[SOLVED] Ryzen or Threadripper?

AngelTech

Prominent
May 18, 2019
604
80
490
7
Originally I was gonna go with a Intel i5 9th gen but I want to get some opinions if I should go team red instead
my planned specs:
RTX 2080
32 GB
500 GB SSD + 2 TB HDD

Note I will be using my computer for both gaming and multi tasking and I play basically all game genres besides racing and most esport games

I really need some opinions so please give me your opinion on something good AMD processors (Threadrippers and Ryzen if possible along with there price) that can handle my GPU
 
Threadripper is good for multitasking, but not so good for games.

Look for higher clock rates which come from 9700K or 9900K which run at 5.0
Ryzen overclocking tops out around 4.3
Possibly the upcoming ryzen 3000 chips will match intel in the single thread performance area.
Not many games can effectively use more than the 6 threads of a 9600k.
In your price bracket, I would think it was hard to beat a 9700K.

If HDD usage is important to you, the intel Z390 chipsets support a optane device as a HDD cache. 16 or 32gb is not expensive to add to your build.
 
Reactions: RememberThe5th

AngelTech

Prominent
May 18, 2019
604
80
490
7
Threadripper is good for multitasking, but not so good for games.

Look for higher clock rates which come from 9700K or 9900K which run at 5.0
Ryzen overclocking tops out around 4.3
Possibly the upcoming ryzen 3000 chips will match intel in the single thread performance area.
Not many games can effectively use more than the 6 threads of a 9600k.
In your price bracket, I would think it was hard to beat a 9700K.

If HDD usage is important to you, the intel Z390 chipsets support a optane device as a HDD cache. 16 or 32gb is not expensive to add to your build.
I see but I don't really care for loading times in games so it won't really bother me as for everything else you said I'll keep it in mind
 

AngelTech

Prominent
May 18, 2019
604
80
490
7
Well lets compare (take this comparison as grain of salt);
https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-9600K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-2700X/4031vs3958
There isnt much of difference at "stock" levels.
With ryzen you get 2 extra cores and 10 more threads which can help in rendering, since you're going to use Nvidia encoder to stream games as it is quite similar to the CPU encoding.

Or as geo said ryzen 3.
I will take it with a grain of salt but I've looked at a few comparisons on YouTube of like frame rates between the two I don't really mind the FPS asking as it isn't below 60 FPS like losing a few frames or even 20 won't really hurt me and so would ryzen be a good choice for gaming streaming and general multitasking?
 
I see but I don't really care for loading times in games so it won't really bother me as for everything else you said I'll keep it in mind
Considering the low ssd prices of today, have you considered just a single 1tb ssd up front?
You can always add a hdd later if you need to store bulk data like videos.

The value of a ssd in games is not just the level load times.
It helps with quicker checkpoints, logging, loading video data.
 
Reactions: davew1860

AngelTech

Prominent
May 18, 2019
604
80
490
7
Considering the low ssd prices of today, have you considered just a single 1tb ssd up front?
You can always add a hdd later if you need to store bulk data like videos.

The value of a ssd in games is not just the level load times.
It helps with quicker checkpoints, logging, loading video data.
I really wouldn't have the money to upgrade later is the issue here for like quite some time I am still a minor so I don't work for money my parents are purchasing the system for me so I wouldn't have the money to get an HDD when I need the upgrade (I am 17 if that matters and won't be able to get a job for quite some time due to medical issues)

disregard this I am stupid lol
 
Last edited:
May 16, 2019
85
20
45
2
You could always add a second small cheap SSD to cache the HDD if you wanted. I did this for a couple of years for gaming using ISRT on the Intel-based system in my sig and gaming performance was almost identical to running games straight from a dedicated SSD.

I'm out of touch with AMD-based systems recently, but I believe the same thing can be achieved on those with StoreMI.
 

AngelTech

Prominent
May 18, 2019
604
80
490
7
You could always add a second small cheap SSD to cache the HDD if you wanted. I did this for a couple of years for gaming using ISRT on the Intel-based system in my sig and gaming performance was almost identical to running games straight from a dedicated SSD.

