# Going to build a PC...



## jononotbono (Apr 7, 2020)

So, the time has finally come when I have decided to build a PC. I’m thinking of buying an i9-9900k for my CPU.

For the money it seems to be excellent. Any thoughts? No doubt I’ll build the PC bit by bit so will add to this thread as I go but for now, any thoughts on the 9900k would be great.

Jono


----------



## easyrider (Apr 7, 2020)

The 9900k is a hot, power hungry chip with only 8 cores and 16 threads.

You should really be looking at the 3900x 12 core 24 thread or the 3950x 16 core 32 thread Ryzen chips.

The 3900x can be had for around £430 making the 9900k a meaningless cpu 

I’ve had a 9900k and sold it for a 3900x , my current chip...The beauty of this is you can just plonk in a 4900x or 4950 x on release without buying a whole new motherboard.

Intel are in trouble and even AMD newly released mobile chips are currently quashing intel in the mobile sector.


----------



## jononotbono (Apr 7, 2020)

Are AMD that good now then? I thought they were considered to be dogs brown in comparison to Intel?


----------



## Christopher Rocky (Apr 7, 2020)

for the money and quality you cant go past ryzen. 
unless you want to play games i would not bother with intel (the gain in intel would negligible anyways) but saying that ryzen holds up just fine for gaming, i have a ryzen 2700 on my gaming pc and i havent had any issues at all and that is a gen 2 chip. also supporting AMD just means better pricing and products in the long run from competitors which is what intel has needed for more than a decade!


----------



## dzilizzi (Apr 7, 2020)

I don't know much about the chips. But I do recommend using https://pcpartpicker.com/ And don't forget to hit the ensure compatibility thing. I can't remember if it was a check box or not. 

Also, if you have problems, check out this Gearslutz thread - https://www.gearslutz.com/board/mus...today-we-build-our-studio-pc-quot-thread.html

There are a lot of DAW builders who participate in the thread. They are a lot of help.


----------



## Jeremy Gillam (Apr 7, 2020)

I can't speak for the AMD chips but my 9900k build has been great. I've yet to really make it choke, working on some fairly big projects hosting VIs directly in Cubase and pop mixes with lots of tracks and native plug ins.


----------



## Pablocrespo (Apr 7, 2020)

My 9900k also very good here, would like some help overclocking it stable, I am not good with that kind of things, but it rocks without overclock.

Didn´t AMD have a problem handing realtime voice count at low latencies?


----------



## Karma (Apr 7, 2020)

I'm currently upgrading from my 8700k with 64GB to a 3950x with 128GB. Can post the results... once it eventually gets shipped


----------



## easyrider (Apr 7, 2020)

jononotbono said:


> Are AMD that good now then? I thought they were considered to be dogs brown in comparison to Intel?



Yes, Thats why I posted....Buying a 9900k now on a dead socket with just 8 core 16 thread is madness when you can get a faster chip with more cores for less money.

Intel has drip fed its consumers for years with tiny ticks and tocks....But AMD have completely pulled the rug and changed everything.


----------



## easyrider (Apr 7, 2020)

Jeremy Gillam said:


> I can't speak for the AMD chips but my 9900k build has been great. I've yet to really make it choke, working on some fairly big projects hosting VIs directly in Cubase and pop mixes with lots of tracks and native plug ins.



The 9900k is not a bad chip...But its dead tech and already being surpassed by AMD.

The 4900x is coming soon and will make the gap even wider...Intel are in trouble and still can't sort out their 10nm mainstream chips...

AMD is already on 7nm and the AMD Ryzen 4000 mobile is already trouncing intel...meaning 4900x will only pull ahead again.


----------



## jononotbono (Apr 7, 2020)

Man, I’m obviously out of touch. I didn’t realise the 9900k is dead tech! It feels like only last year I was looking at intels 18 core 9980xe. Is that dead tech as well?

And yes, I would like to use this PC for games as well.


----------



## URL (Apr 8, 2020)

If you use uad check this. 



March 09, 2020 02:19
* AMD Ryzen CPUs and UAD-2 PCIe Compatibility *

AMD recently released a new line of CPUs called Ryzen. Although Ryzen CPUs have not been specifically tested by Universal Audio with UAD devices, Customer Support has received reports from users experiencing compatibility issues with UAD-2 QUAD, DUO, and SOLO PCIe cards on systems utilizing Ryzen CPUs.
On affected systems, the UAD-2 PCIe cards are not recognized and the UAD Meter shows "No Devices Found." Compatibility issues between Ryzen CPUs and PCIe devices from other manufacturers have also been reported. 
If you are experiencing issues with your UAD-2 PCIe card being recognized on a system that uses a Ryzen CPU, the first step is to contact your motherboard manufacturer for any new BIOS updates that may be available. Installing the latest BIOS updates for your system will ensure that you have the latest fixes and improvements.
Please note that we have not received any reports of compatibility issues between Ryzen CPUs and UAD-2 OCTO PCIe cards, or any other UAD / Apollo devices.


