[SOLVED] Which CPU is best suited for open loop!!

[JaSoN_cRuZe]

Which CPU is best suited in a custom loop for best performance!!

I'm confused since Intel overclocks better but AMD provides more value but does not overclock like Intel.

So in a custom loop which CPU will take advantage of the thermal headroom and eek out the most performance.

I heard that AMD is very sensitive to temperature, will there be a significant difference, say between a 3700X and a 9900K in the same test bed.

 

[TheNightTerror]

I would say that Intel would be better, as it would overclock better, unless you’re thinking about AMD fx processors. My ryzen 9 3900x works fine on a hyper 212 BE.

 

[Rodrigodrt]

Likely intel, they've been refining (stuck) with the 14nm process been quite he while, so they have optimized (brute force squeezed them) to handle more and more ghz to battle the AMD's and their increasingly obnoxious amount of cores, so with a custom loop you should be able to dish out every last mhz of their 14nm, well, technically speaking...

 

[Zizo007]

A 9900KS will likely get you to 5.2Ghz but it will run hot even with a 360mm custom loop.
It really depends on your usage, Ryzen will be way faster than a 9900KS at 5.2Ghz in office and professional work like encoding videos, compiling, converting photos, compressing and unzipping files, video and photo rendering, coding, Auto CAD, etc

If you will only play games at 1440p and less, get the 9900KS but even at 1440p60Hz Ryzen is on par with a 9900KS 5.2Ghz. Its at 1080p144+Hz that the 9900KS will be faster. At 1440p144+Hz the 9900KS 5.2Ghz is slightly faster than a Ryzen.

 

[dorsai]

The 9900k is currently 525 $ on NewEgg...the Ryzen 9 3900 is 490 $.

Why look at the 3700x when you can buy the 3900x for slightly less than the 9900k ? which will walk away from the 9900k in everything except gaming where they'll be so close it won't matter.

Either platform will benefit from custom cooling.

 

[Zizo007]

The 9900k is currently 525 $ on NewEgg...the Ryzen 9 3900 is 490 $.

Why look at the 3700x when you can buy the 3900x for slightly less than the 9900k ? which will walk away from the 9900k in everything except gaming where they'll be so close it won't matter.

For gaming, there is no difference at all between a 3700X and a 3900X or even a 3950X. The 3700X is the best budget gaming CPU but I still prefer the 3800X as it might overclock better due to being higher binned and +300Mhz base clocks.

 

[dorsai]

Yeah I know...my point to the OP is why stop at 3700x if you have the money for the 9900k you have it for the 3900x which is a much more powerful cpu in general use.

 

[neojack]

i have watercooled my 2700x, and run it @4.1Ghz/1.3v all cores (manual OC)
but honestly a good aircooler would have achieved same performance.

a well constructed WC loop is quieter though. (although those high end noctua are very quiet)

tldr : Ryzen doesn't need Watercooling to reach it's full OC potential.

 

[Zizo007]

i have watercooled my 2700x, and run it @4.1Ghz/1.3v all cores (manual OC)
but honestly a good aircooler would have achieved same performance.

a well constructed WC loop is quieter though. (although those high end noctua are very quiet)

tldr : Ryzen doesn't need Watercooling to reach it's full OC potential.

...Unless you OC a 3950X to 4.3-4.4Ghz where it pulls 250+W.

 

[joeblowsmynose]

If you are going for high OC "numbers" and do a lot of high refresh gaming, then I'd go for the 9900k. You should get a 5.1 - maybe 5.2 if you are lucky. It will be hot under an all core load even with a good custom loop.

For the best all round performance value a 3700x at 4.3-ish would be the better choice. 3900x ... a bit better yet - especially if you do any multitasking or heavy load work.

With Intel, you can OC to max boost or a tad higher, with AMD you need to OC to ~4.1 minimum to exceed stock performance at lightly threaded tasks. But as mentioned, you could do this on a high end air cooler or AIO with the Ryzen, and anything higher than 4.4 will be pretty much out of the question at any temp.

All that said, RAM tweaking and OCing on Ryzen is another area that can gain you decent performance increases - depends on how much you like to tweak.

Another thing to consider, LGA 1159 is a total dead end and soon to be replaced with lga1200. AM4 (at least x570) will be compatible with Zen3 -- if AMD knocks it out of the park again with Zen3, you have a relatively inexpensive upgrade path, especially considering that you are thinking of the 3700x ... even a 3950x might be an upgrade for that (and better suited to a CL than a 3700x), meanwhile, Intel has nothing ahead of the 9900k on that socket, and the socket will be gone very soon.

