What's new

Ryzen 3000 Vs I9 9900K for music production

chimuelo

Star Of Stage & Screen
AMD is just not the typical x86 design.
Not sure how gaming differs from audio but I’m reading several different reviewers everyday because to more tests the better.

But with Ryzen CPUs it seems faster DRAM makes a difference, and turning of SMT increases performance too.

A fascinating design. I can’t stop reading about all of these revelations.
 

Pictus

Active Member
But with Ryzen CPUs it seems faster DRAM makes a difference, and turning of SMT increases performance too.
It depends on the application...
From https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-9-3900x-smt-off-vs-intel-9900k/9.html
"
There's a second, major part of this review with the non-gaming applications. Here, the loss of SMT is way more pronounced, particularly with applications that scale well in a multi-threaded environment. WPrime posts a massive 31 percent performance loss, which is roughly 1/3rd the processor's performance. Can you imagine that an intangible feature such as SMT could make such a huge performance contribution? Cinebench R20 multi-threaded also sheds 21 percent (over 1/5th) of its performance.

There are similar performance losses in our rendering tests with SMT disabled. Performance drops roughly 31 percent with Blender and Keyshot and 27 percent with Corona. With SMT-off, the 3900X falls behind both the 3700X and i9-9900K at Tensorflow AI tests. 7-Zip decompression tests show a gargantuan 39 percent performance loss. Media-encoding sprung a surprise with only a 3 percent performance loss seen with H.265 encoding. The H.264 encoder posts a 20 percent loss, though."
 

chimuelo

Star Of Stage & Screen
Definitely a mixed bag, anxious to see what it does with core locked synths.
Not that I need any departure from my happy rigs, just curious as it’s such an odd x86.
We’re so use to more, more, more being the answer to everything.
 

pderbidge

Senior Member
A fascinating design. I can’t stop reading about all of these revelations.
AMD is certainly piloting some unique processes to eek out every bit of performance they can. This is necessary for AMD to do partly due to the fact that the Intel Architecture is still in some ways superior and therefore doesn't necessarily need the constant monitoring that AMD employs to ensure the clocks and voltages etc... are boosting themselves when needed (much different than Intel's Turbo Boost). Intel's Ring bus is an example of what I perceive to be a superior architecture for core to core communication, although as memory prices come down and speeds get better AMD's architecture (infinity fabric) might prove to be better in the long run. Imagine if Intel took the same amount of care and detail to do the kind of process monitoring on top of its excellent architecture that AMD does, then they wouldn't be in such a rough spot right now with AMD encroaching on their performance. I suppose it could be argued that focusing on bettering the architecture itself is better than trying to boost performance through "programming techniques" for lack of a better term. However, AMD is trying to do both, which I think is the best approach. Then again, that's not quite fair to Intel either since Intel has piloted plenty of enhancements suchas Hyper-threading, SSE but it's just that none of these worked without developer involvement and optimizations.

I know Intel, and I'm sure we'll see a massive blow back, however I'm hoping that this time around AMD is prepared for that. I think they are, since they've been through this before and I'm sure they don't want a repeat.
 

chimuelo

Star Of Stage & Screen

Sure glad you’re around here.
Thanks.

Probably the best RAM vid I’ve seen. Plus he uses the 3700X which I thought would be a gem for a low heat rig, but using X470 server board.

Syncing isn’t usually needed for us with Intel but this is great info about latency which is right up our alley.

I was impressed by the end of the 1st part one video then saw he had 2?
Had to watch that too.

Guy just tells you the shit you need to know and doesn’t bore you to death like a real slow synth Demo. Makes you want to yell at them they’re so slow.
 

chimuelo

Star Of Stage & Screen
I played with the ASRock X470 Server Board and a 3700X last night and it’s a server board so no overclocking but this is one of the retail chips, not a binned chip and it’s performance was similar to my i7 4790k CPUs.

My only tests are latency, noticeable or not by touch/MIDI, or audio, and high polyphony with heavy sustain which only PTeq and Kontakt allow.

But even with 6 and 7 way EPiano and Acoustic Piano layers the CPU didn’t gag once and looks to be a great CPU even for locked Core synths that I use.

I don’t need to build anything but pretty sure my next build will be the 3700X because I need low heat which most CPUs do if you don’t overclock, and the 3200 RAM is pretty cheap.