----------



## easyrider (Apr 8, 2020)

jononotbono said:


> Man, I’m obviously out of touch. I didn’t realise the 9900k is dead tech! It feels like only last year I was looking at intels 18 core 9980xe. Is that dead tech as well?
> 
> And yes, I would like to use this PC for games as well.



Intel are in trouble...they have no compelling chips right now compared to AMD...and once the 4000 series Ryzen is released ( scheduled Q3 /Q4) things will only get worse for them...

Intel Need to release new gen chips soon and faster then Ryzen 4000 to compete..but they have nothing...

Ryzen 3900x is a phenomenal gaming chip and unless you game at 1080p at 144hz refresh there is simply no point in wasting money on intel right now...


----------



## jononotbono (Apr 8, 2020)

easyrider said:


> Intel are in trouble...they have no compelling chips right now compared to AMD...and once the 4000 series Ryzen is released ( scheduled Q3 /Q4) things will only get worse for them...
> 
> Intel Need to release new gen chips soon and faster then Ryzen 4000 to compete..but they have nothing...
> 
> Ryzen 3900x is a phenomenal gaming chip and unless you game at 1080p at 144hz refresh there is simply no point in wasting money on intel right now...



Im planning on running games at 240hz. Competitive edge.

And now reading that about Universal Audio, looks like Intel is my choice because I use Universal Audio and I’m not changing that.


----------



## easyrider (Apr 8, 2020)

jononotbono said:


> Im planning on running games at 240hz. Competitive edge.
> 
> And now reading that about Universal Audio, looks like Intel is my choice because I use Universal Audio and I’m not changing that.



What UA device do you have ?

What GFX card do you intend to purchase for this PC build?


----------



## jononotbono (Apr 8, 2020)

Apollo Twin X. It’s a rather wonderful device.

Was thinking about the RTX 270 for GFX but nothing is set in stone yet.


----------



## J-M (Apr 8, 2020)

Just be careful with the Windows updates. Take it from someone who has gone through that hell a couple of times...


----------



## Mornats (Apr 8, 2020)

Just a question about your GPU. If you're planning on running games at 240hz, don't you have to run them at 240fps? Or have I got that wrong? Just a little worried that your GTX 270 may not be up to running at 240fps.


----------



## onebitboy (Apr 8, 2020)

Depends entirely on game and graphics settings. If you play competitively, it's pretty common to lower the settings to max out the refresh rate.


----------



## Technostica (Apr 8, 2020)

Mornats said:


> Just a question about your GPU. If you're planning on running games at 240hz, don't you have to run them at 240fps? Or have I got that wrong? Just a little worried that your GTX 270 may not be up to running at 240fps.


It uses Variable frame rates so it's up to 240Hz.


----------



## jononotbono (Apr 8, 2020)

onebitboy said:


> Depends entirely on game and graphics settings. If you play competitively, it's pretty common to lower the settings to max out the refresh rate.



That’s exactly right.

1080p 240hz 24.5”


----------



## Manaberry (Apr 8, 2020)

Just to counterbalance some thoughts here. Even if Intel is struggling against AMD in terms of horsepower, they still are ahead on the polyphony capability.







Yes. This is dead tech. However, the sample quality is far better than at the beginning of the generation (it stands also for AMD, but 3xxx is still juvenile) I went for a 4.4GHZ all cores 10980XE last January, and it's an absolute beast.
On stock freq, there are very similar, and I'm amazed to see how well Intel is handling this fight with a 4 years old gen. Just a bit of overclocking and you can easily take off.

Another point for Intel is that AMD is UAD's black cat. Both CPU and GPU. I had to send back a brand new RX5700 because it was the origin of Cubase crashes, plugins GUI freezes, Kontakt crashes, VEP crashes, and UAD soundcard heavy distortion, parasites and crackles.


Best


----------



## Karma (Apr 8, 2020)

Manaberry said:


> Even if Intel is struggling against AMD in terms of horsepower, they still are ahead on the polyphony capability.


It's also significantly more expensive though!


----------



## easyrider (Apr 8, 2020)

Intel chips at risk from major new security flaw


Silicon chip redesigns may be necessary to protect against LVI attacks




www.techradar.com


----------



## jononotbono (Apr 8, 2020)

I just always think of cheap whorish behaviour when I think of AMD. And I have extravagant taste so it will be hard going to AMD instead of Intel.

If AMD doesn’t work well with Universal Audio then that basically settles it for me.


----------



## barteredbride (Apr 8, 2020)

easyrider said:


> The 9900k is a hot, power hungry chip with only 8 cores and 16 threads.
> 
> You should really be looking at the 3900x 12 core 24 thread or the 3950x 16 core 32 thread Ryzen chips.
> 
> ...


Just curious...what music software needs 16 core 32 thread processors??

Isn't it a bit overkill??


