Question Does PCIe 4 matter much over PCIe 3 ? Should I get Ryzen for PCIe 4?

[Pumice]

I am torn between the Ryzen 9 3900X and the Core i9-10900K. Both are within my budget of $500

The Ryzen has PCIe 4 while the Intel only PCIe3. I was leaning towards the Intel but am now wondering if I should go AMD for the PCIe 4 ?

I am building a new computer from the ground up, so if I go Ryzen I will have to get an X570 mobo. Is PCIe 4 only available on the AMD graphics cards?

 

[Schmide]

Huh? No, I'm not hyping either AM4 or whatever stupid stopgap s1200 ends up being.

It's just that substantial leaps are coming in the form of DDR5 and PCIe 5, both of which will feature in AMD and Intel's 2021 era plans. Thus, 'future-proofing' with current tech is a fool's errand. Build now for what you want to do now, which is either Intel (high refresh gaming + high end GPU) or AMD (literally everything else, including sub-144hz gaming or any combo of GPU less than a 2080 Super).

Reread my post and take your rage glasses off, and you'll see there's nothing 'hyping' about any current stuff up to and including Intel 10th gen.

No rage glasses. Just reacting to the loaded language and FUD.

So DDR5 and pci-e 5 are suddenly important for future proofing? Shenanigans.

Neither one will necessarily be better for long term potential as a blanket statement.

False equivalence. If in the future pci-e 4 becomes important to some type of execution. Zen is more future proof.

The Zen2 system will support Zen3 CPUs, but there's no guarantee what that will actually entail, and both of these platforms will be stuck with DDR4.

Another false equivalence. Lets play down the fact that AM4 will last to another major cpu release because it lacks ddr5.

The only way to future proof something is to buy a good enough system such that it can be competitive with the next generation. If you have to wait 2 years, you are in the future thus you failed at future proofing.

 

[Arkaign]

No rage glasses. Just reacting to the loaded language and FUD.

So DDR5 and pci-e 5 are suddenly important for future proofing? Shenanigans.



False equivalence. If in the future pci-e 4 becomes important to some type of execution. Zen is more future proof.



Another false equivalence. Lets play down the fact that AM4 will last to another major cpu release because it lacks ddr5.

The only way to future proof something is to buy a good enough system such that it can be competitive with the next generation. If you have to wait 2 years, you are in the future thus you failed at future proofing.

We don't know what Zen3 nor Comet Lake (?) s1200 CPUs will be.

We DO know that DDR5 speed is enormously larger than DDR4, even exotic DDR4.

We DO know just by Gamers Nexus figures that Intel's locked trash non-K + DDR4-2666 performance is far less than even using DDR4-3200, thus it scales.

We DO know that Ryzen responds well to increased bandwidth as well, seen in how Zen2 performs better with 3600 vs 3200, etc.

Unless AMD is incompetent (they aren't), Zen4 and DDR5 will represent an enormous leap forward.

There simply IS NO future proofing. Not with what's coming, and not this late in the game for this existing tech.

You build for what it available, and that's the best you can do. DDR5 rigs will dominate current gen, bookmark it.

 

[Schmide]

We don't know what Zen3 nor Comet Lake (?) s1200 CPUs will be.

We DO know that DDR5 speed is enormously larger than DDR4, even exotic DDR4.

We DO know just by Gamers Nexus figures that Intel's locked trash non-K + DDR4-2666 performance is far less than even using DDR4-3200, thus it scales.

We DO know that Ryzen responds well to increased bandwidth as well, seen in how Zen2 performs better with 3600 vs 3200, etc.

Unless AMD is incompetent (they aren't), Zen4 and DDR5 will represent an enormous leap forward.

There simply IS NO future proofing. Not with what's coming, and not this late in the game for this existing tech.

You build for what it available, and that's the best you can do. DDR5 rigs will dominate current gen, bookmark it.

I took apart your loaded language and you ignored it.

No matter how hard you hype it. It's still FUD. If you don't get ddr5, you aren't future proof.

There is no reason to make this argument other than to dissuade someone.