But this 65 watt CPU in a 1U Chassis runs so cool I can set my loud ass triple Barrel fans on silent, which isn’t silent, but as quiet as they get.

If folks really need extra horsepower I’d get the 3800X and the 3700 DDR that is the sweet spot for RAM.

Other great news, while these Trade Tariffs haven’t hit home yet, Taiwan is stepping up with 24/7 manufacturing for more Boards and RAM.
The ASRock Server Board was 475 bucks earlier this year and they’re dropping by 30% just this month.
 

chimuelo

Star Of Stage & Screen
I love having somebody besides myself confirm things for me a couple days later...

 

pderbidge

Senior Member
All X570 motherboards from all manufacturers support 128 GB of RAM.
Correct. The one thing that all Asrock x570 boards support that the others don't is Thunderbolt. Some allow an add in card for TB and others come with TB built in. I can't believe that none of the other manufacturers are taking advantage of this like Asrock has. Now that the X570 chip set support TB why not support it? Especially if their going to have boards costing $600+ and yet no TB. That seems like a joke to me.
 

steveo42

Active Member
I went Intel 9900k and am very happy. System is a beast and I don't even come close to taxing it.
All I did was turn on XMP for memory and that was it.
It just works.
Here is my build:

GIGABYTE Z390 DESIGNARE Gigabyte (Intel LGA1151/Z390/ATX/2xM.2/Thunderbolt 3/Onboard AC Wifi/12+1 Phases Digital Vrm/Motherboard)

Intel Core i9-9900K Desktop Processor 8 Cores up to 5.0 GHz Turbo unlocked LGA1151 300 Series 95W

Noctua NH-D15, Premium CPU Cooler with 2x NF-A15 PWM 140mm Fans

Corsair Vengeance LPX 64GB DDR4 DRAM 3200MHz C16 Memory Kit

CORSAIR RMX Series, RM850x, 850 Watt, 80+ Gold Certified, Fully Modular Power Supply

CORSAIR FORCE Series MP510 960GB NVMe PCIe Gen3 x4 M.2 SSD Solid State Storage, Up to 3,480MB/s

Fractal Design Case FD-CA-DEF-R6C-BKO (USB C Version, no glass doors)
 
Last edited:

pderbidge

Senior Member
I went Intel 9900k and am very happy. System is a beast and I don't even come close to taxing it.
All I did was turn on XMP for memory and that was it.
It just works.
Here is my build:

GIGABYTE Z390 DESIGNARE Gigabyte (Intel LGA1151/Z390/ATX/2xM.2/Thunderbolt 3/Onboard AC Wifi/12+1 Phases Digital Vrm/Motherboard)

Intel Core i9-9900K Desktop Processor 8 Cores up to 5.0 GHz Turbo unlocked LGA1151 300 Series 95W

Noctua NH-D15, Premium CPU Cooler with 2x NF-A15 PWM 140mm Fans

Corsair Vengeance LPX 64GB DDR4 DRAM 3200MHz C16 Memory Kit

CORSAIR RMX Series, RM850x, 850 Watt, 80+ Gold Certified, Fully Modular Power Supply

CORSAIR FORCE Series MP510 960GB NVMe PCIe Gen3 x4 M.2 SSD Solid State Storage, Up to 3,480MB/s

Fractal Design Case FD-CA-DEF-R6C-BKO (USB C Version, no glass doors)
Looks like a great system. Make sure to max out the case fans. More fans running at slower speed will translate to cooler and quieter. With that Noctua CPU cooler you should consider overclocking the cpu. I think there should be a fairly basic setting in the bios to do an all core overclock without having to do too much tweaking similar to enabling XMP. You should easily get as close to a 5GHZ all core clock with an i9 9900K. Overclocking the 9900k is the only reason I would consider that cpu over Ryzen right now. Well, that and the fact that there are more options for Z390 motherboards. I would have easily gone Gigabyte on X570 if they would have supported Thunderbolt but oddly they don't on their X570 boards right now. My older rig has a rock solid Gigabyte board that's still chugging away and even though it's one of the lower end Gigabyte boards I was still able to get a good stable 4.3Ghz overclock on an Intel 4770k without breaking a sweat. I have not doubt I could have gone 4.6Ghz if I had one of their medium to higher end boards.
 
Top Bottom