----------



## easyrider (Apr 8, 2020)

jononotbono said:


> I just always think of cheap whorish behaviour when I think of AMD. And I have extravagant taste so it will be hard going to AMD instead of Intel.
> 
> If AMD doesn’t work well with Universal Audio then that basically settles it for me.



Extravagant taste? and you quote a RTX 270....? Its actually called an RTX 2070...which runs slower than a 3 year old GTX 1080ti.....

Even the RTX 2070 super is only on Par with a 1080ti in most games....

Think what you like...You have been manipulated by advertising....AMD chips are in the new PS5 ..they are powering google Stadia 

Fact of the matter is...INTEL are losing....They were losing before Core 2 duo when the Opteron line was king...

I have been overclocking and building PC's for years...Your extravagant taste is nothing ( with respect utter BS)

By all means ignore the advice...By all means ignore the advice...by all means ignore the advice and buy what you want...

But the data is clear for everyone to see....AMD are back and its only good for consumers as Intel have been rinsing their consumer base for years and years....


----------



## easyrider (Apr 8, 2020)

barteredbride said:


> Just curious...what music software needs 16 core 32 thread processors??
> 
> Isn't it a bit overkill??



Then buy a 9900k with 8 core 16 thread for more money....

The bottom line is...You by the best performance for your budget...Its called bang for buck....

It amazes me still in 2020 that people somehow think INTEL offer a superior quality experience...when in fact the tech is dead....dead sockets, dead 14 nm chips and problems with security flaws...

If Intel release a chip that destroys a 3900x for less - same money then I'll buy it....But INTEL have waited too long and rinsed the system long enough and have been caught with their pants down...

I dont care who makes what....I'll buy grunt....the 9900k was a hot chip under water clocked to 5ghz all core....The 3900x destroys it for less money whilst saving significant power and thermals....

The 4900x incoming will only widen the gap...and I can just flash my bios for an upgrade.....Unlike intel that requires the end user to buy a new motherboard....


----------



## jononotbono (Apr 8, 2020)

easyrider said:


> Extravagant taste? and you quote a RTX 270....?



Yes. I would buy an RTX 2080 Ti but why would I when I am building a PC with Competitive gaming in mind. Which means running at 1080p and 240fps. Sure, I’ll put in a 2080 Ti then. Why not. Complete waste of money but sure. Let’s do that. I’ll order one next month.

And yes. I know what a 2070 is. Perhaps not get your knickers in a twist about a typo. Thanks.


----------



## jononotbono (Apr 8, 2020)

easyrider said:


> I have been overclocking and building PC's for years...Your extravagant taste is nothing ( with respect utter BS)



I have been building PCs since my first 286. Your opinions mean nothing. With 
respect. By the way. The “extravagant taste” comment was a bit of humour. Guess that went straight over your head right.

Time to leave this forum for a while. Cheers.


----------



## easyrider (Apr 8, 2020)

jononotbono said:


> Your opinions mean nothing.



You asked for peoples opinions about the 9900k in your OP

Having built a PC with one...I thought I would offer my opinion.

Having then days later built a PC around a 3900x and X570 I thought I would offer my opinion.

Apologies if I posted something that didn't fit with your ideological state apparatus....The Church of INTEL


----------



## José Herring (Apr 8, 2020)

jononotbono said:


> I have been building PCs since my first 286. Your opinions mean nothing. With
> respect. By the way. The “extravagant taste” comment was a bit of *humour. Guess that went straight over your head right.
> 
> Time to leave this forum for a while. Cheers.


* Humor


----------



## José Herring (Apr 8, 2020)

Manaberry said:


> Another point for Intel is that AMD is UAD's black cat. Both CPU and GPU. I had to send back a brand new RX5700 because it was the origin of Cubase crashes, plugins GUI freezes, Kontakt crashes, VEP crashes, and UAD soundcard heavy distortion, parasites and crackles.
> 
> 
> Best



Was it just the GPU? Honestly I can't think of the chip causing any problems at all. The graphics card yes, but the chip? Makes no sense.


----------



## Kony (Apr 8, 2020)

josejherring said:


> * Humor


*humour


----------



## dzilizzi (Apr 8, 2020)

Kony said:


> *humour


@jononotbono lives in the U.S. now. He has to learn the proper way to spell English words!

No more extra u's.... 

On another note, it seemed from the list that it was only the UAD PCI-E cards that were a problem. The Apollo wasn't listed. 

When I first got into using music computers, I was a broke student. AMD's were so much better than the similarly priced Celerons. And to put it in perspective, a Macbook pro cost more than 3 months rent.


----------



## barteredbride (Apr 8, 2020)

easyrider said:


> Then buy a 9900k with 8 core 16 thread for more money....
> 
> The bottom line is...You by the best performance for your budget...Its called bang for buck....
> 
> ...



Whooooah there! I was curious to know if all these threads and cores are actually being used by all the music software we use...Cubase, Diva, ambisonics, 1000 track templates, 50 instances of some reverb, etc...

