Question TR 2950x vs i9-9900k Best mix system option?

[talex001]

I am building my new desktop and have boiled down my system choice to be based on either the TR2950x or the i9-9900k. I realize the single thread performance (gaming, many everyday tasks) will benefit the 9900k but other tasks like the imaging software I run to process astronomy images, visual studio, VM's will benefit the 2950x.

I have read so much on all of this I have lost track of the various benefits of each platform, I know the intel had some features but I just cannot remember what they were and the AMD has it own set and this is where I think my decision will be made. I think intel had some memory settings, AMD has more PCI-e lanes.

What I wonder is if it's expected intel's future chips will fit in a Z390 board so the system would be upgrade-able as from what I understand the AMD releases later this year are expected to work in current TR compatible boards.

It's this upgrade-ability and the feature set that will make my decision and hoping someone who maybe has used both and or has the info on the differences that help push my decision over the top.

Thanks

 

[mdd1963]

There's is a small prayer of a chance that the next Intel 10 core 14 nm mainstream flagship variant might fit/function in a Z390, but, that's hardly a good value proposition for someone having spent $580 several months earlier on the 9900K...

You will have to decide on which to prioritize on:

- gaming yes, Intel has the obvious big lead here, but, unless planning on a 144 Hz monitor, and slapping in a RTX2070 or above, the difference might not be noticeable even while gaming, but, the 2950X takes some tinkering, and, few folks are that fond of typical little tricks such as disabling SMT and/or half the cores to extract performance, and, then mandating a reboot to recover...

- PCI-e lanes (irrelevant for most folks unless planning on 2 or 3 GPUs, and three NVME drives, plus one or more 10 GbE cards or RAID cards, etc...)

- workstation tasks If your tasks scale well with more cores, then clearly 16 cores will be more productive, adn the 9900K would take longer to complete assorted tasks...

-VMs (as even my Z270 and 7700K often and easily runs 5-6 server or NAS VMs with Win10 Pro just fine, I doubt the extra cores will be a huge benefit unless you plan on a huge virtualization scenario of 20+ VMs for fun, or intend to open your own datacenter)

 

[talex001]

Thanks pretty much what I was thinking except that I was hoping maybe intel has more upgrade room on the z390 in the future rather than a whole new system view. As far as VM's go, I am usually setting up older OS VM's as it seems I have been doing a lot of upgrading VB6 programs to Windows forms and most of the time I shut these down between use so no real need for a full time VM but it is not uncommon for me to be running a desktop vm alongside a vm with SQL and another with a server running IIS and occasionally an AD server to duplicate a production environment, especially if I am working on MS CRM stuff and as stated I just shut those down when done.

My main monitor is a 32" 144HZ but I don't believe it's 4k but when I do game I do like running everything on ultra and I already have an RTX 2080 which is going in this build. In the imaging software I use for astrophotography (pixinsight) it will take advantage of all cores it can, my previous pc was a core i-7700k and it was ok at best with this especially with stacking and combining gb's of images into 1.

.... at this point I could flip a coin I think.

 

[talex001]

well we shall see, went with an i9-9900k 32GB, Asus Strix Z390-E and a couple of nvme drives, putting either an rtx 2060 or 2080 in it (if the 2060 can run VR then that).