Considering dumping Intel and moving to AMD

[Yanta]

Hello,

Considering my first AMD build. I'm running a I7-6900K. I did consider a I9-7920X but the I9 chips have serious heat problems - if all the discussions and reviews are to be believed. Don't want a hot system because I plan to overclock and I run a lot of media encoding, play games and more.

Money is tight, so this will take me a while to save up for but basically I am considering this build...

1. TR 1950X
2. ASRock X399 Taichi
3. G.Skill Flare X F4-3200C14Q-32GFX
4. Enermax Liqtech 360

I tried to sign up for Overclockers Australia, but as my ISP does not provide email services so I'm using a free service, and they don't allow such people to be members. So respectfully, I hope that people here can help. I felt that sourcing stuff in Australia would be best served on the Australian forums, but alas... Cannot be.

I'm having difficulty finding a supplier for the G.Skill memory. I can't even seem to find pricing. So that's question #1.. Where to get the memory.

I believe the Enermax is currently the only liquid cooler out there with a sTR4 cold plate? Are there any others? Again, stock in Australia seems to be non-existent.

I read somewhere recently that Microsoft are refusing to supply patches to people who go AMD. Can't find the article now. Has any one heard such a story?

I'm quite new to overclocking. In the past all I've simply done is increase the multiplier and leave it at that. Eg. My 6900X is currently set to 40, bclk @ 100, with RAM at 3200.

But as I read more about overclocking I'm finding there is a lot more to learn. Like, turbo mode for 1 or a few cores, XFR mode, and so on...

My existing system was on a Balanced power plan, and the CPU speed was typically quite low, but rarely exceeded 3.0GHZ even when set to 4.00GHZ, so I switched to a performance plan and its now sitting at 3.97GHZ all of the time.

If it makes sense I'd like to run the 1950X higher than the 6900K. Or is that just not needed given I'll be doubling cores? Games which don't use a lot of cores would benefit from the higher frequency, yes?

Anyway, this is getting too long so I'll leave it there for now.

I would welcome any ideas/thoughts/suggestions on my planned build.

many thanks
Tanya

 

[mackerel]

MS will only support Windows 10 on Ryzen family (and Intel processors after Skylake). You can still install and use Windows 7 or 8.1 on those, but Windows Update wont give you patches.

How you clock is up to you. I like to keep things simple, with all cores at the same clock. Increase multiplier, increase voltage as necessary, check cooling. Repeat.

While I don't have personal experience of Threadripper, AMD claim to have used the top binned dies for them, so they can be pushed a bit past 4 GHz, possibly to 4.2 or so. In general, Ryzen family hit a wall around 4 GHz, and doesn't get much past it. Trouble is, when running on the limit the power consumption goes way up. So if controlling that is desired, run a bit off from the limit and power drops quite dramatically.

 

[Yanta]

I did read that M$ has already pulled patches for Windows 7 and 8.1 on all CPUs. If I can track down the article I'll post a link.. I'm sure I read somewhere that someone alleged M$ were saying that they would not even patch Windows 10 on AMD CPUs. I'm guessing that news to everyone so maybe I read it wrong.

My I7-6900K goes higher than 4.0GHZ, and even though the temps are still only in the mid 30's (Celsius), I prefer to keep temps in the high 20's/low 30's, hence why I left it at 4.0. In summer those temps increase 10-15 degrees.

So, if I can't run the 1950x at the same speed, then I guess that means it's not going to perform as well as the Intel?

I know these are noob questions - got to start somewhere

 

[mackerel]

I read somewhere today that claimed MS were not releasing security patches on older Windows, which are still supported for security fixes, as quickly as they were on Windows 10. It suggested this was a potential threat for older OSes as nefarious types might find that was patched in Win10, then go back and see if it was present in older too.

Those temps sound good, too good. Were they measured under load?

Different applications will respond differently. If you focus on applications that can use any and all available CPU cores, AMD is pretty strong in that area with more cores for a price generally able to offset any clock differences. If you want high fps gaming, that is generally more related to higher clocks, and there Intel is still stronger.

 

[Yanta]

I read somewhere today that claimed MS were not releasing security patches on older Windows, which are still supported for security fixes, as quickly as they were on Windows 10. It suggested this was a potential threat for older OSes as nefarious types might find that was patched in Win10, then go back and see if it was present in older too.

Yes, I read the same article. I think that's where I started before I found a linked article about AMD patching... Anyway, if M$ keep patching AMD on Windows 10 that's a start.

Those temps sound good, too good. Were they measured under load?

Goodness no I wish. That is at idle.

x264 on a second pass re-encoding video will push my CPU temps to low to mid 60's and will use 100% of all 16 threads. My fan curves could be tweaked to get a bit more cooling but the noise annoys me.. Besides 60-65 degrees is not bad at 100% load.

Different applications will respond differently. If you focus on applications that can use any and all available CPU cores, AMD is pretty strong in that area with more cores for a price generally able to offset any clock differences. If you want high fps gaming, that is generally more related to higher clocks, and there Intel is still stronger.

I'm getting 120fps in DOTA2 with a GTX 980 Ti. My son gets the same with a I7-6700K and a GTX 970. Another son gets only 60fps with a I7-6800K and a GTX 960.

The AMD reviews say the Intel allegedly outperforms the AMD by around 6% on gaming. If my fps stays the same that's good enough.

And there's the catch. The 1920X has a higher base frequency than the 1950, but I don't know how each chip overclocks. I'm hoping the 1950X will OC at least as much as the 1920X. I recall reading somewhere though that more cores = lower stable overclock, or did I misread that too

 

[mackerel]

The silicon is the same, and assuming same binning on Threadripper, they should have similar eventual clock potential too. The difference is in power delivery, and getting rid of the resulting heat.

 

[Yanta]

The silicon is the same, and assuming same binning on Threadripper, they should have similar eventual clock potential too. The difference is in power delivery, and getting rid of the resulting heat.

My existing X99 board has 12 power phases (Which I assume is really 8+4), and the X399 Taichi has 11 (or 8+3). The existing board is quite stable at 4.0 with a stock frequency of 3.2, and I haven't tweaked the voltage at all. At least not knowingly.

So I guess the Taichi should be OK in terms of power delivery?

My existing cooler is the Kraken x61. I'm thinking it's better to get a cooler that covers the whole of the CPU, hence the Enermax Liqtech 360

Am I on the right track?

 

[mackerel]

I'm not familiar with specific boards, but you can't go far wrong on the higher end. If I were to get a Threadripper, I'd want a block that as better coverage than historic coolers.

 

[Tír na nÓg]

WHat software do you use for encoding? Not sure Threadripper is your best bet: look at the video (benchmarks) on this thread, and check the last posts.
http://www.overclockers.com/forums/...p-setup!-(Benches-too)?highlight=threadripper

I would dig a bit on the media encoding to make sure Softwares make good use of the Threadripper threads (sic) first...

Not an Intel fanboy at all, but it is quite a lot of money you are going to throw inyour system, and cautious is better than sorry!


Edit: found those as well.
https://www.techspot.com/review/1465-amd-ryzen-threadripper-1950x-1920x/page3.html
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11697/the-amd-ryzen-threadripper-1950x-and-1920x-review/10
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-threadripper-1950x-review,16.html
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-threadripper-1950x-review,16.html

THe INtel CPU have a higher OC margin, higher IPC, and the core count is not everything... Food for thoughts!

 

[trents]

Microsoft is not refusing to supply "patches" for AMD users. That's ridiculous. But I'm not sure what you mean when you use the term "patches." Do you mean regular monthly updates and the twice yearly platform updates for Windows 10? They would get their butts sued if they did that. I can confirm that for Windows 10 Microsoft is still supplying updates for multiple generations of AMD CPUs. I have customers that have AMD based desktops and laptops and have done multiple Windows 10 upgrades on various AMD computers lately.

As someone else has said, you may be getting confused about the newer hardware from AMD and Intel not being 100% compatible with Windows 7. That's a driver issue primarily.

 

[mackerel]

As someone else has said, you may be getting confused about the newer hardware from AMD and Intel not being 100% compatible with Windows 7. That's a driver issue primarily.

No, it is NOT a driver issue. It is a MS issue. They simply refuse to test bug fixes on newer processors for previous versions of Windows. AMD even provide Win7 drivers for Ryzen.

 

[Daleon]

You can't compare raw Mhz between AMD and Intel. You have to take what you can get out of either. If you can get 4.0-4.1 out of a TR your doing as good as you can. If you get a 8700K and get 5.0-5.2 your doing about as good as you can. The two numbers themselves don't really relate to each other, much of it because raw Mhz itself is not always that big of a boost. When gaming the difference between 5ghz and 5.2ghz can sometimes be 3 to 5 fps. Is that extra juice and heat it takes to get there worth it?

Your basically deciding between higher IPC vs more cores. So it really depends on the apps you use and if they take full advantage of a TR. Not many do that I have seen. TR will be ahead in most heavily multi-threaded apps but not by the margin I would consider the price to be worth while.

Here some Handbrake benchs, from two different tests so the numbers are a little different in each but close.



To me it depends on what you would do with your existing system. You have quite a bit of money in it now and its hardly past its prime. If you could sell for a good price or you have other uses for it then maybe building a new system makes sense. If not I can't see it.

 

[Tír na nÓg]

You can't compare raw Mhz between AMD and Intel. You have to take what you can get out of either. If you can get 4.0-4.1 out of a TR your doing as good as you can. If you get a 8700K and get 5.0-5.2 your doing about as good as you can. The two numbers themselves don't really relate to each other, much of it because raw Mhz itself is not always that big of a boost. When gaming the difference between 5ghz and 5.2ghz can sometimes be 3 to 5 fps. Is that extra juice and heat it takes to get there worth it?

Your basically deciding between higher IPC vs more cores. So it really depends on the apps you use and if they take full advantage of a TR. Not many do that I have seen. TR will be ahead in most heavily multi-threaded apps but not by the margin I would consider the price to be worth while.

Here some Handbrake benchs, from two different tests so the numbers are a little different in each but close.

View attachment 193876

To me it depends on what you would do with your existing system. You have quite a bit of money in it now and its hardly past its prime. If you could sell for a good price or you have other uses for it then maybe building a new system makes sense. If not I can't see it.

That was exactly my point in post #9.

 

[trents]

No, it is NOT a driver issue. It is a MS issue. They simply refuse to test bug fixes on newer processors for previous versions of Windows. AMD even provide Win7 drivers for Ryzen.

Alright, thanks for the correction. But why would MS supply patches for Windows 7 to the Intel platform and not for the AMD platform? Is it corporate a resource allocation decision? Does MS figure there aren't enough AMD users out there still on older operating systems to justify the expense?

 

[mackerel]

Alright, thanks for the correction. But why would MS supply patches for Windows 7 to the Intel platform and not for the AMD platform? Is it corporate a resource allocation decision? Does MS figure there aren't enough AMD users out there still on older operating systems to justify the expense?

It isn't an AMD specific thing. Basically Skylake was the last processor series released that MS will support on Windows 7 (I think it also applies to 8.1). If you run Kaby Lake, Skylake-X, Coffee Lake, Ryzen, Threadripper, MS will ONLY support those on Windows 10. If you run one of those processors and try to do Windows Update, it detects the unsupported CPU and refuses to run.

 

[trents]

That's right. I think I knew that but got a little confused. Thanks.

 

[Alaric]

Skylake is supported on Windows 10. I have 7 and 10 in a dual boot Skylake rig. Then again, no guarantees M$ will continue supporting Skylake in the future.

 

[mackerel]

I'm not aware of MS limiting CPU support on 10, providing you meet whatever the minimum spec is. Good point though, maybe at some point they'll drop support for very old processors. I have an install of Win10 on a Core 2 Duo machine and it works fine (apart from the slooooooow HD).

 

[Alaric]

M$ offers no official support for any Intel chip prior to Skylake and no AMD chip prior to FX. They aren't writing drivers for them or updates. I'm not sure W10 will let itself be installed on them anymore. M$ dropped support for Intel's Atom CPU on W10, after saying they would support them.

 

[mackerel]

What support, for which OS? Got a reference saying they're dropping support for CPUs "prior to Skylake" cos that doesn't sound right. The win10 product page only states a requirement of 1 GHz processor, which I know an exception to already as I have a Pentium M 1.5 GHz (1c1t) laptop that wont run Win10 due to lack of some particular instruction. It currently runs Win7 as well as can be expected for hardware of that age. Also my question on support was due to the varying levels of support they offer. About the only one worth anything is security patches. Apart from newer than Skylake CPUs on OSes before Windows 10, I'm not aware of any limitation.