Easyrider... try go watching the film Easy Rider and chill maaan.


----------



## Technostica (Apr 9, 2020)

"try go watching the film Easy Rider and chill maaan." 

I watched it recently and it's really dark and not just the ending, not chilled at all!
Very sloppily made also but some good music.


----------



## easyrider (Apr 9, 2020)

barteredbride said:


> Whooooah there! I was curious to know if all these threads and cores are actually being used by all the music software we use...Cubase, Diva, ambisonics, 1000 track templates, 50 instances of some reverb, etc...
> 
> Easyrider... try go watching the film Easy Rider and chill maaan.



Yep 

I am chill...


----------



## steveo42 (Apr 9, 2020)

Check this thread out for some useful advice on builds.. Look for a poster named "Pictus" as he's very knowledgeable. Good luck. https://www.gearslutz.com/board/mus...today-we-build-our-studio-pc-quot-thread.html


----------



## novaburst (Apr 10, 2020)

Manaberry said:


> Another point for Intel is that AMD is UAD's black cat. Both CPU and GPU. I had to send back a brand new RX5700 because it was the origin of Cubase crashes, plugins GUI freezes, Kontakt crashes, VEP crashes, and UAD soundcard heavy distortion, parasites and crackles.



Not sure how a graphic card can do this.

I think you must be the only one in the world to experience this, cant speak for UAD but many have bad experiences with UAD.

At this time i think the best choice would be to build an AMD system you would really need to be ignorant
to ignore AMDs benefits today,

it is AMD that has woke Intel out of its slumber, and that says a lot

Soon maybe late this year or early next year Intel will have a very healthy choice of CPUs but the catch will be they may not offer much more than what AMD are doing so i think it will be more on what your money is doing

What AMD have done is deliberately cut there prices of their 2nd and 3rd gen not so much as to grab a chunk of the market but to give people a chance to test run their CPU and see for their self.

Yes you can get a big monster Intel now and it may work fine but you can also get the equivalent with AMD far cheaper not because its poorly made but because it is deliberately cut in price.

What AMD have done is level the quality, and what woke Intel up and have them running scared is AMD are not stopping they are continuing to develop much more CPUs and they are getting better.

needless to say many have now tasted the AMD CPU and i think it would be hard for them to go back to Intel firstly they offer the same if not better quality, 2nd they are offering some great prices, as of now,

Yes the saying was once Intel are a great CPU but so are AMD


----------



## Technostica (Apr 10, 2020)

If you don't require more than 8 cores, are conservative with regard to compatibility and the price difference is not important to you, then Intel are still worth considering for a DAW. 
Their monolithic chip design is great latency wise and they clock well. 
But with their raft of security issues, no upgrade path and their excessive power consumption it's still not an easy sell. 
They do have integrated graphics which is also a plus in their favour. 
Things are rarely 100% skewed towards one side as is the case here.


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK (Apr 10, 2020)

easyrider said:


> Extravagant taste? and you quote a RTX 270....? Its actually called an RTX 2070...which runs slower than a 3 year old GTX 1080ti.....
> 
> Even the RTX 2070 super is only on Par with a 1080ti in most games....
> 
> ...


I run an RX 580 Sapphire 8GB NITRO+ here and it works fine
Running at 4K in my games on high specs

It is now my old i7 4770K that is suffering the blow
Plans to move to the 3900 or 3950X soon...


----------



## easyrider (Apr 10, 2020)

Shad0wLandsUK said:


> I run an RX 580 Sapphire 8GB NITRO+ here and it works fine
> Running at 4K in my games on high specs
> 
> It is now my old i7 4770K that is suffering the blow
> Plans to move to the 3900 or 3950X soon...




RX 580 Sapphire 8GB NITRO+ is not a 4k gaming card...and I very much doubt your are running 60FPS at 4k

At 4k the bottleneck is the GPU not CPU mate.


----------



## Manaberry (Apr 11, 2020)

novaburst said:


> Not sure how a graphic card can do this.
> 
> I think you must be the only one in the world to experience this



As soon as a pixel is displayed on your screen, the GPU is involved. Make that GPU and drivers unable to do this properly: the software crash. 

Sadly, I'm not the only one having this problem. Others doing music also got serious issues with that card and AMD drivers.


----------



## novaburst (Apr 11, 2020)

There have been complaints about AMD and drivers on some of the graphic cards, mostly in the gaming community, i guess even with production a big graphic card is neede if you are going for these huge 4k monitors,

I think if your using graphics for gaming then opt for the secondry PSIe slot and have a dedeicated card for music production,


----------



## easyrider (Apr 11, 2020)

Manaberry said:


> As soon as a pixel is displayed on your screen, the GPU is involved. Make that GPU and drivers unable to do this properly: the software crash.
> 
> Sadly, I'm not the only one having this problem. Others doing music also got serious issues with that card and AMD drivers.



While others have seen no issues using Cubase...So it might be a hardware issue...Bios version....windows update....Driver version....windows version....etc....