A system is built around balance. You need enough bandwidth to keep the cores fed.

But fine. I'll poke a few more holes in it. As with all memory transitions, the previous generations do not vaporize. In fact they may receive some benefit from the transition. Prices go down, fabrication gets better, compatibility improves. From past experience early adopters are probably the least future proofed. Especially in terms of performance vs cost of ownership. Ddr2 800 was about the same as ddr3 1333 and 1600 was only marginally better. The first versions of both had mediocre timings. The exact same can be said for the ddr3 1600 to ddr4 2133-2666. It took years to get to the 3200-3600 sweet spot. I would put my money on the same type of transition to ddr5.

If you look at the technology, it's complicated. Ddr5 is kind of a dual channel in a single package. In terms of pins to performance you're looking at 20-40% improvement max. It will put more density into the platforms but that's true of all segments. The mainstream of tomorrow will most likely be equal to the workstations of today.

IMO the smart will happen when you can score a ddr4 4000-4400 kit for the price of a 3200-3600.

 

[VirtualLarry]

IMO the smart will happen when you can score a ddr4 4000-4400 kit for the price of a 3200-3600.

But Zen2 users are still limited by the FCLK multipliers, drop off of 1:1, and your performance no longer scales with DRAM clock, like it does up to DDR4-3800 (if your CPU will push 1900 FCLK, which is kind of extreme to begin with.)

 

[Arkaign]

I think you just like being argumentative for the sake of it, and see what you want to see in pursuit of some bizarre agenda.

#1 I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from anything, other than overspending on either a 3900 or 10900 CPU that won't help OP in his stated aims (chiefly stated as playing Far Cry games, direct quote, with secondary usage also not being highly threaded such as Solidworks)

#2 I stated BUILD WITH WHAT YOU NEED NOW. Not wait for the future. However, it's important to note that AM4 is getting old, and S1200 is a stopgap. Both look to be getting a single additional round of SKUs, but nothing earth shattering either way. By the very nature of generational improvements involving full platform changes, not tweaks ala X370-570 and Z170-490, the new platforms WILL make the current ones obsolete, and they will mark a new series of platforms involving 5nm, advanced EUV, USB4, etc. It's just plain wrong to give someone the idea that current platforms will be future proof. It's not a concept that flies well under the best circumstances, but is especially unhelpful in the deep ages of the DDR4 era.

What you call "loaded" language is just the plain truth. If you are building for a need today, you just do so, with the build focused on what you need to run today, as best you can with the budget you have. Plain and simple. All choices currently will end in them being relegated to old tech within 24 months at the longest. That doesn't mean they will suddenly become useless by any means. It just means 'future-proofing' is a false hope.

Office PC, Work PC, encoding/multitasking, I only recommend Zen2 SKUs.

Gaming, gets a little more complicated, but unless someone is pairing with a GPU fast enough to actually see the difference (or will upgrade to one for sure, not just maybe upgrade), then probably still a Zen2 eg 3600/3600X (maybe XT?).

High refresh gaming, 10600K/10700K OC + fast ram, 2080 Super or better. But that's getting into $$$ territory, and would be an utter waste with say a 60hz panel or 4k period.

 

[thesmokingman]

We DO know that Ryzen responds well to increased bandwidth as well, seen in how Zen2 performs better with 3600 vs 3200, etc.

This is not accurate. It's not about the speed but really about the fabric clock. 3600mhz hits the right multiplier to get the IF clocked at 1800. 3800mhz gets the IF to 1900, even better. Go above 3800mhz and you get worse performance because now you are hit with a bad multiplier and the IF ends up being clocked too low even though the ram speed is much higher.

 

[Schmide]

Fine I'll leave one more statement.

In the next 2 years there will be nothing better than what you can get today without being an early adopter. Early adopters pay a premium for what they get. Any system built to the specifications talked about in this thread will coexist well with all the software produced for the next generation of consoles. It's sad that consoles drive the market but they are built for a long lifespan +3 years and should be the least common denominator to stay above.

