That sucks, I was considering a Threadripper or even Ryzen 9 for a secondary PC, but seems like an Intel chip might be a better option.
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: How do you normally pay for purchases in stores?
Ryzen 5 3600 died, Evetech not replying
- Thread starter NickDiablo
- Start date
DrJohnZoidberg
Honorary Master
Well you wouldn't want to (and physically couldn't with TR) use a b450 motherboard with either of those chips.
I've had Ryzen since the first gen but only used the premium boards - had a x370 board with my Ryzen 1700 & 2700X and upgraded to a x570 board with my Ryzen 3950X. Both these boards have been excelllent.
So buy an x series board and not a b series board pretty much. I suppose TR might also be overkill for my use case so I'll end up with a 3950x or 3900x. I don't have a use for more cores.
DrJohnZoidberg
Honorary Master
It's like most things in life, you get what you pay for. There are certainly good b450 boards but just do your research first.
If you're going Ryzen 9 though it seems like you would want a high end board to pair it with, still do your research but you're far less likely getting a bad board.
The Voice
Honorary Master
They really aren't a better option. Intel is dead.
Do tell. I'm considering options, so why do you believe Intel is "Dead"? Wasn't AMD also basically dead at some stage in the last decade?
Intel does not really have anything to counter amds lineup.
If your sole goal is extreme gaming and you want a few extra frames look at the i9-9900KS It's about 4%/6% faster than the 3950X/3900X with tuned memory. It's $800 v $990/$490 but in productivity apps they stomp on the intel due to more cores/threads.
The Voice
Honorary Master
Even then, no-one is going to buy a 3950X just for gaming to be honest. It's a "budget" workstation chip (basically a cheaper Threadripper). Intel, it's becoming quite obvious, has simply given up on the builder/enthusiast/gamer market - AMD comes in cheaper, faster, uses less power and with more cores every single time. And AMD can actually use high speed memory, while Intel only seems stable with sub-2933 speeds. Besides, Intel makes most of its money from workstation and server hardware, so doesn't really need to give a toss about us.
Sure, you could throw the i9-9900KS in the mix, but unless you're a hardware reviewer you're never going to receive the best silicon anyway, and aren't going to be able to get mega clocks out of it - not even close to what your favourite channel on YouTube does (recent news showed that reviewers were all receiving pre-binned chips).
For us, the only logical choice is going to be AMD - the stats have been out there for a while, and there's simply no real reason to stick with Team Blue anymore. Sure, fanbois always will, but a lot of them have started seeing the light.