Question Which would you buy right now? 3800x, 3900x, 9900KF, 9900K, or 9900KS

[wehler53]

Hi all!

So im going to give you a case scenario, and id love to here some opinions on what youd pick out of the above options for a new build tomorrow!

Alright the computer will be running a 2080ti, it will have either 32 or 64GB of ram at lets say 3600mhz, and will be running a 3440x1440 21:9 screen for gaming at 100Hz, and a secondary 27 inch 4k monitor for various uses. All within a highend custom cooling loop.

The computer will mainly be used for gaming in ultra for games in the league of the Witcher 3, Cyberpunk, Red Dead ect. It will also be used for causal graphic design/video editing, and for occasional general day to day administration and report generating work. I think thats a reasonable average use for people looking at these CPUs right?

Here in Australia prices are as follows (roughly)
3800x - $599
3900x - $789
9900KF - $699
9900K - $799
9900KS - $859

So whats it going to be, what are you taking and why? What is the biggest factor for you, theres no shame if your hard team AMD or team Intel, is it price, is it flexibility, is it OC'ing? Im interested to see what people say.

 

[yourilevoye]

You sure if you mainly use it for casual editing and stuff + gaming really needs one of those cpu's?
I have seen the 9900KS hitting 5GHz on all cores, but that of course requires a lot of other premium stuff (Mobo, psu, cooling). But is it worth it for you to spend that much on those CPU's?

Personally I went for the 3700x and I installed it yesterday. I mainly game, occasionally stream and do some 3d rendering stuff. Personally I believe at these price differences, the question is more what is the cpu worth for you. Both amd and Intel are great and won't let you down. Since you will be using it for gaming mostly from what I can see, clockfrequency will be quite important for you.

 

[MrBird]

this is an easy pick.....what is your doubt?

Full on ultra gaming CPU speed = doesnt matter GPU does....and you got that covered.....so....with this said....
AMD all the way. i have a 3900x and i wouldnt trade it for a 9900k. this CPU simply has to much punch for intel to take.

Workwise AMD is better....CPU´s have more IPC and if you take into account the 3900x you have more cores, so better render speed....

Gamingwise Intel beats AMD in its raw state....but when you put everything into account....intel only has more FPS when core speed is a factor........with this said you can only talk Intel until you reach FHD resolutions.....passing that resolution....CPU speed is no longer a factor because games start to get GPU intensive instead of CPU intensive like in low res´s.

With all this explained.....and since you pack a 2080TI I assume you will not be playing at 1080p or less....and also assuming that you are not a "single threaded brain person"....your computer you will also 100% sure will not be either.....so you will have MULTIPLE app.s and shit opened on your PC and there is where these new 3rdgen AMD shines........the multi-threaded power of these bad boys are on par with 2000E CPU.s so you do the math........I like BOTH brands.....but right now i have to say...AMD beats the living crap out of Intel in everyway shape or form......

I am not a AMD fanboy....my first PC was a IBM 2.8.6....my first gaming PC was an AMD single core.....but then....i am Intel for 15 years now, my last CPU was a 8700k wich is still 1 of the kings of FPS and a tremendous CPU!.....i am saying this so you can understand that i am not "taking sides" i am just beeing transparent and giving you my experience and saying what is best right now.

 

[vMax]

Probably against the grain...but here you go.....

For your use case and money NOT being an issue, the 9900K (overclocking) or 9900KS (if not overclocking). Why, quiet simply because it will provide the very best frame rates bar none and get the most out of the RTX 2080Ti if gaming is the focus which it is based on your use case.

The AMD CPU's are absolutely great and where you have a mixed work load, especially pro workloads, then they cannot be beaten on both value and performance but for the best gaming results and some mixed workloads, the 9900K/9900KS cannot be beaten.

Ultimately it comes down to budget for me. If money is not an issue then the 9900K/KS will be the one and if budget is an issue then the 3600/3700/3700X/9700K etc would be the way to go....period.

I am not going into the Intel vs AMD vs Nvidia as it is just a complete waste of time...they are all businesses out to make a profit and they certainly are not going to tuck me in bed and read me a bed time story! my 2 cents...

 

[MrBird]

Probably against the grain...but here you go.....

For your use case and money NOT being an issue, the 9900K (overclocking) or 9900KS (if not overclocking). Why, quiet simply because it will provide the very best frame rates bar none and get the most out of the RTX 2080Ti if gaming is the focus which it is based on your use case.

The AMD CPU's are absolutely great and where you have a mixed work load, especially pro workloads, then they cannot be beaten on both value and performance but for the best gaming results and some mixed workloads, the 9900K/9900KS cannot be beaten.

Ultimately it comes down to budget for me. If money is not an issue then the 9900K/KS will be the one and if budget is an issue then the 3600/3700/3700X/9700K etc would be the way to go....period.

I am not going into the Intel vs AMD vs Nvidia as it is just a complete waste of time...they are all businesses out to make a profit and they certainly are not going to tuck me in bed and read me a bed time story! my 2 cents...

i get stuned when people advice Intel for 2k and 4k gaming saying it has more FPS that is not true at all! i had and have both....and that is not true at alllllllll!!!

 

[SgtScream]

Based on the original post, the budget is very high. Going anything other than a i9 9900ks would be a mistake. You have no reason not to go best of the best.

 

[vMax]

i get stuned when people advice Intel for 2k and 4k gaming saying it has more FPS that is not true at all! i had and have both....and that is not true at alllllllll!!!

The ultimate example of someone who does not know how to engage in a discussion....

 

[toniplavna]

I would buy 3900x for sure.

 

[MrBird]

Based on the original post, the budget is very high. Going anything other than a i9 9900ks would be a mistake. You have no reason not to go best of the best.

best of the best right now is NOT intel! it was 2 years ago......but right now, it is not.....check derbauer....jayz.....gamersmeld...wtv.....they will all say the same thing if you dont believe random people!

If you are going to have a 2k rez monitor or more.....forget Intel.......if you are going to play counterstrike of fortnite for example(games that are still runned at FHD rez and higly depende on core speed to squiizeee that bastard single FPS out of the gfx into your screen so you can pin point the exact pixel of that super headshot.......fine go intel.......) since that is not the case.....



i will just post this:

3900X = 2000E CPU power by comparison to an intel that does the same thing(9980XE)..........now you think about that when you consider buying a 9900KS publicity stunt to rip you off another 100bucks more when you can get a 9900k wich is the the exact same shit or the 3900x for +- the same price.

Please go check the syntetic benchmarks and real world benchs....they are really that darn impressive!
Like i said....i came from Intel because they where hands down the best.....but the game changed...and they are not the best anymore.......

When people nowadays talk about intel they only remind me of the Apple users....Apple is the GREATEST THING EVER...........when you look at their hardware/price ratio = most expensive brand in the world with the crapiest hardware inside their products but Apple fans dont care....its...its APPLE! ahahahah morons! sory

 

[faalin]

Ill just leave this here 36 game test if you don't feel like reading video. You can also watch this where they talk about AMD vs Intel youtube and why someone might choose one over the other.

but for me
straight gaming -> intel
gaming plus streaming -> i would look hard at AMD
any multi core activities -> AMD

Questions: causal graphic design/video editing, and for occasional general day to day administration and report generating work. Are you getting paid for any of this? Do you care how long it takes to finish these tasks?

If you answer no to both of these go intel. If ether of the answers is a yes look at AMD.

 

[rodrigoxm49]

For me, as a gamer only, 3900x would be my choice.

Intel platform is dead, so spent a lot of money in a platform that I would never could update? For me, its just not smart since 3900x have roughly the same performance and it's overclockable too.

I think this is compelling enough to choose AMD for the first time after more than a decade. Ryzen Zen2 is a nice surprise.

View: https://youtu.be/qGwEg7px2ko

 

[SgtScream]

The platform is irrelevant when choosing a 9900ks. By the time the platform dates anyone with this kind of budget would build a new system.

 

[PdxPetmonster]

The platform is very relevant.

There's choosing to spend money because you want to, and there's choosing to spend money because you need to. Just because an initial build may have a high budget doesn't mean next year when new hardware comes out that budget will be there again. Intel's business plan has always forced people to upgrade parts they really wouldn't if given the choice, and now along comes AMD giving people the option to only needing a single upgrade to bring their system relatively current. I'll choose 90+% of Intels gaming performance, while only needing to upgrade 1 piece of equipment each year, every day of the week.

 

[SgtScream]

The platform is very relevant.

There's choosing to spend money because you want to, and there's choosing to spend money because you need to. Just because an initial build may have a high budget doesn't mean next year when new hardware comes out that budget will be there again. Intel's business plan has always forced people to upgrade parts they really wouldn't if given the choice, and now along comes AMD giving people the option to only needing a single upgrade to bring their system relatively current. I'll choose 90+% of Intels gaming performance, while only needing to upgrade 1 piece of equipment each year, every day of the week.

Anyone who builds a high end system with an i9 9900ks isnt EVER going to even consider upgrading the processor on a preexisting platform and this build won't have be considered for replacement until at the very least 5 years. You'll likely get more than 5 years out of a system that boosts to 5.0ghz on all cores right out of the box. The system is already high end so there's nothing to upgrade dude! Lets say he goes the 3900x route. There isn't going to be many viable AM4 options to upgrade to down the line (going from a 3900x or higher) that will make the price to performance increase worth the hassle. There's only 4th gen and that's it so lets face the facts that any of the processors listed above wouldn't be a bad decision and all of them won't need to be upgraded for 5+ years, especially high end systems so the platform IS irrelevant. The am4 platform upgrades are only relevant for mid to low end systems.

 

[SgtScream]

I'd just like to see what happens after the warranty expires and the chipset fans start to go on AM4 motherboards.

 

[rodrigoxm49]

The platform is irrelevant when choosing a 9900ks. By the time the platform dates anyone with this kind of budget would build a new system.

People need to understand that nobody is saying that i9 9900 will need be changed in the next years. Probably is a CPU for at least 5 years easily. But the demands always grows and sometimes, specially to people that have money to buy a 9900, you just want to add more and more performance to what you have. Nothing to do with needs.

Do people need really a new smartphone every year? No, nobody needs. But I know a lot of people that change Iphone and Samsung S every single year. Why? Sometimes there's not a singular good reason to do it beyound "i just have money to do it" argument and we need to respect that.

And let's just don't forget that we have 144Hz and even 240Hz panel over there for people that have money to buy the best CPU, best GPU, etc. Changing CPU to a new one, let's say a Ryzen 5900X (assuming that would be compatible with 570 chipsets), will give 20% more performance - just hypothetically - will help a lot to keep frames much higher.

I'm not saying that people should agree with AMD choice or saying that AMD choice would be better and period. It's not that. I just don't understand how people can't understand how compelling are the arguments to do it.

 

[RodroX]

Hi, If someone would ask me this question, I will said go AMD, why? cause you still have zen 3 (Ryzen 4xxx) coming on the same platform (socket AM4) for future upgrades.

Many already mention this, once you scale to 1440 ultrawide @100Hz or 4K, while Intel may still have the lead, Do you really need those 5~10ish extra FPS you may see in just some games?

Right now I believe you can't go wrong with either. In fact as yourilevoye already mention, I also believe that even the Ryzen 7 3700X should be more than enough to power the RTX 2080TI at those resolutions and refresh rates.

Cheers!!!

 

[RodroX]

I'd just like to see what happens after the warranty expires and the chipset fans start to go on AM4 motherboards.

Well if thats something to worry, one can do what most of us did (since you don't really need a X570 mobo to drive a 3900X) and go with a good B450 or X470. Or if not in a hurry, just wait till the B550 mobos comes out

 

[SgtScream]

People need to understand that nobody is saying that i9 9900 will need be changed in the next years. Probably is a CPU for at least 5 years easily. But the demands always grows and sometimes, specially to people that have money to buy a 9900, you just want to add more and more performance to what you have. Nothing to do with needs.

Do people need really a new smartphone every year? No, nobody needs. But I know a lot of people that change Iphone and Samsung S every single year. Why? Sometimes there's not a singular good reason to do it beyound "i just have money to do it" argument and we need to respect that.

And let's just don't forget that we have 144Hz and even 240Hz panel over there for people that have money to buy the best CPU, best GPU, etc. Changing CPU to a new one, let's say a Ryzen 5900X (assuming that would be compatible with 570 chipsets), will give 20% more performance - just hypothetically - will help a lot to keep frames much higher.

I'm not saying that people should agree with AMD choice or saying that AMD choice would be better and period. It's not that. I just don't understand how people can't understand how compelling are the arguments to do it.

People replace their cell phones, they don't upgrade the processors in them lol and this just backs my statement that high end systems will most likely be replaced at the 5 year mark and not even be considered for upgrading. Again your analogies need work. I doubt any 4th gen processor upgrade will give any triple A titles 20% fps improvement over third gen. Who knows but by the time the processor is dated enough to consider upgrading, 4th gen will also be including the platform. People only need so much processing power and upgrading an already high end 3rd gen processor to 4th gen isn't going to be worth it in 5 years let alone 1 year. Most people just arent going to do it, especially for high end systems because there isn't going to be a need to.

 

[Deleted member 14196]

3900x hands down. because i do way more than just mere gaming.

 

[rodrigoxm49]

People replace their cell phones, they don't upgrade the processors in them lol. Again your analogies need work. I doubt any 4th gen processor upgrade will give any triple A titles 20% fps improvement over third gen. Who knows but by the time the processor is dated enough to consider upgrading, 4th gen will also be let alone the platform. People only need so much processing power and upgrading a high end 3rd gen processor to 4th gen isn't going to be worth it in 5 years let alone 1 year. Most people just arent going to do it, especially for high end systems.

Since a analogy doesn't need perfect symmetry, I am amazed how much little effort you made to understand a very simple, didactic and rudimentary analogy. I'm amazed, but deffinitely not surprised.

I have nothing to add here. Bye!

 

[SgtScream]

Since a analogy doesn't need perfect symmetry, I am amazed how much little effort you made to understand a very simple, didactic and rudimentary analogy. I'm amazed, but deffinitely not surprised.

I have nothing to add here. Bye!

Hey man no worries, team red vs team blue is a highly debatable topic. I just want to make sure we're comparing apples to apples. Just because they upgrade their cell phones for no reason doesn't make it justifiable. We at tom's hardware are a very small niche compared to the outside world and I guarantee you only a small percentage of that niche would consider upgrading an already high end system because we are knowledgeable enough to know the price to performance increase wouldn't be justifiable. I'm just trying to emphasize the fact that yes the AM4 platform is very up-gradable, but only feasible for mid to low end systems. All of those processors are close to if not flagship and 4th gen is'nt going to be a massive difference. When your budget exceeds a certain cost there really is no point to get anything other than the best of the best.

 

[Phaaze88]

My 2 cents:
If this work of yours is one of main sources of income, you may want to consider an HEDT platform instead.

Back to the mainstream choices: As already mentioned, the speed edge of Intel cpus matters less at higher resolutions, so the whole 'must have all the fps in games' is a rather weak reason to go with them, and IMO, the best mainstream cpu + gpu combo right now is AMD + Nvidia.
Since you budget is large, I see no reason not to go with a 3900X, or 3950X, instead.

Also, I've no idea why some people get a high end cpu and expect to replace it within 5 years. It's the gpu that goes obsolete first.
Ryzen 3000 and 9th gen Intel owners can skip Ryzen 4000 and 10th gen; they're not going to offer much.
Cpus have a much longer 'use by date', and with quite a few within, or at the 5ghz wall, no one should expect to have to replace their high end Ryzen or Intel cpu anytime soon.
I've got a delidded + OC'd 7820X @ 4.5ghz, and none of the available cpus offer a significant enough performance improvement for the cost.

 

[PdxPetmonster]

Anyone who builds a high end system with an i9 9900ks isnt EVER going to even consider upgrading the processor on a preexisting platform and this build won't have be considered for replacement until at the very least 5 years.

You honestly think that won't be the case next year, or the year after, when Intel drops their 7nm series of CPU's? And this isn't Yahoo Answers. People who cruise these forums are the types of people who upgrade their systems far more often than you're parents. We're all hardware enthusiasts here, we upgrade far more often than the average Joe. So that being said, suggesting he'll stick to that CPU for 5 years with as explosive a CPU market we've seen in a good decade, and new, cutting edge technology just around the corner, is foolish.

 

[RodroX]

Just to be clear, what I mean with the 4 gen Ryzen CPUs upgrade (zen 3) is that if you choose to go with something like Ryzen 3700X, you will still have the chance in like, I don't know, 2021 to pick a higher Core/Thread count Ryzen 4xxx (4900Xish? with extra 4 cores and 8 threads), using the same motherboard and RAM.

I think with Intel dominance in the last ~10 years we got to think everything about frecuency and ipc bumps cause there was always the same amount of cores, and yeah thats ok, cause we really didn't need more.

In my post what I tried to point out was that theres a posible path of upgrade to get more "resources" in AMD now (cores, threads and maybe even small architecture improvements and speed) without changing your mobo. (Unless you pick the Ryzen 3900X or the 3950X when is available).

Of course, if the OP choose to go with either 9900K or KS or the 3900X, probably wont need to upgrade that CPU in a long, long time.

Cheers