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK (Apr 11, 2020)

easyrider said:


> RX 580 Sapphire 8GB NITRO+ is not a 4k gaming card...and I very much doubt your are running 60FPS at 4k
> 
> At 4k the bottleneck is the GPU not CPU mate.


OK, I am not sure what you had in mind when you wrote this...
But I never said that my bottleneck had anything to do with gaming
I know the GPU is a bottleneck when it comes to graphics, because I have built 7 PCs and spent almost the last 5 years studying the latest tech

I don't know if I even appreciate the 'correction', as it seems to be posed as more of an insult to my background (which has been assumed anyway). I also work in IT, studied in a Media university and have built custom video machines for people.
Next time I would advise asking more specific questions in your reply, before assuming you know someones level of knowledge and experience.

And yes I am gaming at 3840x1600, no idea if I am getting 60FPS, but I will certainly check that


----------



## easyrider (Apr 11, 2020)

Shad0wLandsUK said:


> OK, I am not sure what you had in mind when you wrote this...
> But I never said that my bottleneck had anything to do with gaming
> I know the GPU is a bottleneck when it comes to graphics, because I have built 7 PCs and spent almost the last 5 years studying the latest tech



I meant no malice in my post...I was just saying at the higher resolution the GPU is the most important factor for FPS

At higher reslotions games become GPU bound rather than CPU bound



> I don't know if I even appreciate the 'correction', as it seems to be posed as more of an insult to my background (which has been assumed anyway). I also work in IT, studied in a Media university and have built custom video machines for people.
> Next time I would advise asking more specific questions in your reply, before assuming you know someones level of knowledge and experience.
> 
> And yes I am gaming at 3840x1600, no idea if I am getting 60FPS, but I will certainly check that



I wasn't trying to insult you...But the fact you don't know what FPS you are getting somewhat concerns me.

I assumed you were running a 60hz 4k panel. meaning running your games at 60 FPS to avoid tearing.

This is the first thing you check to test everything is working as it should. Checking FPS is not an after thought its a fundamental part of making sure your hardware is performing like it should.

You can see from this data





__





GPU 2019 Benchmarks - Compare Products on AnandTech


GPU 2019 benchmarks: Compare two products side-by-side or see a cascading list of product ratings along with our annotations.




www.anandtech.com





The Rx 580 barely gets 40 FPS even at 2560x 1440


Shadow of the Tomb Raider - 2560x1440 - Highest Quality
Frames per Second - Higher is Better *40.6*

So as I said the RX 580 is not a 4K gaming card..This is fact unless you turn down all the quality settings ( which defeats the purpose of gaming at 4K in the first place ) or run your games Between 20 and 40 fps


----------



## styledelk (Apr 11, 2020)

Ask a few questions and all of the sharks come out like you're supposed to only make your decision on one or two vectors.

The 9900K is going to be fine. The 2070 Super is fine for most people. Eeking out another 10 fps in a game is a fool's errand for hundreds of dollars more.

I've just spent the last week deciding to upgrade my i5-4570 and ended up with the i9-9900k. Why? Because I could get it delivered faster . I wanted to go AMD with the 3900X, agonized over the decision. But in the end they're both fucking fast and they'll both do everything you want them to. Until like 3 years from now.

The criticism about it being a "dead socket" and platform is true, but it hardly matters.

I don't know why people treat the competition between two processor manufacturers like it's some personal battle they are participating in by buying their products. Your purchase of a 3900X isn't conscripting into their army. You made a consumer choice, and you'll make another one the next time you decide to upgrade.

If you're worried about the UAD compatibility your decision is made up already. And you're not even going to notice the difference except at the extreme reaches. Benchmarks aren't experience, they're just measurement.


----------



## longaker (Apr 11, 2020)

Intel’s 109xx line coming next month. If you need thunderbolt/uad; AMD is not natively suitable yet. End of this year or next when USB4 is out with thunderbolt cross compatibility, then I’ll revisit AMD. Intel will have Rocket Lake then too, will need to see benchmarks against Ryzen 4/5xxx.

Like most MAC users, I squeeze 3-5+ years out of a system. Socket compatibility for future upgrades may extend the machine life a year or two, but other modern tech will be missed. PCIE4/5, DDR5, USB4, New CPU/Bridge Architecture and all the other advancements. I find upgrading the motherboard with a new cpu more compelling.

Good luck with what you choose.


----------



## novaburst (Apr 11, 2020)

styledelk said:


> If you're worried about the UAD compatibility your decision is made up already.



Remember only if you have the old UAD cards, the new UAD cards work fine with AMD ryzen but i guess it will suck to purchase a new UAD card, 



styledelk said:


> I don't know why people treat the competition between two processor manufacturers like it's some personal battle they are participating in by buying their products.



Yes does sound like a battle i think before it was aways Intel Intel Intel i guess its just a sign AMD has now come into play, where as a good few years ago AMD was just a very poor CPU and barly mentioned in the music production.

