,
I can't see a lot of quality reviews of the Antec A30, but from what I do see I think the answer is no (please excuse the google translate pseudo-English):
As we can see in the capture, the cooler is one of the least benefits that has passed through our hands, but it is capable of lowering the maximum temperature of the Intel cooler by 6ºC, staying at a reasonable 62ºC. It is not a cooler that is oriented to practice overclocking, although due to its size, very low sound and lighting it fulfills more than its task, being suitable for HTPC equipment without many pretensions

Read more http://www.razorman.net/reviewshardware/review-antec-a30/5/

That reviewer was testing the cooler with a INTEL CELERON G3450, your CPU generates a lot more heat.

For a demanding CPU like that I would recommend the Noctua NH-D15 CPU Cooler - you're paying a premium for the clock speed, so you don't want to loose it to thermal throttling.

The NH-D15 is simply the best CPU air cooler, comes with a 6 year warranty and the fans are legendary.

You would need to make sure your case is big enough to hold NH-D15 (it's big).

Take the time to choose all the parts for your build (so everything fits) before buying - that would also let you compare package options (I still think you'd probably be better with AMD :) ).

All the best.
 

XSR

Distinguished
Aug 10, 2012
334
0
18,780
0
Do not try the integrated graphics with Ryzen 3700x, for that is impossible, only see that there is no integrated graphics with Ryzen 3700x.
I read that Ryzen has issue with low latency/realtime performance. So I create this topic to have some more info about that.

AMD shines in multicore performance where realtime processing is not required, like for rendering video or other CPU tasks which are not time critical.

Should I get the i7 9700?
 

my_pc_build

Great
Nov 17, 2019
104
15
95
2
I read that Ryzen has issue with low latency/realtime performance. So I create this topic to have some more info about that.

AMD shines in multicore performance where realtime processing is not required, like for rendering video or other CPU tasks which are not time critical.

Should I get the i7 9700?
Hi XSR, 'Ryzen has issue with low latency/realtime performance' - hmm not sure where you read that but no that's not true. Here's one comparison you could look at:
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-i7-9700-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-3700X-vs-Intel-i7-9700K/3477vs3485vs3335

The software you want to use is a bit of a corner case, because looks like single core / thread speed is important, but you need to look carefully through the discussions - some forums discussions that sound like 'My ryzen does really badly with Cubase ...' actually turn out otherwise (see example quoted below).

I need to look into this a little further to get back to you. I would recommend do some more research yourself, get some further advice. My gut feeling is still that you will get a better deal with Ryzen but I do need to look further into that.

All the best.

Here's a user that started with a complaint about his new Ryzen 3600 - not as strong as the 3700x you're looking at - who concluded, after further research, that the Ryzen 3600 was actually a good choice for this software (https://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=165153):
========================
Re: Upgraded to 3x faster CPU, a Ryzen 3600, seeing only 10% decrease in ASIO performance meter...

Post by Nuieve » Sun Jul 28, 2019 5:47 am
Ok, couldn't find peace with this, did some more testing. Well result is very surprising.

I add a track with 16 instances of Kramer tape to a channel. Asio meter goes up to ~72%.
I add another track with 16 instances (2nd track), nothing happens, still at ~75%.
I add two more tracks with 16 instances each (4 tracks total now), meter goes up to something like 85%.
I add two more tracks, one at a time, meter goes up by a few % each time but after 6th one it starts stuttering a bit but doesn't go red.
(see attached gif)
Each channel takes up about 6-7% of actual CPU use. At the moment of stuttering CPU is used at 43%.

asio.gif
(191.2 KiB) Not downloaded yet

So the actual ASIO meter graph is not linear at all, and this whole thread is one big confusion.

But the performance is actually very impressive. Kramer's tape is one of Waves most CPU hungry plugins. 96 instances of that, I'll take it. I think 3600 is fine.

Much happier now.
====================
 
Last edited:

RodroX

Notable
Aug 4, 2019
768
222
940
35
From my humble knowladge Im guessing that any of the two CPU will do fine in Cubase.

If you wana do more things on your PC while using Cubase then Ryzen should be more productivity friendly since it have SMT (intels HT) enable making it an 8 cores / 16 threads cpu, vs the i7 9700 8 cores / 8 threads.

The i7 9700 is a great cpu on its own league but at this point of time they are both really close to each other.

I have no clue where did you read all that low latency nonsense, but maybe they were talking about the first gen Ryzen (the 1xxx).

In short buy which ever you find more appealing.

As a side note, on saturday I had to convert a folder to MP3, around 3GB of .wav music (70 songs give or take). I selected all the files, set the MP3 to 320kbps, pressed Enter and it was done in less than a minute (my cpu has the turbo boost option disable in BIOS because I don't feel I need it On yet, since everything I work or play with runs really great) . I love my Ryzen 5 3600 :)

Cheers
 

my_pc_build

Great
Nov 17, 2019
104
15
95
2
I read that Ryzen has issue with low latency/realtime performance. So I create this topic to have some more info about that.

AMD shines in multicore performance where realtime processing is not required, like for rendering video or other CPU tasks which are not time critical.

Should I get the i7 9700?
Here's a review that puts to rest concerns about latency on the Ryzen 3000s (http://www.scanproaudio.info/2019/07/12/amd-ryzen-3600-3700x-3900x-dawbench-tested-3-is-it-the-magic-number/):
"So, overall thoughts are one of being largely impressed at each given price point. I don’t think I’d drop as low as the 3600 personally, but the 3700X has a strong claim as a superb all-rounder at the entry-level and both of these chips seem to have largely shaken any concerns that remain about internal latency handling. "
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts