• Pardon our dust as we work on some regularly scheduled forum maintenance. You may notice some missing features during this time. Thank you for your patience!

Question Is it worth upgrading Ryzen 1300X to i5 9400F?

Option 1 or 2

  • Option 1

    Votes: 1 33.3%
  • Option 2

    Votes: 2 66.7%

  • Total voters
    3
Apr 26, 2019
4
0
10
0
I was planning on upgrading my current Build.

What I do: Website Designing, Adobe Photoshop (Graphics Designing, Photo Editing). Casual Gaming - World of Warcraft, Overwatch, Dota 2 etc. I don't do any kind of Video Editing or Task intensive work.

My current build is:

  1. AMD Ryzen 1300X (O.C. to 3.8 GHz)
  2. ASUS Prime B450M-A Motherboard
  3. G.Skill Ripjaw DDR4-3000Mhz Ram (Can only run at 2666Mhz - Not sure why, tried everything, anything above crashes my PC).
  4. Corsair RM550 PSU 80+ Gold. (4 years old and still going strong).
  5. Kingston 240GB SSD
  6. ASUS STRIX Geforce 960 GTX 2GB Graphics Card.
What I wanted to upgrade to:

  1. Intel Core i5 9400F
  2. ASUS B360 Motherboard
  3. Corsair Vengeance Pro DDR4-3000Mhz RGB RAM
  4. MSI GeForce GTX 1060 3GB (Getting this from a friend for $110)
  5. Antec Earthwatts Pro Gold.
I have two options:

Option 1:
Upgrade everything for $140 Extra. (Calculated everything, this is what I'm paying in my country, I know it must be cheaper outside, but for me this is the price.)
Option 2: Keep everything and upgrade only the GPU to 1060 for $40 extra.

Please give me your opinions, I am really confused. Is it really worth changing my AMD for Intel or should I just wait and upgrade directly to 2600X later.
 

Lutfij

Titan
Moderator
You can't go to DDR4-3000 with that B360 chipset. I'd ask you to keep everything as is, just drop in an R5 2600 or higher and be done with it. If you're looking at a GTX1060, get nothing less than a 6GB version.

Where are you located if I may ask?
 
Apr 26, 2019
4
0
10
0
No that's the thing, if I sell my whole set, someone is ready to buy all of it for $520. And the intel config will cost me about $600. So it's not much of a difference. But my question is should I wait for Ryzen 3000 and keep my current mobo or just switch to intel all together.
 

g-unit1111

Titan
Moderator
No that's the thing, if I sell my whole set, someone is ready to buy all of it for $520. And the intel config will cost me about $600. So it's not much of a difference. But my question is should I wait for Ryzen 3000 and keep my current mobo or just switch to intel all together.
You're not coming out ahead at that deal. As it stands now, you would lose $80 off the price plus whatever interest you've already paid on your original system and the difference in whatever you paid for your setup initially. You're better off, as we have suggested, upgrading the current platform you already have, and if possible, sell the parts you're not using.
 

Darkbreeze

Titan
Moderator
It's only worth it if you game at high refresh rates. Otherwise it's definitely not worth it with next gen Ryzen soon releasing.
It's absolutely worth it, as the first two things he listed were web design and Photoshop. Assuming a higher level of usage than the average person who is just creating memes, those processes will benefit from both the higher number of cores AND the much higher single core performance.

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/AMD-Ryzen-3-1300X-vs-Intel-i5-9400F/3057vs3397

Granted, not the MOST accurate comparison, but the gap is so huge that what it represents is too significant to bother with minutiae, plus, I couldn't FIND any direct comparisons, not even on Anandtech bench.

Even gaming is going to benefit. I don't think most people recognize or understand how underwhelming the Ryzen 3 processors actually are, but they BARELY have better single core performance than an FX CPU, and the FX-8350 at the stock configuration whoops all over it. So it's not very good. It's only marginally better than an FX-6300 based on both real world and synthetics.

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/AMD-Ryzen-3-1300X-vs-AMD-FX-8350-Eight-Core/3057vs1780

Personally, I think if you can sell that system for 520 dollars and get into a comparable Intel system with the 9400F by adding 80 bucks, it's more than worth it. For the application performance certainly and probably for the gaming performance as well because there are still a lot of games that don't have extensive multithreaded support or do, but do a lot better with a four to six fairly strong threads than with eight weak ones.

Even compared to the 2600x, it's almost dead even. So if you can get the 9400F system for 80 bucks, but it is going to cost you 180 bucks for a 2600x, I think it's a no brainer.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: King_V
It's absolutely worth it, as the first two things he listed were web design and Photoshop. Assuming a higher level of usage than the average person who is just creating memes, those processes will benefit from both the higher number of cores AND the much higher single core performance.

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/AMD-Ryzen-3-1300X-vs-Intel-i5-9400F/3057vs3397

Granted, not the MOST accurate comparison, but the gap is so huge that what it represents is too significant to bother with minutiae, plus, I couldn't FIND any direct comparisons, not even on Anandtech bench.

Even gaming is going to benefit. I don't think most people recognize or understand how underwhelming the Ryzen 3 processors actually are, but they BARELY have better single core performance than an FX CPU, and the FX-8350 at the stock configuration whoops all over it. So it's not very good. It's only marginally better than an FX-6300 based on both real world and synthetics.

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/AMD-Ryzen-3-1300X-vs-AMD-FX-8350-Eight-Core/3057vs1780

Personally, I think if you can sell that system for 520 dollars and get into a comparable Intel system with the 9400F by adding 80 bucks, it's more than worth it. For the application performance certainly and probably for the gaming performance as well because there are still a lot of games that don't have extensive multithreaded support or do, but do a lot better with a four to six fairly strong threads than with eight weak ones.

Even compared to the 2600x, it's almost dead even. So if you can get the 9400F system for 80 bucks, but it is going to cost you 180 bucks for a 2600x, I think it's a no brainer.
He only has a 75hz panel. I disagree because he only needs 60-80 fps and IMO I would rather upgrade the cpu in 2020 instead of spending money on a new platform now, for only two extra cores and FPS that won't be noticeable because of his existing panel. Now is a bad time to spend money on Intel. Especially with third gen Ryzen releasing within the next couple months. He doesn't have to wait until 2020 (I would) but a next gen ryzen cpu upgrade will yield the results he desires at a fraction of cost as opposed to purchasing a whole entire new platform.
 
if you can't wait, the 2700 or 2700X would be awesome; if you can wait till July, it's possible your mainboard might support the next gen/3000 series, rumored to some '15% faster'...

I think I'd try hard to wait until July....; if nothing else, then the 2700X should be ~$40-$50 less expensive...
 

Darkbreeze

Titan
Moderator
He only has a 75hz panel. I disagree because he only needs 60-80 fps and IMO I would rather upgrade the cpu in 2020 instead of spending money on a new platform now, for only two extra cores and FPS that won't be noticeable because of his existing panel. Now is a bad time to spend money on Intel. Especially with third gen Ryzen releasing within the next couple months. He doesn't have to wait until 2020 (I would) but a next gen ryzen cpu upgrade will yield the results he desires at a fraction of cost as opposed to purchasing a whole entire new platform.
You're still ONLY talking gaming, which is clearly not the only consideration. One track minds around here.
 
...those processes will benefit from both the higher number of cores AND the much higher single core performance.

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/AMD-Ryzen-3-1300X-vs-Intel-i5-9400F/3057vs3397

Granted, not the MOST accurate comparison, but the gap is so huge that what it represents is too significant to bother with minutiae, plus, I couldn't FIND any direct comparisons, not even on Anandtech bench.
That's not exactly what I would consider a particularly good benchmark site, and the results it provides tend to be a bit vague as to how they compare to real-world tasks, and overclocked performance is not represented. But if you are going to make that comparison between a brand-new mid-range Intel processor and a lower-end two year old Ryzen, why not at least toss in a similarly priced mid-range Ryzen as well, like a 2600 or 2600X, which provide better multithreaded performance and will run on their existing motherboard...

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/AMD-Ryzen-3-1300X-vs-Intel-i5-9400F-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-2600X/3057vs3397vs3235

I generally tend to prefer Userbench though, as it typically provides more detailed performance results that I think may be a bit more accurate, though these are all ultimately synthetic benchmarks...

https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-9400F-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-2600X/m699058vs3956

I don't think most people recognize or understand how underwhelming the Ryzen 3 processors actually are, but they BARELY have better single core performance than an FX CPU, and the FX-8350 at the stock configuration whoops all over it. So it's not very good. It's only marginally better than an FX-6300 based on both real world and synthetics.
This doesn't seem all that accurate. An 8-core FX CPU might outperform a 4-core Ryzen at some less common heavily-multithreaded workloads, but it's going to perform well behind even a low-end Ryzen processor at most tasks...

https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-Ryzen-3-1300X-vs-AMD-FX-8350/3930vs1489
 

Darkbreeze

Titan
Moderator
I still think you are ALL missing the fact that we're talking, based on assuming the OPs numbers are right, an 80 dollar investment versus a 170 dollar investment, for two platforms that have basically the same performance. I can't imagine I'd ever pay an extra 90 bucks for the privilege of being able to spend ANOTHER 200-400 bucks later if I wanted to upgrade again on the same platform. Just seems, numbskull to me.

As far down the road as both these platforms are currently, even given the upcoming 3000 series CPUs, I'd be looking at this as a stopgap anyhow, not a long term investment, and doubling your performance for only having to add 80 bucks out of your own pocket to get the same performance (Assuming 9400F vs 2600x, give or take a few points here or there, both ways) as what you'd get sticking with the same platform you already have but swapping out the CPU for 175 bucks (At least, if he can even get one at that price where he is) just doesn't seem wise or smart. Plus, then he's stuck with a 1300x that he likely can't sell to anybody without having the rest of the hardware to go with it as few people are going to be interested in purchasing a lone 1300x.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: King_V

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts