Question 5900X worth it in my use case?

[Pwndenburg]

Good afternoon,

I have a highly unbalanced system that I used only for triple A gaming at 1440p. I'm running an 8700k at stock, 16 gigs of 3000 mhz RAM, SATA SSD x3 totaling 2.5 TB and an RTX 3090. My frames are just fine at 1440p, but I was wondering if I would see a significant improvement in overall responsiveness and of course slightly higher 1% lows with a 5900X. What do you all think? Worth it, or not.

I'm thinking of changing to 5900x, 32 gig 3600 mhz, and add an NVME SSD into the mix.

Edit: Alternatively, I could drop a 9900k and the other upgrades mentioned.

Thanks

 

[VirtualLarry]

If I were looking to buy a CPU right now, it would be hard to pass on Intel. The 10400F (equivalent to the 3600) can be had for $145 USD on Newegg

Yeah, I did the same thing...

 

[undertaker101]

5900x definitely has a heat/power penalty associated with it, my peak load on demanding games went up by about 40-50w compared to the 5800x...actually thoughy of downsizing to a 5600x lol for a sec or two but naah where's the fun in that. 5900X will probably last a long long time though, at least as long as my x99 rig lasted (5.5 years) I'm betting before you see any bottlenecks..

 

[aleader]

5900x definitely has a heat/power penalty associated with it, my peak load on demanding games went up by about 40-50w compared to the 5800x...actually thoughy of downsizing to a 5600x lol for a sec or two but naah where's the fun in that. 5900X will probably last a long long time though, at least as long as my x99 rig lasted (5.5 years) I'm betting before you see any bottlenecks..

As most of the scaling benchmarks show, your bottlenecks now (slight as they are) are GPU-related. HW Unboxed also talks about how there isn't much point buying high-end CPUs to game as in 2 years or less a better one with higher IPC and clocks will be out that match or better the top-end, although that is becoming less of a thing now as we've sort of peaked with regards to gaming.

Games have a lot of catching up to do before we'll even max out the 'low-end' 3600-type CPUs. I haven't seen CPU usage in a game go over 30% with my 3600, and I rarely crack 28% on the 5600x (at 1440p) on even my most demanding games. I won't be upgrading again until I see stuttering in games I play, which could be 10 years from now.

 

[aleader]

Yeah, I did the same thing...

What MB did you pair it with? I haven't bought a new Intel MB for several years now. They seem to have a few out now that are better value.

 

[blckgrffn]

As most of the scaling benchmarks show, your bottlenecks now (slight as they are) are GPU-related. HW Unboxed also talks about how there isn't much point buying high-end CPUs to game as in 2 years or less a better one with higher IPC and clocks will be out that match or better the top-end, although that is becoming less of a thing now as we've sort of peaked with regards to gaming.

Games have a lot of catching up to do before we'll even max out the 'low-end' 3600-type CPUs. I haven't seen CPU usage in a game go over 30% with my 3600, and I rarely crack 28% on the 5600x (at 1440p) on even my most demanding games. I won't be upgrading again until I see stuttering in games I play, which could be 10 years from now.

IDK, I don't think we've really peaked w/regards to gaming. Typically that favors higher IPC and we should see massive gains this year from Intel (maybe as much as 40% if we are being optimistic, but likely no less than 30%) and Zen 4 should be another substantial whenever we see it. There are plenty of games that show Zen 2 -> Comet Lake -> Zen 3 in terms of gaming results right now, maybe we if could actually buy better gaming GPUs it would matter more.

Given the consoles are "stuck" with Zen 2 there might be diminishing returns yet the CPU bound stuff (physics, etc.) should continue to allow for better minimum FPS. It will obviously depend on the game and the setup but I think things are as exciting now as they have been in the last five years or so. We are finally moving past 4C/8T Skylake, woo!

As for Intel boards I just buy based on features and price, the Z series is nice if you want full memory clocks but I've used lower chipset at stock clocks and XMP profiles that max out at lower speeds with zero issues. Since I don't really OC either it comes down to value. If the "Z" series chipset is only ~15% more I'll definitely swing for it. Usually those boards are equipped for K series CPUs and decent power delivery. Word on the street is some AsRock and MSI boards may not support Rocket Lake (and certainly some of the lower end chipset just straight up don't) but if you can wait a couple weeks it's like the Rocket Lake CPU and motherboard launch might brings prices down even further if there is any supply, which has been my main beef with the LGA1200 boards.

 

[Makaveli]

Given the consoles are "stuck" with Zen 2 there might be diminishing returns yet the CPU bound stuff (physics, etc.) should continue to allow for better minimum FPS. It will obviously depend on the game and the setup but I think things are as exciting now as they have been in the last five years or so. We are finally moving past 4C/8T Skylake, woo!

I wonder if Sony and Ms will do a mid cycle refresh of the consoles and go with Zen 3 in 5 years time. Since they should be able to just drop it in without much extra work. And to Increase Storage capacity which I think is way to small in both consoles.

 

[VirtualLarry]

What MB did you pair it with? I haven't bought a new Intel MB for several years now. They seem to have a few out now that are better value.

I have a couple of the ASRock H470M-ITX/ac boards. The reason that I got them, besides being case-versatile (because of ITX size), is because they have dual NVMe slots, H470 chipset, and they have 2.5GbE-T ethernet and AC Wifi 5 onboard. Not a bad combo at all, especially for the $120 or so that I paid for them ea.

 

[blckgrffn]

I wonder if Sony and Ms will do a mid cycle refresh of the consoles and go with Zen 3 in 5 years time. Since they should be able to just drop it in without much extra work. And to Increase Storage capacity which I think is way to small in both consoles.

I honestly think we'll see them start pushing this fall for a next fall release on an update. I think they are pushing towards progressively shorter hardware cycles, and I think MS has the better lifecycle approach when it comes to software scaling across platforms. My pet hunch is that MS is going to put chips on the table to iterate hardware at such a pace that it puts Sony on their heels. 100% speculation but MS is the one that needs to flip the script on the consoles wars, and "better" hardware is one way and maybe easier way than having "better" games. Zen 3 on 5 nm with a 80CU RDNA 2 GPU, 24GB Ram, and 2TB drive? I dunno. That would be a lot closer to a true 4K/60p console. It seems ripe to me that there could also be a $699 or $799 price point for a "halo" (no not Halo, the other halo) console. I would probably buy it...

Getting Zen 3 into the consoles would help all of the rest of us in the PCMR expect more from our games.

 

[CP5670]

IDK, I don't think we've really peaked w/regards to gaming. Typically that favors higher IPC and we should see massive gains this year from Intel (maybe as much as 40% if we are being optimistic, but likely no less than 30%) and Zen 4 should be another substantial whenever we see it. There are plenty of games that show Zen 2 -> Comet Lake -> Zen 3 in terms of gaming results right now, maybe we if could actually buy better gaming GPUs it would matter more.

I don't think traditional games benefit much from CPU upgrades anymore outside of a few strategy and sim games. Newer CPUs look a bit faster in benchmarks but it's hard to see a clear improvement subjectively when you upgrade to a new CPU, unlike video cards. Even in VR, I find the GPU frametimes are always much higher than the CPU ones and is always the bottleneck.

 

[Makaveli]

I don't think traditional games benefit much from CPU upgrades anymore outside of a few strategy and sim games. Newer CPUs look a bit faster in benchmarks but it's hard to see a clear improvement subjectively when you upgrade to a new CPU, unlike video cards. Even in VR, I find the GPU frametimes are always much higher than the CPU ones and is always the bottleneck.

One game i've seen a huge difference from is Starcraft 2 since its limited in the amount of cores it can use. From Zen 2 to Zen 3 there is a big difference if you are playing 4x4 map late game with alot of action going on.

 

[CP5670]

One game i've seen a huge difference from is Starcraft 2 since its limited in the amount of cores it can use. From Zen 2 to Zen 3 there is a big difference if you are playing 4x4 map late game with alot of action going on.

That is a fair point, some of the really old games do benefit from IPC since they were never optimized for having lots of objects in the game. In fact, going from a 4790K to 10700K the only games I saw a noticeable improvement in were Freespace 2, some Tiberian Sun mods and some emulators like Basilisk.

 

[aleader]

I have a couple of the ASRock H470M-ITX/ac boards. The reason that I got them, besides being case-versatile (because of ITX size), is because they have dual NVMe slots, H470 chipset, and they have 2.5GbE-T ethernet and AC Wifi 5 onboard. Not a bad combo at all, especially for the $120 or so that I paid for them ea.

Holy crap those things are tiny! I don't think I've every actually looked at a mini-ITX board before. Cheapest one of those on Newegg.ca is $208 w/shipping, so you did get a good deal. I assume you're just using those for mining though?

 

[aleader]

IDK, I don't think we've really peaked w/regards to gaming. Typically that favors higher IPC and we should see massive gains this year from Intel (maybe as much as 40% if we are being optimistic, but likely no less than 30%) and Zen 4 should be another substantial whenever we see it. There are plenty of games that show Zen 2 -> Comet Lake -> Zen 3 in terms of gaming results right now, maybe we if could actually buy better gaming GPUs it would matter more.

Not with GPUs, no, but I don't see much improvement for CPUs from the benchmarks (especially at 1440p+), unless maybe you're coming from something like a 1600x, or an older i5:

I did notice an improvement in 'smoothness' coming from my i5 4670K@4.5GHz to a 3600, but no difference in framerates at all. Ditto so far from the move from a 3600 to 5600x. Now the moves from a 1060 to 1070 to 5700XT to 3070...those were substantial.

 

[blckgrffn]

Not with GPUs, no, but I don't see much improvement for CPUs from the benchmarks (especially at 1440p+), unless maybe you're coming from something like a 1600x, or an older i5:

I did notice an improvement in 'smoothness' coming from my i5 4670K@4.5GHz to a 3600, but no difference in framerates at all. Ditto so far from the move from a 3600 to 5600x. Now the moves from a 1060 to 1070 to 5700XT to 3070...those were substantial.

Usually the gains are seen in the low frame rates and the lowest 1% type frames. Sorry, I don't watch videos for reviews so I don't know what's going on there. There are plenty or reviews from even places like Tom's that show sizeable gains coming that roughly line up Zen 2 -> Comet Lake -> Zen 3 for minimum frames and the like. Obviously some titles it matters more than others and is really going to be more prevalent when GPU constrained.

And yeah, 1440p+ is going to do a better job of masking your CPU.

My 5700xt sucked with my OC'd 3930K on Borderlands 3 - and the 5700xt regularly competes with the 2080S on that title. Constant stutters, issues with lots of enemies on screen, and momentary dips that were hardcore and intrusive. The built benchmark showed a ~20 FPS lift, mostly due to the increase in minimum framerates. This is all at 1440p. It wasn't just threads, cache or clock speeds there. Eventually that will happen to all the CPUs we have now ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Anecdote vs Anecdote