I'm out of touch with AMD-based systems recently, but I believe the same thing can be achieved on those with StoreMI.
After further research I can get both an SSD for OS (1TB) and still get the 2TB HDD for some reason I thought we were still in the world when SSDs were just disgustingly expensive and I am choosing between Ryzen 2700x and 2600x If you have any perspective it would really help
 

ElectrO_90

Dignified
BANNED
For instance -
PCPartPicker Part List

CPU: AMD - Ryzen 5 2600 3.4 GHz 6-Core Processor ($145.00 @ Amazon)
CPU Cooler: be quiet! - Dark Rock 4 CPU Cooler ($74.90 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: MSI - B450 TOMAHAWK ATX AM4 Motherboard ($109.89 @ OutletPC)
Memory: G.Skill - Ripjaws V Series 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3200 Memory ($154.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Samsung - 970 Evo Plus 500 GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive ($125.30 @ Amazon)
Storage: Hitachi - Ultrastar 7K3000 2 TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive
Video Card: Asus - GeForce RTX 2080 8 GB ROG Strix Gaming Video Card ($749.99 @ Newegg Business)
Case: Phanteks - ECLIPSE P350X ATX Mid Tower Case ($62.54 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: SeaSonic - FOCUS Plus Gold 550 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply ($79.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Total: $1502.59
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-05-20 21:14 EDT-0400
 
May 16, 2019
85
20
45
2
Just a quick heads-up on the above: As much as I love the speed and reliability of my Hitachi Ultrastar 7K3000, it's possibly the noisiest hard drive I've ever owned. Maybe go for a WD Red instead? It won't be quite as fast, but it would be almost silent.
 
May 16, 2019
85
20
45
2
WD Reds are for whatever purpose you decide to use them for and are generally cheaper than an equivalent size Ultrastar. I own both.

Both are optimised for use in multi-drive configurations (NAS/RAID) but are equally happy to run as a single drive.

Don't get me wrong. I love Ultrastars for their reliability (I own a 2TB and a 3TB), but they both sound like someone's whacking a toffee hammer against the side of the PC case when the heads are on the move and are clearly audible from the next room. By comparison, even a pair of 3TB WD Reds in Raid 1 are so quiet that I have to almost rest my ear on the case to hear them at all.
 
Last edited:
Here is a nice article on the WD "rainbow"

As to 2700X vs. 2600X I think it will make little difference if you have 16 threads or 12.
You will hardly use them all effectively.
You will see activity on all threads, but that is just windows spreading things around.
The value of the 2700X is that it is likely to OC better.
 
Reactions: RayOfDark

AngelTech

Prominent
May 18, 2019
604
80
490
7
Here is a nice article on the WD "rainbow"

As to 2700X vs. 2600X I think it will make little difference if you have 16 threads or 12.
You will hardly use them all effectively.
You will see activity on all threads, but that is just windows spreading things around.
The value of the 2700X is that it is likely to OC better.
I will go with the blue and 2700x will it cause any issues with my RTX card? (the CPU) I am choosing 2700x bc I am gonna try to overclock and see how it goes so the best OC value will be helpful BUT if you think there's any reason I should go with 2600x then I will take your word for it
and I am gonna go with the WD Blue as I usually wear headphones and such so noise isn't much of a concern
 
All of the $200+ modern processors will do well with a RTX2080 class card.
Don't beat yourself up about that decision.

DW blue is fine, but to my mind, a SSD is the way to go if you can manage it.
It will be faster and likely more reliable.
Noise is less also, but that will not concern you.
 

AngelTech

Prominent
May 18, 2019
604
80
490
7
All of the $200+ modern processors will do well with a RTX2080 class card.
Don't beat yourself up about that decision.

DW blue is fine, but to my mind, a SSD is the way to go if you can manage it.
It will be faster and likely more reliable.
Noise is less also, but that will not concern you.
The WD Blue is a 1TB SSD
 

rigg42

Upstanding
Oct 17, 2018
421
141
390
10
I will go with the blue and 2700x will it cause any issues with my RTX card? (the CPU) I am choosing 2700x bc I am gonna try to overclock and see how it goes so the best OC value will be helpful BUT if you think there's any reason I should go with 2600x then I will take your word for it
and I am gonna go with the WD Blue as I usually wear headphones and such so noise isn't much of a concern
If you are going to overclock buy the non x 2700. It's the same CPU with different out of the box settings. It's not much more expensive than a 2600x. The only reason to buy the X chips is for the auto overclocking features and superior stock coolers. If manually overclocking you'll get better performance spending the same money on a non x chip and an aftermarket cooler rather than buying the X chip and using the stock cooler. You can't get all the benefit of the auto overclocking on the 2700x/2600x without a better cooler anyway. Your also likely to be able manually dial in a better overclock on the X variants with the stock coolers in terms of temperatures. I was actually running into this issue today on a 2600x i got in a trade. Stock settings with the stock cooler was running the CPU in the low-mid 90's c during stress tests (despite running a -100 mv offset). It also wasn't stable. I managed to drop that by about 12 c with a manual overclock. It's possible my CPU is just an outlier but I was extremely disappointed with stock settings on this CPU. I had a 2700x as well a few months back. That worked awesome with a Dark Rock 4 cooler. I turned PBO on with a -100 mv offset and would hit 4.2 all core in stress tests with sub 80c temps. It would boost between 4.2 - 4.3 when gaming. It was cool but I'd rather have saved the money and just manually overclocked a 2700 to 4.2 in retrospect.

Either way I would wait and see what AMD announces at Computex next week. Ryzen 3000 could live up to the hype. We will likely have specs and performance data next week Rumored availability on the CPU's is 7/7/19. Prices are likely to trend downwards on 2000 parts in the coming months.
 
Reactions: davew1860

AngelTech

Prominent
May 18, 2019
604
80
490
7
If you are going to overclock buy the non x 2700. It's the same CPU with different out of the box settings. It's not much more expensive than a 2600x. The only reason to buy the X chips is for the auto overclocking features and superior stock coolers. If manually overclocking you'll get better performance spending the same money on a non x chip and an aftermarket cooler rather than buying the X chip and using the stock cooler. You can't get all the benefit of the auto overclocking on the 2700x/2600x without a better cooler anyway. Your also likely to be able manually dial in a better overclock on the X variants with the stock coolers in terms of temperatures. I was actually running into this issue today on a 2600x i got in a trade. Stock settings with the stock cooler was running the CPU in the low-mid 90's c during stress tests (despite running a -100 mv offset). It also wasn't stable. I managed to drop that by about 12 c with a manual overclock. It's possible my CPU is just an outlier but I was extremely disappointed with stock settings on this CPU. I had a 2700x as well a few months back. That worked awesome with a Dark Rock 4 cooler. I turned PBO on with a -100 mv offset and would hit 4.2 all core in stress tests with sub 80c temps. It would boost between 4.2 - 4.3 when gaming. It was cool but I'd rather have saved the money and just manually overclocked a 2700 to 4.2 in retrospect.

Either way I would wait and see what AMD announces at Computex next week. Ryzen 3000 could live up to the hype. We will likely have specs and performance data next week Rumored availability on the CPU's is 7/7/19. Prices are likely to trend downwards on 2000 parts in the coming months.
Thank you for the huge paragraph if any of the 3000 chips are worth it can you tell me which 3000 chip is worth it I don't keep up on tech often like I had 0 clue what a GTX 1650 was till a few weeks ago (you can pm me if that will help) if nothing meets expectations I will get a Ryzen 2700 and manually overclock it like you suggested thanks again!
 

rigg42

Upstanding
Oct 17, 2018
421
141
390
10
Thank you for the huge paragraph if any of the 3000 chips are worth it can you tell me which 3000 chip is worth it I don't keep up on tech often like I had 0 clue what a GTX 1650 was till a few weeks ago (you can pm me if that will help) if nothing meets expectations I will get a Ryzen 2700 and manually overclock it like you suggested thanks again!
It will be hard to say definitively until independent benchmarks are released. This probably won't happen until late June. We should hopefully at least be able to make educated guesses after the Computex keynote though. You can probably count on the 3000 models being better across the board than the previous Ryzen CPU's. It will just be difficult to determine value propositions until pricing/specs/performance can be directly compared between the old and new CPU's. This can't be fully known until the independent reviews drop. If the rumors are true, these new CPU's could go head to head with Intel in gaming performance, while offering higher core and thread counts for the same price.

The 1650 is a joke BTW. Anybody who buys that is being an idiot IMO.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS