I've asked this question on other forums but I think it's prudent I double check here as well. I spend around 80% of the time on my PC gaming and 20% developing in Visual Studio with C#. Due to this on other forums I'd been recommended to wait for the Ryzen release coming up in the new few months as the general consensus was that it would benefit me more. In reality though, despite the AMD having better performance for productivity/workload related operations, the Intels do seem a little ahead on gaming. And the question I am asking myself is: Will I notice the extra 10 seconds compile time, or the 15% difference in frame rate (I notice when I compared 10900k to 3950x it's somewhere between 0-30% difference)? And I'm starting to sway towards thinking the framerate is more noticeable. I have a new 27" 1440p 170Hz Asus ROG monitor on the way that I plan on making my primary display (getting rid of 4K, not getting on with the scaling with 2 side monitors at 1080p). Is your advice to still hold out for the next gen Ryzens, or do you think I should just go with the intels (either 10900k or something else?) as the gaming difference might be more noticeable? Also currently have a 2070 Super and was debating grabbing one of the amperes (as I multibox games like EVE and am getting fps issues even at 1440p on some newer games now), but I'm going to predict your responses there which will most likely be "wait for the announcement and price"? Thanks in advance
0-30% difference? I doubt it. Seriously the gap is nowhere even close to that high. Maybe 10-15% being generous at 1080p. If you are serious about buying a GPU then don't buy Ampere. Just don't. The screw factor is much higher on GPUs. AMD have something at least, anything, and like the smaller Navi cards it will cause price drops on Nvidia. Prices that are going to be as high as they can be until AMD come along (release prices are generally much higher than later prices, especially in areas with competition). As soon as small Navi launched I got a 2070 for £355. Compared to the launch price of $599. There are also things you can do to the 3950x to make the deficit even smaller. Personally I would hold out for both. Mainly because I hear the 4000 series Ryzen could take the gaming crown leaving Intel in the dust for a while.
This is interesting and something I hadn't considered. I noticed there's currently very little info on the actual release date for us consumers. Some stating October some time but nothing solid. I have never had any issues with my current 1920X and to be honest has been the first AMD cpu I bought since I was around 12 years old, so 20 years ago now. Another option I'd considered was seeing if I can piggyback off the people that are moving on and get another 2070S in SLI. I'm fully watercooled so noise/space isn't an issue with SLI but of all the 4 times I've had an SLI setup it's never quite been "all that".
You've not mentioned your budget or how much you care about money... If its a non issue then I'd probably say just go for a high end X570 build and grab a 4xxx series when it drops. SLI is basically dead at this stage, so would be better to dump yoour current card and invest in a better new single one
Sorry, budget isn't really important to me right now. While I did get this GPU only 5 or so months ago, the base PC has been how it is for 3+ years I think and generally I tend to go for the top, or one under the top (hence the 1920x). I've just bought 3 x 27" 1440p monitors as a departure from my existing 4K and 2 x 1080p side monitors as I'm not fully conviced with 4K over the 1440p and high refresh from the gaming perspective. Also because I really did not get on with the different scaling when I sat those 1080p screens next to my 3K ones. Hence three of the same size and res. I've spent £1k on the monitors and would not like to spend more than an additional £2k (to cover CPU, motherboard and GPU), totalling £3k. But that's a ceiling not a target
Threadripper 1920x 2070 Super 32GB Corsair Vengeance 3000Mhz 500GB NVME SSD 750GB Sata SSD Currently 4K Acer Predator + 2 x 1080p side monitors. As of tomorrow 3 x 27" 1440p, centre one is a ROG Strix 170Hz, side ones are standard 75Hz
AMD still struggle with low fps for high refresh low resolution gaming which seems to be your target, so buy the fastest Intel chip. AMD have had many stabs at the gaming performance crown and failed each time, they will likely fail again or just about match, regardless they are no longer a cheap good enough CPU and prices will trade with Intel, so just get the best. I would wait for the new chip if you are going to stick with it for some time as it is probably imminent but there haven't been a lot of noises for its new release like there has been for prior chips I would imagine AMD probably doesn't have much incentive to release something new right now if there is a GPU push coming. If you will be driving all screens in games (sounds like a no) GPU will be the limit stick with what you have an get good GPU, 1920x is not slow assuming appropriate tuned. If you have 1920 for lane/storage usage, then no desktop platform with suffice and you need to look towards trx40 but if that is your entire setup you don't need HEDT.
I went with the 1920x at the time due to it being better at workloads etc. I was playing less games then, nowadays I actually tend to remote into my work PC and develop on that, it's only when I'm lazy that I do it locally, hence the curiosity as to whether the intel chip was actually just better for me at this time. I usually upgrade somewhere in the 3-5 year window or when I start seeing issues in games. This upgrade happens to be at the lower end of that.
With known new parts coming and no real hurry to upgrade, I would wait if I were in your shoes. Do you have any games that you MUST play, but could not play at your desired quality standard with your current hardware? Do you have any workload that you find slow on your current computer? If no, wait until new hardware and their price war settles. If yes, then look at current solutions.
No urgent workload issues no. I did get frustrated that New World plays like a pile of turd on my PC (30-40fps on medium with freezes), when friends with a newer setup can get theirs running at 120fps on high at the same resolution. I was slightly annoyed that my laptop that runs a 1070 also seems to play EVE smoother than this desktop though. Again something else that just irked me. It could be related to resolution perhaps.
Wasn't there something about a gaming mode for threadrippers that disabled half the cores otherwise there'd be gaming issues? Just scrapping about the recesses of my memory for that, no idea if it has any relevance.
There is a gaming mode for threadripper I would not advise using it necessarily as it is a bit harsh on the smaller CPUs but certainly give it a bash, if you are having issues another system is not rather than that you you can switch between uma/distributed and numa/local memory mode leaving all die active and is worth a test as is disabling SMT, try these modes independently of each other. For the most part when gaming local mode is best for me with everything else on and I tend to leave it there but are some titles that like the uma. You mention stuttering, I have found in the past there is game stuttering if I am in a uma setting I guess due to the latency involved in storing some data in non local memory.