So in truth there will be talks and shouts about the two products today becuase AMD has made a brake throught into Intels Kingdom, so yes i guess you will just need to put up with the talk that goes with that, it will happen weather you like it or not its just an awareness of a product thats making thats braking through, i guess Intel just want have it too easy as of now with a very healthy choice between the two developers.


----------



## novaburst (Apr 11, 2020)

easyrider said:


> While others have seen no issues using Cubase...So it might be a hardware issue...Bios version....windows update....Driver version....windows version....etc....



Yes this so true, i think W10 can play a big part in messing things up with its untimely updates, i think best way forward find a sweet spot in windows 10 update then shut off all updates from services, perhaps go for 3rd party security


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Apr 11, 2020)

The 9900K was a safe bet when I bought. I would’ve waited if I could - in fact, I was waiting until the 3950x. My old computer had other ideas and died. The 9900K works beautifully- heat is no problem (just get the right parts because you have to think about the full system, not just the components).

Now that 6 months have gone by, I’d get AMD, despite the fear of it (got burned by AMD long ago with buggy crap). Intel is just too far behind. AMD may have a few more little issues, but most of those seem ironed out now, too.

Likely, in two years or so, Intel will be destroying AMD again, as they leapfrog one another. I don’t mind, as a consumer, of having two competitors rather than the one.


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK (Apr 11, 2020)

easyrider said:


> I wasn't trying to insult you...But the fact you don't know what FPS you are getting somewhat concerns me.


I do not know the FPS because I myself am not an avid gamer. I used to game more and back then I had a low-end system. I recently purchased a G512 SE keyboard and a G502 Hero mouse, as I am spending more time gaming. 

I do understand that GPU performance is the decider in games.
I was more talking about my CPU being the low performer in everything as this machines is also my Windows 10 VE PRO slave.


easyrider said:


> I assumed you were running a 60hz 4k panel. meaning running your games at 60 FPS to avoid tearing.


My display is a Dell U3818DW, which I did not buy for gaming, but primarily for work. VMware, Client monitoring, Windows Patching and Updates...

Perhaps I read your tone wrong, so I also apologise


----------



## easyrider (Apr 11, 2020)

styledelk said:


> Ask a few questions and all of the sharks come out like you're supposed to only make your decision on one or two vectors.



Not really...I don't care who makes what...What I do care is performance for my money.

There is no compelling reason to buy a 9900k right now...

I have built many INTEL and AMD rigs....as said I don't care who makes what...Fact is...Intel is stagnant tech...so I won't base a new system around it....

You said last 3 years...Well the 4900x is coming and I can just plonk in and replace my 3900 x with a bios update... making my system last even longer ....Intel have nothing and this is only good for consumers


----------



## Leandro Marcos (Apr 16, 2020)

jononotbono said:


> So, the time has finally come when I have decided to build a PC. I’m thinking of buying an i9-9900k for my CPU.
> 
> For the money it seems to be excellent. Any thoughts? No doubt I’ll build the PC bit by bit so will add to this thread as I go but for now, any thoughts on the 9900k would be great.
> 
> Jono


I’ve just received my new build with 9900K. Haven’t tried it yet, but believe me I’ve been debating myself for more than 2 months on which parts to get (including the CPU).
Audio is all about real time processing. And for that, you must get the fastest processor you can buy. The 9900K is still the fastest CPU on the market (check userbenchmark). eight cores is more than enough. Having a zillion cores is useless if you won’t have the speed to execute in real time all those tracks and zillion plugins that those cores let you load.
All forums agree that if you are getting your computer for both music and personal use, then get AMD. On the contrary, if you are getting it for the solely purpose of music production, go with Intel.
Also, another point in favour of the 9900k is the integrated graphics. Discrete graphics can bring many latency problems for audio.
CPU over RAM, always. Clock speed over number of cores, always.
Play it safe, and go for the 9900K.


----------



## Karma (Apr 16, 2020)

Oh man, some of this thread isn't going to age well when Ryzen 4 hits the market


----------



## styledelk (Apr 16, 2020)

That involves waiting!


----------



## dzilizzi (Apr 16, 2020)

Always waiting for the next best thing and you never end up getting anything.  

And all you can really do it get the best you can afford and try to make it upgradeable as possible.


----------



## novaburst (Apr 16, 2020)

There is some info that China is now test its own CPU so this will be interesting for the future.


----------



## José Herring (Apr 16, 2020)

novaburst said:


> There is some info that China is now test its own CPU so this will be interesting for the future.


I just looked into it. Looks like clones of some older Intel chips at the moment. Could take them a while to catch up, but China does have a way of catching up and it should be interesting in a year or two. I wonder if you'll just be able to drop a Chinese CPU right into an Intel compatible Mobo?


----------



## MarcHedenberg (Apr 19, 2020)

So between, say, a 3900x, 3950x, and an i9-9900k, which would you choose at the moment for strictly audio production?


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Apr 19, 2020)

3950x


----------



## MarcHedenberg (Apr 19, 2020)

vitocorleone123 said:


> 3950x



Interesting. Do the cores make that big of a difference compared to the better single-threaded performance of the 9900k?


----------



## novaburst (Apr 19, 2020)

I have seen examples of playback and live play when the user was doing recording and a 4 core 8 threads was nearly hitting peak but a 16 core 32 threads appears to still be sleeping, not this was not done Via a DAW but in VEpro server project


----------



## easyrider (Apr 19, 2020)

Karma said:


> Oh man, some of this thread isn't going to age well when Ryzen 4 hits the market



Update Bios and plonk in a 4950 x 



styledelk said:


> That involves waiting!



No it doesn’t , you could build an AMD X570 rig now...then just get a 4950x when they hit...

Far more upgrade potential then going the dead 9900k route....


----------



## Leandro Marcos (Apr 19, 2020)

MarcHedenberg said:


> So between, say, a 3900x, 3950x, and an i9-9900k, which would you choose at the moment for strictly audio production?


9900k - best single core speed on the market. That’s what matters for audio production. You won’t see improvements in getting more than 6 or 8 cores, other than the amount of tracks and fx plugins you can load.


----------



## novaburst (Apr 19, 2020)

Leandro Marcos said:


> 9900k - best single core speed on the market. That’s what matters for audio production. You won’t see improvements in getting more than 6 or 8 cores, other than the amount of tracks and fx plugins you can load.



The true fact if you are honest it is the top but for gaming there is not alot that can beat it but the AMD is just slightly behind,

For production, vidio music the 99K00k is neither here nor there and the more cores have prooved far better for production work. but go for more cores you will be better off if doing production

Another thing is the AMD MB are so easy to otherclock and with the correct cooler they remain rock solid outside the CPU base clock speed, RAM speed is so easy to overclock too all with very little temp difference.

never the less if you had the 9900K you wont be moaning its a good CPU but there is better, especaily if you want future proof 

I really dont understand where this more cores dont matter came from but it is a fales

So many have beifitted from more cores as opposed to speed, with music production esp midi tracking rendering instrument library its not about speed its about load two poeple liftiing up a heavy chunk of steel will make the work easier than one person, 10 people helping will make the chunk of steel seem like cardboard..

The argument is stupid becuase those who have moved from less cores to more cores weather it be Intel or AMD have benefited greatly in there projects.


----------



## Karma (Apr 20, 2020)

easyrider said:


> Update Bios and plonk in a 4950 x


That's what I'm saying, my comment was more aimed at the Intel stuff. I've just put in a 3950x myself


----------



## MarcHedenberg (Apr 20, 2020)

Karma said:


> That's what I'm saying, my comment was more aimed at the Intel stuff. I've just put in a 3950x myself



How's the 3950x working so far? Do you normally work with lots of tracks?


----------



## Karma (Apr 20, 2020)

MarcHedenberg said:


> How's the 3950x working so far? Do you normally work with lots of tracks?


I'll let you know once I get Cubase back up and running. Still sorting everything currently!


----------



## José Herring (Apr 20, 2020)

MarcHedenberg said:


> So between, say, a 3900x, 3950x, and an i9-9900k, which would you choose at the moment for strictly audio production?


3950x is currently doing better as far as overall DAW performance. I9-9900k will perform slightly better if you have a CPU intensive plugin.

My only concern is that for some reason Cubase isn't doing well on Windows 10 with chips that have a high core count. I'm looking into this more.


----------



## styledelk (Apr 20, 2020)

easyrider said:


> Update Bios and plonk in a 4950 x
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sure, and buy a processor now, and a processor later. Which you'll probably do anyway, of course, but by the time you need to upgrade the 3950X, AMD will have moved on to 5950X on AM5 and this is all a moot point again.


----------



## easyrider (Apr 20, 2020)

styledelk said:


> Sure, and buy a processor now, and a processor later. Which you'll probably do anyway, of course, but by the time you need to upgrade the 3950X, AMD will have moved on to 5950X on AM5 and this is all a moot point again.



That’s the nature of the beast.. but time it right and you can upgrade for little cost...and it’s fun


----------



## Vonk (Apr 23, 2020)

Leandro Marcos said:


> 9900k - best single core speed on the market. That’s what matters for audio production. You won’t see improvements in getting more than 6 or 8 cores, other than the amount of tracks and fx plugins you can load.


@jononotbono & others - If you still pondering your build then you should check this latest benchmarking video from Richard Ames. For windows/cubase/vepro it seems that high core counts are superfluous. Of course they may serve well for other purposes...
https://vi-control.net/community/th...digital-audio-workstation.92466/#post-4544408


----------



## Chungus (May 8, 2020)

The most important part about building a PC is to have RGB on absolutely everything.

See, running a computer produces heat, and when heat builds up, the system will bottleneck. RGB takes that heat and turns it into visible light, thus increasing performance.

True fact. There is nothing wrong about this statement.


----------



## dzilizzi (May 8, 2020)

Chungus said:


> The most important part about building a PC is to have RGB on absolutely everything.
> 
> See, running a computer produces heat, and when heat builds up, the system will bottleneck. RGB takes that heat and turns it into visible light, thus increasing performance.
> 
> True fact. There is nothing wrong about this statement.


Only if the lights are outside of the case. If you put enough light into the case, it will cause heat. Heat is bad.


----------



## tabulius (May 8, 2020)

dzilizzi said:


> Only if the lights are outside of the case. If you put enough light into the case, it will cause heat. Heat is bad.



LED-lights don't produce much heat at all.


----------



## Pablocrespo (May 8, 2020)

@jononotbono , did you go for the 9900k? I have it and it rocks, thinking about going 128gb with the new somewhat cheaper 32gb sticks, but don´t have a lot of info about it yet.


----------



## easyrider (May 8, 2020)

Pablocrespo said:


> @jononotbono , did you go for the 9900k? I have it and it rocks, thinking about going 128gb with the new somewhat cheaper 32gb sticks, but don´t have a lot of info about it yet.



Why would you go for the 9900K?

The 10990K is the chip to get if you want INTEL


----------



## dzilizzi (May 8, 2020)

tabulius said:


> LED-lights don't produce much heat at all.


Yes and no. They do, but it is usually minimal. However, if you put enough of them in your case? It can get warm.


----------



## jononotbono (May 8, 2020)

easyrider said:


> You asked for peoples opinions about the 9900k in your OP
> 
> Having built a PC with one...I thought I would offer my opinion.
> 
> ...



haha Man, I apologise for my response. I was pretty wasted and someone on the internet said I was talking bullshit! Honesty hurts because I'm excellent at talking bullshit. But I haven't been manipulated by anything. Except for Sample Library devs that keep forcing me to buy their shit.

Anyway, moving on (hopefully you've dug deep in yourself to forgive me since reading my last paragraph ) I'm still deciding on this whole situation and then along comes 10 core 5.3hz Comet chips soon just to waiver my opinions.

I'm thinking that 10 core Comet for a main machine with a couple of Threadripper slaves would be the way forward.


----------



## Technostica (May 8, 2020)

The issue with the new ten core is the amount of power it consumes which means fairly exotic cooling. 
So more expense and potentially more noise. 
I would look very hard at the forthcoming reviews before considering that chip. 
This is just comparing with other Intel chips as versus AMD is another ball game.


----------



## dolmacb (Jun 25, 2020)

HI 
I Am going To Build A PC mainly for Music Production,specifically for Film Scoring With Large VSTi like spitfire,LASS,AudioBro,etc and also 4K video Editing..
So Could You Please guide the Parts which i can opt for but obviously inTightBudget 

1)I am Bit Confused over 3900X as i heard that for audio production with large instruments it Produces Latency and also with Four Sticks of RAM it fails to run at its Mentioned Clock Speed.Is this True?correct me if i am wrong..
2)Should i Go For 10900k or 10700k?as intel cpus are good for Audio production..
3)i am willing to go 64 gb of ram with 16x4gb..so plz guide which speed should i go for with the above CPUs
4)2070 Super will my job for Video editing 4K be Smooth i will be using Premiere pro and Resolve

Plz Share your valuable comments..


----------



## thevisi0nary (Jul 2, 2020)

Please delete, I’m stupid and posted in the wrong place :|.


----------



## José Herring (Jul 7, 2020)

jononotbono said:


> haha Man, I apologise for my response. I was pretty wasted and someone on the internet said I was talking bullshit! Honesty hurts because I'm excellent at talking bullshit. But I haven't been manipulated by anything. Except for Sample Library devs that keep forcing me to buy their shit.
> 
> Anyway, moving on (hopefully you've dug deep in yourself to forgive me since reading my last paragraph ) I'm still deciding on this whole situation and then along comes 10 core 5.3hz Comet chips soon just to waiver my opinions.
> 
> I'm thinking that 10 core Comet for a main machine with a couple of Threadripper slaves would be the way forward.


I've always used Intel on my main machine and AMD as slaves. I've become religious about that combo. Intel rules the kingdom, and AMD are dutiful worker bees. But.....lately those AMD chips are starting to challenge the thrown.


----------



## chimuelo (Jul 8, 2020)

josejherring said:


> I've always used Intel on my main machine and AMD as slaves. I've become religious about that combo. Intel rules the kingdom, and AMD are dutiful worker bees. But.....lately those AMD chips are starting to challenge the thrown.



Well said and also what I did with a 3700X.

Can’t wait for Tiger Lake desktops and Next Gen AMD APUs.
2021 should be great for audio folks.
2019/20 were great and Intel wasn’t fighting back much.
The battles are coming, and App£€ going to their ARM CPUs means even more competition.


----------