 

[joeblowsmynose]

...

If you will only play games at 1440p and less, get the 9900KS but even at 1440p60Hz Ryzen is on par with a 9900KS 5.2Ghz. Its at 1080p144+Hz that the 9900KS will be faster. At 1440p144+Hz the 9900KS 5.2Ghz is slightly faster than a Ryzen.

Just a side note ... "resolution" has far less to do with how an AMD CPU can do at high refresh gaming than the GPU itself.

A 1050ti even at 720p won't be bottlenecking any modern CPU whatsoever.

Given he listed a 1070ti as GPU spec - if he keeps that card, there will be very little, if any, performance difference between an AMD and Intel CPU, even at 1080p.

The reviewers only ever use a 2080ti to test games, so when we look at the gaming charts, we have to keep in mind that that gap narrows very quickly as GPU processing power drops. Unfortunately, reviewers are too lazy to include any of this type of data in the reviews, so this fact always gets overlooked to the appearance of favour to Intel in games, greater than it is in reality.

 

[rubix_1011]

For me, it was the 32-core Threadripper 2990WX and getting it to 4.2ghz (up from 3.1ghz stock speed)

https://www.tomshardware.com/uk/reviews/amd-threadripper-2990wx-water-cooling-pc-build,5934.html

I haven't been able to get it that stable without that motherboard or cooling loop.

 

[JaSoN_cRuZe]

I really wanted AMD because of the insane variety of processors to choose from based on thier core counts. So getting a good x570 mobo like ASUS TUF paves way to just switch the processors from zen 2 and zen 3 and upgrade from 8, 12 to 16 cores based on the workload.

My only gripe with AMD is that the cooling headroom will be wasted since it is not as overclockable as Intel.

Intel on the other hand is considerably priced higher and also doesn't have any variety of processors or easy upgrade path.

Intel favours on the side of durability and has lasted this long for me without any problems, Most of the legacy applications were developed based on Intel architecture and i also heard that Intel systems felt snappier in normal cpu usage like browsing, please correct me if im wrong.

If that's not the case, i will defintely go with AMD and hope that zen 3 provides a good boost in clock speeds from thier current lineup coupled with some good ipc uplift.

Thanks for the inputs.

 

[Zizo007]

There is 0 difference between AMD and Intel when browsing the internet. I would go with AMD because you can upgrade to Ryzen 4000 in the future. I myself have a 1800X from 2017 and will be upgrading to 4800X when it comes out. I think my X370 motherboard will have a bios update to support Ryzen 4000 by then.

 

[neojack]

intel just announced their "new" i7 10900k wich uses a new socket, so yet again a new motherboard.
and it's still 14nm++++++++++
they do it to answer AMD's 3950X, but it would need a much heftier cooling

stay away from intel 14nm , it's prescott vs athlon XPs all over again.

if you get a 9900k now, you would never be able to upgrade without changing everything.

plus, you can fin ryzen 2600 CPUs or 1600AF (same CPU), for really cheap, and still be able to OC them to 4.1ghz all cores or activate PBO.
100USD on aliexpress !


as for watercooling ryzen. yeah if your CPU has more than 8 cores that's beneficial. but OP asked about the 3700x in it's first post

 

[joeblowsmynose]

...
Intel favours on the side of durability

This is pretty subjective.

I ran a PhenomII 965 OCd and OVd for seven years without a hiccup. My current R7 1700 has been OVd to 1.375 (this is beyond recommended voltage) and OCd to 3.9 for 2.5 years - no hiccups. I ever accidentally put 1.6v through it and started heavy all core benchmarking - no hiccup (except it overwhelmed my cooler - which is how I noticed something was up).

So I can say anecdotally, that durability - in the true sense of the word probably isn't a variable. The only CPU I ever had die was an Intel CPU - all CPUs seem pretty durable to me.

You may run into the appearance of a few more glitches on an AMD system, but if they are legit glitches, they will be patched quickly. But sometimes its just user error or not understanding the issues.

I keep hearing about how the new driver suite for AMD GPUs is so horribly glitchy, people can't play their games, etc. 99.99% of those are people changed graphics cards (often from Nvidia to AMD) and didn't to a clean driver sweep in safemode before installing new drivers. Well no kidding ...

(that said, AMD could do a better job of having their driver software direct the user when it needs to do a clean sweep, for example I change a video card from an older AMD card to a RX580 recently and the driver suite not only didn't prompt me to reinstall the drivers, it would give me no option to do so at all. It worked ok, but I was missing features I should have had with the new card etc, until I did a clean install. Well it should be common sense to change drivers on hardware change, but like I said their software could do a better job in that arena. Anyways - that was a full digression of the topic.

Intel DOES have marketing slides bragging about how, for example "media player" is more responsive with Intel processors, and that a browser will open 0.002 seconds faster with their chips. Do you think you would notice this? Media Player either stops to buffer, or it does not, lol.

I use both a Ryzen R7 1700 (OCd to 3,9), and an i7 4930 (OCd to 4.4), and I'd say both OCd, the Ryzen is snappier for sure - that said, at stock, I'd say they are the same in that dept, slight nod to the Intel maybe considering the R7 base is only 3.0ghz.Both older procs, but another anecdote.

But you might be able to go to a local PC shop and try one out to alleviate any concerns there?

Edit: I just realized I have a faster SSD drive on my Ryzen system, that's probably why partly at least, it generally feels a lot snappier than my i7.

 

[joeblowsmynose]

intel just announced their "new" i7 10900k wich uses a new socket, so yet again a new motherboard.
and it's still 14nm++++++++++
they do it to answer AMD's 3950X, but it would need a much heftier cooling
...

I'd be more interested in the 10700k - 10 cores on 14nm approaching 5.0? No thanks. Too hot.

That might be an option for OP to consider though ... who knows, maybe LGA1200 will be forward compatible with newer Intel CPUs ... probably not though.

 

[rubix_1011]

I'll be honest; most people choose their components and then build their custom loop around them. The only component I consider is the GPU and I will only purchase a graphics card for which there is a full cover GPU block. There are far too many SKUs out there which are custom PCB and there isn't always a block for.

 

[joeblowsmynose]

I'll be honest; most people choose their components and then build their custom loop around them. ...

Yeah, this has got him in a bit of a tough spot -- the loop would be way more useful on Intel, but it would be almost a shame to not take advantage of AMDs overall current performance, bang for buck and potential platform longevity (upgrade path - even if just for one more gen).

I have to recommend to go with a Ryzen system though - even if the loop won't be being used to its fullest potential. As you mentioned, adding a GPU block might be something for him to consider ... the cooler running Ryzen should allow for more headroom to add that second block ... ?

 

[rubix_1011]

I'm a bit puzzled, then. If he already has the loop components, how is he going to get an Intel CPU block to fit on an AMD CPU? Many of them don't have multiple brackets, but some do, so perhaps this is one of them.

 

[joeblowsmynose]

I'm a bit puzzled, then. If he already has the loop components, how is he going to get an Intel CPU block to fit on an AMD CPU? Many of them don't have multiple brackets, but some do, so perhaps this is one of them.

Between a pump, rad, fans, tubing, reservoir, sensors maybe, etc, a block is just one component to replace. He should consider that cost in his decision though, if its not an "all-in-one" type of block

 

[JaSoN_cRuZe]

I already have an AM4 block lying around collecting dust, No need to buy a separate block for LGA 1200 since LGA 115X coolers will supposedly be forwards-compatible.

Anyways my GPU is already connected with the loop with a total RAD space of 480mm(240 for each overclocked component rule!)

Yeah, this has got him in a bit of a tough spot -- the loop would be way more useful on Intel, but it would be almost a shame to not take advantage of AMDs overall current performance, bang for buck and potential platform longevity (upgrade path - even if just for one more gen).

I have to recommend to go with a Ryzen system though - even if the loop won't be being used to its fullest potential. As you mentioned, adding a GPU block might be something for him to consider ... the cooler running Ryzen should allow for more headroom to add that second block ... ?

Since i will hold on to the processor for more than 5 - 7 years, investing in either Intel or AMD i would not be swapping it any time in the future unless of course the need for more cores where AMD seems the way to go.

So personally i think it will boil down to price and performance offered by Intel & AMD in their upcoming products but the PCIe gen4/USB 4 seems to be a futuristic tech anyways let's wait and see.

 

[rubix_1011]

Between a pump, rad, fans, tubing, reservoir, sensors maybe, etc, a block is just one component to replace. He should consider that cost in his decision though, if its not an "all-in-one" type of block

Yes, but depending on which block, it could be a $100 additional cost. My point is, have an understanding of what hardware you plan to use, then carefully plan your cooling build around that. It gets expensive quickly if you find out that your components don't align with your preferred outcome.