Intel 6700k -------> 5900X or wait for Zen 4?

WilyKit said:
That said, even if they don’t, I don’t agree with AMD wasting resources on AM4 at this stage.
Click to expand...
I think it's great. AMD at least gives people options, maybe to make one last upgrade before abandoning the system. That is one of the best reasons to choose AMD in the first place, they support their platforms long term.
 
cybereality said:
I think it's great. AMD at least gives people options, maybe to make one last upgrade before abandoning the system. That is one of the best reasons to choose AMD in the first place, they support their platforms long term.
Click to expand...
It’s going to be a very incremental upgrade for the sole purpose of retaining the performance crown. Given silicon/substrate shortages, I’d rather have them put the resources both raw and man power into optimizing AM5 as much as possible before release. You may like AMD for staying with a platform for an extended period of time, but it’s also One reason why they struggle to snag the title of performance king once they lose it.
 
I understand what you are saying, but I think they can do both. And any advancement they make on AM4, they can use that as a test for bringing to AM5. It's not wasted effort.
 
WilyKit said:
I think we do know. AMD wouldn’t be wasting their time messing with v-cache CPUs on a dead platform if they thought they thought their current cpus were good enough to retain the performance crown. That said, even if they don’t, I don’t agree with AMD wasting resources on AM4 at this stage.
Click to expand...
Most likely they wanted to test the tech on a stable platform to make sure it works instead of risking delays on a new architecture. It is a lot faster and easier to add v-cache to a platform where everything else is already present and a known quantity performance wise. Their strategy was probably: if it works then they can release it and make some extra money while transferring the know-how to Zen4 and if it doesn't work then they do not implement it on zen4.
 
Honestly I think it makes.*way* more sense to release a last hurrah on the stable AM4 and DDR4 platform due to expected massive shortages and price increases of DDR5 and AM5 silicon for, likely, multiple months and years.

First Gen AM5 will be for the mega enthusiasts who need it immediately. I'll be happy with a Ryzen 5950XT (or whatever they call it) until DDR5 gets cheap enough that I can afford 128GB.

A single $800 (or whatever) upgrade to replace a single CPU for a huge performance increase over my 3900X is a hell of a lot easier on the wallet than a $1000 CPU, another $400 motherboard, another $400+ in RAM, etc. Assuming they're all even available widely.

And before anyone says anything cause someone will chime in... Yes, I do need all the threads, and that much RAM.
 
As the others have stated, stick with the 5900x. Its a good CPU and will last a long time. You will def see a nice minimum framerate jump as well because your 6700 will start to hold you back with a mid to high end gpu.
 
TheSlySyl said:
Honestly I think it makes.*way* more sense to release a last hurrah on the stable AM4 and DDR4 platform due to expected massive shortages and price increases of DDR5 and AM5 silicon for, likely, multiple months and years.

First Gen AM5 will be for the mega enthusiasts who need it immediately. I'll be happy with a Ryzen 5950XT (or whatever they call it) until DDR5 gets cheap enough that I can afford 128GB.

A single $800 (or whatever) upgrade to replace a single CPU for a huge performance increase over my 3900X is a hell of a lot easier on the wallet than a $1000 CPU, another $400 motherboard, another $400+ in RAM, etc. Assuming they're all even available widely.

And before anyone says anything cause someone will chime in... Yes, I do need all the threads, and that much RAM.
Click to expand...

Your own system specs suggest you aren't being completely genuine. If you really "needed" all those threads, you'd be running a 5950x not a 3900x
 
TheSlySyl said:
Not everyone can afford to upgrade every single CPU cycle. Especially when the upgrade was running scalper prices for the first year of its existence.
Click to expand...
That may be true, but that doesn't change the definition of the word "need" Fact of the matter is, you have a 12c/24t CPU and you're waiting around for a 5950xt to upgrade even though two options already exist with more threads that will drop right into your board. You clearly do not "need" 14/28. You may want it and you may even benefit from it, but you don't need it.
 
Yes, I was talking about during a future upgrade cycle. I'm not gonna upgrade to a slower, lower quality system than my current one. I don't "need" a computer at all by your unnecessary argumentiveness.

It's not relevant nor is it important. So I'm sorry that I wasted everyones time even responding to you.
 
Not sure how the 6700k compares to the 6900k but if It's similar I think the 6th generation Intel chips are beasts for their time.
 
Just bought a 5900x for $499 on Amazon. Should last me few years yet. Now to get my hands on a fractal design torrent case!
 
mnewxcv said:
The difference over a 6700k is night and day.
Click to expand...
Really? I'm currently running a normal 6700 + RX470, so I'm interested in options once BF2042 comes out and benchmarks are released.

xDiVolatilX said:
Not sure how the 6700k compares to the 6900k but if It's similar I think the 6th generation Intel chips are beasts for their time.
Click to expand...
It's Grandpa SkyLake.

They're still running SkyLake.

All the 14nm++++++ are SkyLake.

And the new "E" chips in their big.LITTLE are being compared to SkyLake.

Everything is SkyLake.

Forever.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Whach
like this
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top