1. #1
    Moderator chazus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    16,596

    Intel or AMD for upgrade?

    So I was juuuuust about to pull the trigger on an Ryzen 3600, board, and RAM. I already have a GPU (1060 which Im happy with for 1080p).

    That said, I recently came into the possession of a busted Gigabyte Z390 board that I'm RMA'ing, and is probably worth at least a good $150 on ebay (retails on amazon for 250).

    So now I'm wondering. Should I:
    1) Sell it, stick with the Ryzen 5 3600, and spend ~$150 less on amd setup
    2) Sell it, upgrade to a higher Ryzen and sped only ~$50 less on amd setup
    3) Keep it, and get an Intel 9600K and spend ~$100 less on an intel setup
    4) Something else? (Different intel?)
    Gaming: Dual Intel Pentium III Coppermine @ 1400mhz + Blue Orb | Asus CUV266-D | GeForce 2 Ti + ZF700-Cu | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 | Whistler Build 2267
    Media: Dual Intel Drake Xeon @ 600mhz | Intel Marlinspike MS440GX | Matrox G440 | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 @ 166mhz | Windows 2000 Pro

    IT'S ALWAYS BEEN WANKERSHIM | Did you mean: Fhqwhgads
    "Three days on a tree. Hardly enough time for a prelude. When it came to visiting agony, the Romans were hobbyists." -Mab

  2. #2
    Please wait Temp name's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Under construction
    Posts
    10,887
    You're just going to be playing at 1080p60 hz, I take it? Since you're happy with your 1060

    If you get a 9600k that'll probably be cheaper than a 3600+MOBO combo (Since 9600k's go for around 40 dollars more than 3600's). The main problem would be only being a 6/6 CPU, rather than a 6/12, but should perform just fine if you just game on it

  3. #3
    This depends on what you’re going to use it for and what another bump would enable you to do.
    Personally, I think 2) would excite me more. What else will you use it for?

  4. #4
    Moderator chazus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    16,596
    Mostly just gaming. WoW (Which my 3570K plays fine atm).

    The biggest reason I've been wanting to upgrade is because both Division 2 and Anthem pretty much max out my 3570K, and both the 9600K and 3600 have a huge enough boost.

    After running the numbers, it may be cheapest to simply sell the board, since A) The Ryzen CPU is cheaper and B) The board is worth more than the one I'd buy anyway.
    Gaming: Dual Intel Pentium III Coppermine @ 1400mhz + Blue Orb | Asus CUV266-D | GeForce 2 Ti + ZF700-Cu | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 | Whistler Build 2267
    Media: Dual Intel Drake Xeon @ 600mhz | Intel Marlinspike MS440GX | Matrox G440 | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 @ 166mhz | Windows 2000 Pro

    IT'S ALWAYS BEEN WANKERSHIM | Did you mean: Fhqwhgads
    "Three days on a tree. Hardly enough time for a prelude. When it came to visiting agony, the Romans were hobbyists." -Mab

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by chazus View Post
    Mostly just gaming. WoW (Which my 3570K plays fine atm).

    The biggest reason I've been wanting to upgrade is because both Division 2 and Anthem pretty much max out my 3570K, and both the 9600K and 3600 have a huge enough boost.

    After running the numbers, it may be cheapest to simply sell the board, since A) The Ryzen CPU is cheaper and B) The board is worth more than the one I'd buy anyway.
    Since you're in for Division, i can say you AMD is the way to go. I have an 8600k clocked at 5GHz and it's basically used near max all the time, while people with a 6700k experience much less CPU usage - this only because they have HT. Granted, i play at 1440p - ultra, so it's something. But Division really like HT/multithreading and 6 coress look like a little too low of a number. Given the 9600k is literally the same chip of the 8th serie, i would just go AMD. Even worse, 9th serie doesn't have HT even on the i7, only one is the i9.

    It's not that you're going to have a bad time with Intel. I have a perfect fine gameplay with it, but since your idea was to get already a 3600, i'd just stick with that and maybe get a better CPU if you have the budget for it.
    No one wants to choose. Everyone wants everything.

  6. #6
    By comparison, AMD processors tend to be more affordable than Intel chips. ... Whereas most Intel processors are locked in at a fixed clocking speed, many AMD processors can be "overclocked" – that is, they can be made to run at a faster speed than is available right out of the box.

  7. #7
    just go with the ryzen, it will serve you for the next 5+ years minimum, and games will probably switch more towards multicore support since the next gen consoles will have zen2 based cpus aswell

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by valky94 View Post
    just go with the ryzen, it will serve you for the next 5+ years minimum, and games will probably switch more towards multicore support since the next gen consoles will have zen2 based cpus aswell
    Yep, it may finally be the time where we see games developed that really push these multicore CPUs to their limits.
    Synek - best rogue in the world


  9. #9
    All right. Unless you have a stronger want-factor for a beefier system, I really think 1) is a good choice for your use case scenarios. If you do have that want-factor, I would opt for 2) in that situation, because it’s still a bonus upgrade and money left over from the original budget, but when it comes to other peoples’ money, I prefer not spending more than needed.
    So 1) for what you need, 2) if that is what you want.

    The last AMD CPU I personally had was the Athlon XP 1500+, but if I were to upgrade today, I would go with AMD. I really don’t see the point of Intel at this time, if money matters at all. They might lag slightly behind in IPC, but as soon as you need to multi-task or use multi-threaded applications, that advantage turns irrelevant. And they lack in every other regard. At this time.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •