Will_m wrote:My interface is an RME UFX+ so I've been looking at boards with either built in TB3 or an AIC option. The Taichi seems to be one of the few choices or the Asrock Creator has built in TB3.
I couldn't get my UFX+ working correctly on my current Intel build with an AIC so I'm a little nervous about using an AIC again, however the creator mobo with built in TB3 is quite pricey at £500.
There is no difference between AIC and "on-board" at this point, in both cases it's a none native controller chip that needs supporting at the BIOS level to work. Issues in the past were normally fixable through a BIOS update, but only if the mainboard firm could be convinced to look into it.
Often you could solve it by slot swapping, BIOS tweaking and trying different builds of the TB driver / management package until it started working. Admittedly, an absolute pain in the arris for the longest time, but it's improved over the last year or so since MS started to improve it's OS level support.
Will_m wrote:My current CPU is an Intel 6900k, in Cubase I get dropouts on bigger projects, which seem to come from the first CPU core being overloaded, the other cores are quite high too though.
A single core overload would suggest that you might have a plug-in or third party program running in the background that is hard coded to one core. Sometimes updating or replacing the culprit might help level that out, although if the other cores are looking fairly busy too then I guess your just approaching the limits of what that chip can do.
I've been using these great benchmarks from Pete Kaine which seem to suggest that even the 3900x is close in performance to the 9940x which costs considerably more, so I'm hoping the 3950x will be even better.
Yeah, it's better, although i'm not sure it's amazing on the "bang per buck" stakes. I did start a round of testing before x-mas, although the 18 core chips broke the test again, so Vin's been buildng a new suite revision for us which will be released over the coming weeks. I need to go and retest everything again, which is on the cards just as soon as I get my hearing back from NAMM.
The other reason I've not published of late is that stock and the release scheduels have been screwy since November too. I saw a 3950X sample and then no stock till over x-mas, similarly I only saw 10920X and 10980XE samples but no stock from those or elsewhere in the range.
I've given those a quick look over using one of the beta builds, so I'm not going to give out figures, but I'll comment on related differences.
The 10920X is the Intel £800 chip running 12 cores/24 threads base clock 3.5/4.6 turbo
The 3900X is the AMD £470 chip running 12 cores/24 threads base clock 3.8/4.6 turbo
The 3950X is the AMD £740 chip running 16 cores/32 threads base clock 3.5/4.7 turbo
The 3900X is 15% - 20% higher performing than the Intel
The 3950X is about 10% higher performing than the 3900X (30% higher than the Intel), yes we've more cores, but the extra heat means that they tend to hit a lower average speed in heavy use.
The thing I noticed with AMD is that unlike Intel and their staggered cores, AMD when put into the optimized creators mode it will attempt to balance the cores for you which to be fair is pretty much what we want to see.
What this means is that when I tested the 3700X and the 3800X, they both turbo'd to about 4.2GHz and the benchmarks were surprisingly close together, enough that I still advise the cheaper 3700X.
The 3950X is a great chip, it just breaks the price curve and due to that load balancing method, I'm not sure if the £300 over the 3900X is all that tempting unless you need the extra overhead. It feels like they may have gone a little aggressive on the 3900X pricing and I suspect we'll see them slowly adjust those prices to see what the market can take going forward. After all when you force your main competitor to halve their street price in order to attempt to remain relevent, I can see the shareholders questioning some of those price points as market share swings.
I also have a slight concern with the X570 boards as they all seem to have a small fan on them which looks like it could be really noisy.
Not yet, although I feel it's ineveitable that they'll break over the long term given past experience, only we can't predict how annoying it'll prove to be until it starts to happen.
From what I'm reading there won't be another 9 series AMD cpu for a while but there may be another Intel release to challenge the current offering. I'm wondering if there are any current or future Intel options that might best the AMD offerings?
Threadripper is next on the cards I believe, some monster ones coming, although It's going to be interesting to see if any of the DAW's handle 60+ threads properly. TR had real lag with it's multi-die design on earlier generations and I didn't take a look on the second generation, I may have to throw one of those on the desk in due course too and see if that's improved too.
Agharta wrote:Intel have only recently updated their HEDT platform and prices have halved compared to the older one.
Not sure if they have reached retail yet and on whether prices have stabilised.
It all happened in November, although the UK channel in it's infinete wisdom said "well, you announced the new models, where are they", to which Intel went "what do you mean you don't want to buy up all our lovely old stock now that we told the public something better was coming out in a few weeks".
Other countries have 9 series stock at the lower prices, whilst the UK channel has zero 9 series stock and has done since about November 2nd and no real wish to invest in something they consider dead and buried.
I'm sure you can probably take a wild guess at my feelings on this scenario currently and be fairly close my thoughts on the matter.
Agharta wrote:They currently seem to be on order with prices well above the expected based on official Intel tray pricing in some cases.
I'm sure prices are marked high in most cases so that it guides users towards the 10 series instead.
Agharta wrote:So nothing new is due to significantly change the market place for a CPU below a grand.
You are paying a large premium for TB3 support so I assume that is worth it to you.
The DDR4 2133 that you have will seriously bottleneck the AMD system as the system buss runs at the same speed as the RAM clock. They recommend at least 3200 and RAM is cheap right now.
I don't however. The performance loss I saw on earlier generations looks to have been largely down to memory choices. The optimum RAM I've found this generation wasn't available even 6 months ago and finally it closes those memory hole I've complained about since day one. To me it looks like they set this crazy internal bus and then brought it to market before the RAM firms could catch up, although it looks like finally it's all converging.
The optimum is 3733MHz and tweaked timings, although that RAM is expensive. What I found however, is that you need to be getting the RAM to run with roughly a 70-80ns response time in order to get the most out of the CPU.
There is a load of "Ryzen optimized" versions of the 3600MHz kits kicking about now from a few different firms and it's not a marketing gimmick in this instance. Those kits have D.O.C.P profiles that will land you somewhere in the 75ns region without even trying.
Given I've spent a morning overclocking RAM off the shelf and hit 72ns at best, only to then open one of these packets and hit 74ns without any effort on my behalf... well, the extra tenner I feel is a wise choice and it still comes in cheaper than the 3733 kits.
Agharta wrote:As for the fan noise of the chipset fan you can only check reviews or ask Scan maybe!
Unfortently, reviews are pointless for fan noise like this, the real quesiton is what it sounds like at the 12 month mark.
Agharta wrote:The AMD chip will consume less power when you load it up so will be easier to cool quietly.
The throttle point is also 10 - 20 degrees lower, so you've got to work harder to keep it lower as the voltage saving isn't that amazing. Yes, the AMD's have it on paper, but haven't been convinced about them being any easier to cool quietly.
Agharta wrote:I still feel there's a slight risk with AMD platforms as they were marginalised for such a long time that full support isn't guaranteed.
Agreed and a number of firms carry warnings about incompatabilites to this end. I always ask people to check with manufacturers of key equipetment before changing platforms.
The AM4 platform will get one last update towards the end of the year whereas the Intel one won't.
We live in hope, We've been waiting on that new Intel platform for about 3 years now...
If the 14 core Intel does end up being around £800 soon I think it's worthy of consideration versus the AMD 16 core.
More balanced benchmark results, industry standard platform means better support, plus being HEDT gives it extra features.
Agreed, although they are due to land around £900, I agree that your pricepoint would make more sense through.
Will_m wrote:The Scan benchmarks I spoke of seem to say that for Kontakt voice counts the Intel 9940x and 9960x are indeed way ahead of the AMD 3900x but those chips cost about double. The 3900x is more on par with the Intel 9900k/x which are around the same price and the 3900x comes out on top in the plug-in benchmarks above the Kontakt results.
All correct, if using 3200MHz memory, the 3700X is pretty much neck and neck with the 9900K.
Stick that 3600MHz kit in there and it pulls ahead by roughly the 20% it was previously missing on the tighter buffers.
Folderol wrote:The overall impression I get is that Intel are trying to squeeze the last few pips out of their chip design, while AMD have a lot of space for continued development of theirs.
Well, from what we've seen AMD is absolutely kicking the living daylights out of the current chip range, apparent in the fact there is no overclocking overhead to be had...
although, the arguement could be made that they are simply extracting as much performance out of them as they can before they leave the factory and it's not like Intel has any overhead at this point either.
Intel as we know missed the die shrink... twice, at this point. They had a load of overhead in there to play with, right up until this generation where they threw pretty much everything at the wall in a blind panic in hope that something stuck and whilst it did most people feel it wasn't enough. Until the acheive that process refinement they are in rough place, although it's now expected this year, the question we're all asking is "is it going to happen before AMD manage to get their next process refinement out of the door?"