Future technologies are that. Future. If you really think any one piece of technology will make multi generational improvements, I say "Don't believe the hype"

You get 10-20% per generation. Replacing any one part (memory, video card, processor, drives) will score you some margin of that. Most likely single digits.

IMO systems built at the end of a generation hold value much better that those built at the beginning.

 

[Arkaign]

This is not accurate. It's not about the speed but really about the fabric clock. 3600mhz hits the right multiplier to get the IF clocked at 1800. 3800mhz gets the IF to 1900, even better. Go above 3800mhz and you get worse performance because now you are hit with a bad multiplier and the IF ends up being clocked too low even though the ram speed is much higher.

I didn't say anything about beyond 3600 specifically with Zen2 for that exact reason, I think you're conflating another person's response with mine. What IS true is that as the supported ram speeds increase, performance capabilities increase. Obviously Zen2 infinity fabric puts a ceiling on that. Despite that, Zen2 at 2666, 3200, and 3600 show incremental performance increases before that architecture wall.

AMD are not fools, their DDR5 setup will not continue to have a 3600Mhz wall.

 

[thesmokingman]

I didn't say anything about beyond 3600 specifically with Zen2 for that exact reason, I think you're conflating another person's response with mine. What IS true is that as the supported ram speeds increase, performance capabilities increase. Obviously Zen2 infinity fabric puts a ceiling on that. Despite that, Zen2 at 2666, 3200, and 3600 show incremental performance increases before that architecture wall.

AMD are not fools, their DDR5 setup will not continue to have a 3600Mhz wall.

Fools...? while you ignore the fact that ram speed is tied to fabric clock. Ram speeds matter only to the extent of maxing the fabric clock.

 

[Arkaign]

Fine I'll leave one more statement.

In the next 2 years there will be nothing better than what you can get today without being an early adopter. Early adopters pay a premium for what they get. Any system built to the specifications talked about in this thread will coexist well with all the software produced for the next generation of consoles. It's sad that consoles drive the market but they are built for a long lifespan +3 years and should be the least common denominator to stay above.

Future technologies are that. Future. If you really think any one piece of technology will make multi generational improvements, I say "Don't believe the hype"

You get 10-20% per generation. Replacing any one part (memory, video card, processor, drives) will score you some margin of that. Most likely single digits.

IMO systems built at the end of a generation hold value much better that those built at the beginning.

This is completely reasonable, although I believe the '2nd gen' of a particular generation series makes the most sense for a platform upgrade. Eg; Core 2 Duo refresh and better mobos vs the initial run, Athlon S939 vs S940 early adopter, Athlon Socket A vs Slot A, 100Fsb Slot 1s, Sandy Bridge / 6 series mobos, Zen+/x470, etc etc. That is more of a philosophical difference, my logic being : the initial bugs and early adopter high prices have mostly passed by, roadmaps look a little more solid, and most likely performance will be fairly decent for a while (as 2700X build would be holding up nicely for example right now).

YMMV, it all gets old anyway lol.

 

[Rigg]

This is not accurate. It's not about the speed but really about the fabric clock. 3600mhz hits the right multiplier to get the IF clocked at 1800. 3800mhz gets the IF to 1900, even better. Go above 3800mhz and you get worse performance because now you are hit with a bad multiplier and the IF ends up being clocked too low even though the ram speed is much higher.

Fools...? while you ignore the fact that ram speed is tied to fabric clock. Ram speeds matter only to the extent of maxing the fabric clock.

That’s only true to a point. When you get above 5000mhz you can overcome the latency penalty from decoupling.

While perhaps not practical to run at these speeds currently, who’s to say what the limit of the FCLK will be on a DDR5 capable ryzen.

 

[thesmokingman]

That’s only true to a point. When you get above 5000mhz you can overcome the latency penalty from decoupling.

While perhaps not practical to run at these speeds currently, who’s to say what the limit of the FCLK will be on a DDR5 capable ryzen.

Haha, yea I didn't mention that cuz that's going full.... overcompensation.

 

[Arkaign]

Fools...? while you ignore the fact that ram speed is tied to fabric clock. Ram speeds matter only to the extent of maxing the fabric clock.

Lol I really don't think you're understanding me 😅

As of right now : of course, the practical limit is 3600, or try juicing your IF for 3800 or even more if you go subambient.

This has absolutely nothing to do with Zen2 getting performance increases WITHIN the parameters of supported and efficient IF limits. Nor does it mean that future Zen releases, particularly with regards to DDR5 support like the reported 8400 speed, will not be able to show significant growth in that area.

I've never NOT said Zen2 didn't have IF limits. However, it IS true that you can have three Zen2 identical PCs, with 2666, 3200, and 3600 ram. All other things being equal, and appropriately optimized, they increase in bandwidth sensitive performance accordingly. Moving beyond this with DDR5 implies the necessary reworking and architectural advancement to achieve further gains with the new tech. Book it.

Hopefully that clears things up. You can go back and reread again if you need to, never once did I say Zen2 will benefit from DDR5, or beyond 3600 outside of highly exotic situations playing with IF settings at razors edge.

 

[Rigg]

The most demanding task is going to be FPS games. I will play a lot of Far Cry.
I will also be running Photoshop and Illustrator though being a newbie I won't be utilizing the programs anywhere near their intended capability .

I will be running Solidworks (CAD program) but don't see myself designing an assembly containing more than 50 individual parts. At my college we have HP Xeon workstations with Nvida Quadro P2000 cards for Solidworkds but these are a few years old now.

Based on your proposed use case for the PC (with a rough guess at the budget) I would spec something along these lines:

PCPartPicker Part List

CPU: Intel Core i7-10700F 2.9 GHz 8-Core Processor ($325.00)
CPU Cooler: Thermalright MACHO Rev.C 84.97 CFM CPU Cooler ($54.99 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: MSI Z490-A PRO ATX LGA1200 Motherboard ($149.99 @ Newegg)
Memory: Patriot Viper Steel 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-4400 CL19 Memory ($124.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: HP EX950 2 TB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive ($276.87 @ Amazon)
Video Card: MSI GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER 8 GB GAMING X Video Card ($549.99 @ Newegg)
Case: be quiet! Pure Base 500DX ATX Mid Tower Case ($102.34 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: Corsair RM (2019) 750 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply ($144.99 @ Best Buy)
Total: $1729.16


Power limits would need tweaking for optimal CPU performance. This should stack up pretty good against a 3700x/x570 in price to performance. I think an 8 core should be "future proof" enough if you must build now. Between pandemic supply chain issues and looming Zen 2 refresh/Zen 3/Rocket Lake/RDNA2/ Ampere launches I would wait until fall to build your PC if you can. It might be worth going with a placeholder GPU if you need to build before then. This is likely to be the biggest value loss if buying a mid-high end GPU now IMO.

 

[mopardude87]

DDR5-8400 and USB 4.0 🔥🔥 (and almost certainly PCIe 5.0) for Zen4

AMD's Zen 4 Based 5nm Ryzen 5000 Desktop CPUs Allegedly Feature DDR5 Memory And USB 4.0 Support On AM5 Platform In 2022

AMD's next-generation Zen 4 based 5nm Ryzen 5000 desktop CPUs are rumored to get DDR5 & USB 4 support on the AM5 platform in 2022.

wccftech.com

Given recent history, it wouldn't surprise me to see AMD extend their lead with Zen3+ and Zen4. In fact I hope they retool Zen3 to release AM5 early so we could plan some longer term builds via Zen3+ revision perhaps summer/fall 2021.

Sounds like a legendary step for sure, oh i can't wait. My body is already ready for it. Just like Ampere. I prob said it a few times already but honestly i can't express the excitement enough. Oh well.

https://imgur.com/a/BwZOBbD

 

[Arkaign]

Based on your proposed use case for the PC (with a rough guess at the budget) I would spec something along these lines:

PCPartPicker Part List

CPU: Intel Core i7-10700F 2.9 GHz 8-Core Processor ($325.00)
CPU Cooler: Thermalright MACHO Rev.C 84.97 CFM CPU Cooler ($54.99 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: MSI Z490-A PRO ATX LGA1200 Motherboard ($149.99 @ Newegg)
Memory: Patriot Viper Steel 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-4400 CL19 Memory ($124.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: HP EX950 2 TB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive ($276.87 @ Amazon)
Video Card: MSI GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER 8 GB GAMING X Video Card ($549.99 @ Newegg)
Case: be quiet! Pure Base 500DX ATX Mid Tower Case ($102.34 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: Corsair RM (2019) 750 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply ($144.99 @ Best Buy)
Total: $1729.16


Power limits would need tweaking for optimal CPU performance. This should stack up pretty good against a 3700x/x570 in price to performance. I think an 8 core should be "future proof" enough if you must build now. Between pandemic supply chain issues and looming Zen 2 refresh/Zen 3/Rocket Lake/RDNA2/ Ampere launches I would wait until fall to build your PC if you can. It might be worth going with a placeholder GPU if you need to build before then. This is likely to be the biggest value loss if buying a mid-high end GPU now IMO.

This is pretty reasonable, and would be brutally fast for high refresh with 4400 Ram.

Pro/Con vs 3700X

Pros : Faster for high refresh gaming. Low Latency performance and scaling shown with 2080ti OC indicates that gap will be more achievable with future mid-range GPUs (with the caveat that nothing is ever guaranteed in the future). Seems to match up exceedingly well to OP's stated use case.

Cons : Less efficient, particularly if set for a nice all core OC and aggressive memory performance. Not more than a general equal to the 3700X in non-gaming scenarios, at the price of higher power consumption and heat output, and needing more expensive Ram to really show it's finest attributes.

Context : Need to know if OP will be pursuing 100+FPS VRR gaming or not.

If 60hz or 4k, then I think I'd just go with a 3600/3700 build. OP has given zero indication of any heavy MT loadset or use case that would make going past 8 Cores a rewarding proposition, and indeed opens the potential of going 6C/12T + more GPU budget (though I would probably still recommend 8C/16T by either AMD or Intel for a 2020 build personally).

If VRR (Gysnc/Freesync) is on the table, and gaming and specifically Far Cry/Ubi stuff, then the i7 is a fine choice when balanced as the above build list entails.

 

[VirtualLarry]

IMO systems built at the end of a generation hold value much better that those built at the beginning.

Maybe, but systems built right at the *beginning* of a "generational leap", often have the best value/money over time.

My Z170 Pro4S ASRock ATX boards, which I bought at the beginning of the Skylake platform's introduction, are still kicking, I still use them for utilitarian purposes. They cost me all of $80 or so. Now THAT is serious VFM. Yes, DDR4 prices have fluctuated, and these days, near the end of DDR4, where they are soon to have a surplus due to lessening demand in a year, prices have mostly never been better. But I've been able to enjoy Skylake goodness (*actually, replaced with G4560 Kaby Lake 2C/4T CPUs on the cheap a few years back), for all of this time. I don't use them as daily-drivers, when Ryzen (Zen1) came around, I was an early-adopter of those, too, and other than some annoying "maybe bugs" with early silicon, I've really gotten my money's worth out of that platform as well.

If I were just getting "into AM4 / Ryzen" right now, I wouldn't be getting nearly my money's worth, if the entire platform (AM4 and DDR4) are going to be replaced by AM5 and DDR5 platform, in a year or two.

 

[Rigg]

This is pretty reasonable, and would be brutally fast for high refresh with 4400 Ram.

Pro/Con vs 3700X

Pros : Faster for high refresh gaming. Low Latency performance and scaling shown with 2080ti OC indicates that gap will be more achievable with future mid-range GPUs (with the caveat that nothing is ever guaranteed in the future). Seems to match up exceedingly well to OP's stated use case.

Cons : Less efficient, particularly if set for a nice all core OC and aggressive memory performance. Not more than a general equal to the 3700X in non-gaming scenarios, at the price of higher power consumption and heat output, and needing more expensive Ram to really show it's finest attributes.

Context : Need to know if OP will be pursuing 100+FPS VRR gaming or not.

If 60hz or 4k, then I think I'd just go with a 3600/3700 build. OP has given zero indication of any heavy MT loadset or use case that would make going past 8 Cores a rewarding proposition, and indeed opens the potential of going 6C/12T + more GPU budget (though I would probably still recommend 8C/16T by either AMD or Intel for a 2020 build personally).

If VRR (Gysnc/Freesync) is on the table, and gaming and specifically Far Cry/Ubi stuff, then the i7 is a fine choice when balanced as the above build list entails.

I put a non K SKU in there so it wouldn't be an OC technically. Its kind of moot because you'd want to increase PL to get more all core turbo so it's similar to an all core OC for all intents and purposes. Either way its a valid point. I'm pretty sure even at similar power draw the Intel probably beats or at least trades blows with a 3700x pretty well in most workloads. It definitely favors the OP's workloads.

This is why I kind of like these non K Intel i7 SKU's. They have enough turbo speed to beat the Ryzens at a lot of workloads and if the PL's are tuned properly they shouldn't need to draw that much more power to keep pace in heavier workloads. If both are optimally tuned I still think the Intel wins though. It would be an interesting comparison especially if the more recent 3700x CPU's OC as good as the recent 3600's. I've always thought the 3900x and 3600 were much better buys than the 8 core Ryzen's personally. Even more so now that they've reduced the 3900x price and the non K Intel i7's directly compete in core/thread count and price.

I agree that the Intel wouldn't perform better over the Ryzen if gaming at 4k60. I assumed he was going for high refresh so that is also a good point to bring up.

 

[Kenmitch]

@Pumice....Good luck on your quest!

I'd wait and see how the XT refresh goes before dropping the $'s on anything.

 

[Pumice]

@Pumice....Good luck on your quest!

I'd wait and see how the XT refresh goes before dropping the $'s on anything.

Thanks. I am waiting on the XT. After much reading , I feel te Ryzen 3900XT is a better buy than the Core i9-10900K.

While PCIe 4 may not give a significant advantage now, it might later this year?
The Ryzen 4000 series will be using the X570 chipset so I always have the option of upgrading without needing to buy a new mobo.

 

[Markfw]

Thanks. I am waiting on the XT. After much reading , I feel te Ryzen 3900XT is a better buy than the Core i9-10900K.

While PCIe 4 may not give a significant advantage now, it might later this year?
The Ryzen 4000 series will be using the X570 chipset so I always have the option of upgrading without needing to buy a new mobo.

I agree that the 3900XT will be a better buy than the 10900k, also you might be able to buy one.. The 10900k has not been available since launch (I think) that was May 22nd, as another poster said that in my thread. I already have 3 3900x's, so I don't need another, just wanted to play with the 10900k, but it looks like I may never get my chance.

 

[Pumice]

I agree that the 3900XT will be a better buy than the 10900k, also you might be able to buy one.. The 10900k has not been available since launch (I think) that was May 22nd, as another poster said that in my thread. I already have 3 3900x's, so I don't need another, just wanted to play with the 10900k, but it looks like I may never get my chance.

Yeah I have been looking at Newegg, Best Buy, Amazon and elsewhere and can't find anyone selling an i9-10900K. Ebay has it but I am not pay the inflated price and there is always the risk the advertised CPU is not legit.

Having looked at several Youtube videos comparing the 3900K to the i9-10900K, there doesn't seem to be a big difference in most games, except for Far Cry 5 where the i9 shows a significant FPS difference.

 

[Markfw]

Yeah I have been looking at Newegg, Best Buy, Amazon and elsewhere and can't find anyone selling an i9-10900K. Ebay has it but I am not pay the inflated price and there is always the risk the advertised CPU is not legit.

Having looked at several Youtube videos comparing the 3900K to the i9-10900K, there doesn't seem to be a big difference in most games, except for Far Cry 5 where the i9 shows a significant FPS difference.

And thats not the XT, which is supposed to be faster....