I've just started using CCL. They were the only retailer that had decent memory in stock that didn't cost an absolute fortune, it still wasn't cheap though.
I would ❤ to see Capture One and Unreal Engine 5 benchmarks included. To me Adobe Suite is history. I use Davinci Resolve and Capture One on both Win and Mac. And I’m slowly getting into Blender and UE5
DAW use means lots of plugins in memory and instruments' sample data too. So it takes fastest memory setup which is DDR5 mobo and two combs to get 64GB. My very free form setup would be two RME Raydat pcie-cards( 72 free routable channels) and four AD/DA devices. That way I get most out of loopback devices and such audio lab has unlimited possibilities to route (RME mixer allow loop outputs back to appear as input i.e loopback and includes windows ouputs too) signal without need for outboard devices. In a DAW build it would be nice to 1. Use built in GPU to free pcie lanes to your self. 2. Connect both sound cards directly to processor. Of course I have not that system yet so I cannot even say if this is correct thinking(considering pci-lanes) but it would be nice to have Tech Notice's take on DAW at current stage of processors and memory because it is getting very interesting for DAW builders. Well - I have one Raydat 36 channels and two ADDAs so I know exactly how magnificent thing loopback chance is with Windows 10 Pro. "Actually Hardcore Overclocker" was beautifully whining about mobo manufacturers holding back allowing PCI-lanes available connected directly to processor. There should be much more of that whining in the world.
yeah in the same boat too.....the alternative is the threadripper wrx8 socket, but the ST clock speeds arent that fast compared the raptor lake. So you are stuck with limited full bandwidth PCIE lanes Vs better single core frequencies. DAW users may need PCIE nvme SDD's + PCIE sound cards + GPU for video encode/decode, so that already needing min 3 PCIE full bandwidth slots. The max you get with consumer level AM5 or intel raptor is 1 PCE at x16 or x8 shared with2 PCIE's.........on the other side WRX8 has 7 x16 full bandwidth, but lower singe core clock speeds + higher cost.
Yes, looking at getting 64 Gb Ram. Doubting to go for a 13600k or 7700x. Single core performance means more or heavier plugins per track. Seems there the Intel and AMD are roughly equal. Plus for the Intel 13th gen would be a better (e.g. faster) memory controller, but there are (possible?) better upgrade paths for the AM5 platform. I've noticed the ASRock LiveMixer B650 mobo has two PCIe slots going to the CPU. So that's on my "to get" list. Haven't seen any review yet. It's not that easy a choice. As for the converters, I'm using a firewire Mytek, so I'll have to get some Firewire PCIe card and cross my fingers that it works. Sadly there's no stable multi-converter setup possible on Windows (there is on Mac OS with the "aggregate device" option. Which limits my i/0 to 8 (coming from a cheesegrater mac pro with 16 tracks). I'm frustrated about that. Windows OS audio drivers are billions of years old now. Considered getting a 16 Ch Ferrofish. But decided I don't want to sell the Mytek because of the quality of it's sound. I've used RME Hammerfall PCIe cards in the past and those were rocksolid. Best drivers in the business. RME stuff is quite good. Another thought: Maybe use the new PC as a processing node for the old Mac Pro using audiogridder over a LAN. The Mac Pro is still a good machine (after 10 yrs!) but severely lacks memory bandwidth. Have to test that option.
@@reptilespantoso I'm using Behringer ADA8200 and 8000 for adda. 8000 is trash because the output channels keep turning off if there is no signal present. That is crazy design bug. I still can use 8000 for midbass and sub outputs by feeding faint noise to channel to keep it on. On contrast ADA8200 is so good no even above average listening person could never complain. The goodness of 8200 can be also measured and made visible with measuring mic and sine sweeps and observing noise floor. Time with digital speaker system have taught me passive crossovers are responsible 80% of perceivable bad in speaker's sound. That is why my main listening system have no single passive crossover - they all are in Cubase group tracks. There is full freedom to change crossover characteristic at any given time in realtime. I would like an other Raydat to just grow the channels so there is good abundance of them. Currently with one Raydat I need to consider too much to how arrange test situation but with two Raydats that would be cured and more energy left for programming and research. RME Raydat has prooved so stable it has never betrayed me in 8 years. Sensible buffersize is 512 which is enough for occasional guitar noodling too.
@@reptilespantosoThis is in my case: Another thing to consider is two Cubases in the same machine. One raydat for song writing and musical sounds and other for speaker management and research programming. At least song writing one could be non pro version. That way they both would have quite a lot abundance in Raydat routing. Something to ask from RME is if the driver can aggregate identical interfaces as one device - which at least Cubase 10 wants. There should be multi interface support in those vst hosts without being forced to revert to asio4all.
I think if your creating, the intel 13-700k would be the better bang for buck. Been using CCL online for at least 8 yrs, always reliable, excellent customer service, and you can always get a great deal on there if you're patient.
I edit volume photos. I don't use Lightroom, but a program a lot like Lightroom. The active number, or the editing number is what is important to me. When I export photos I usually do it when I am in bed. The passive score is not really all that important to me so the overall score is not all that important. The active score is important, because that is my time. I know that the newer CPUs are faster, but do I need the fastest. I can only do things so fast. When mirrorless cameras first came out, it seems that they all were in a contest to make the smallest camera. They found out that they were not making the people using them any smaller and could not really work the tiny cameras. They are now making mirrorless cameras for professionals bigger. Have CPUs gotten faster than the people using them? Speed for speed's sake doesn't make much sense to me.
@@HarvinderSingh-yy8th No. I build a new I-5 every few years. I live in Las Vegas, heat is a bit of an issue here, but editing photos used a lot of RAM and almost no GPU. You can't buy a prebuilt with 64 or 128 gb of RAM that uses integrated graphics. I had a 10600k and it was showing its age a bit. I found updating your computer every few years is much more important than a CPU with high specs.
Usually photo editing uses alot of ram. I use LRC with the latest update it uses my vram alot (2080ti) i think because of ai analysis of photos. At average I use ram 20gb with a single wedding
The motherboard manufacturers support higher memory frequencies so with runnign dual rank memory you can use 6000 instead of just 5200. If you could do an update video on the correct speeds and any other updates AM5 has made since launch that would be great.
I'll second this. DDR5 5200 is WAY below AMD's recommended SPEC for optimal performance. ( 6000 CL30 ) Ryzen gets a BIG bump from proper RAM speed and timings. (* Intel will also get a performance bump, but not as much.) This has been the case since ZEN 1. Many tech tuber channels either tested with the correct RAM initially, or re-tested again with proper RAM.
youve shown a platform cost of $1200 for the 7700x , $1080 for 13600k, and $1100 for 12700k. excluding the i7-13700k is pretty misleading , even with the small bump in cpu price, the i7-13700k still lands below the cost of AM4 w/ 7700x , and you get so much more for your $... (not a fan boy, I really like both cpus but I wish AM4 was priced better for what it is)
excellent video but I still have several doubts I am an architect and I am thinking of setting up a PC with a Ryzen 9 5900X and an MSI X570S Ace Max board but I don't know if it is the right thing to do, what do you recommend? greetings from Honduras 🇭🇳
That crossed my mind. (I'm not an architect, though) I had a nice ASRock AM4 motherboard reserved but the shop sold it. So now I'm going for a newer CPU. You may need 64 Gb of RAM, if you have some big project files.
The choice is simple. If you are building a new system, then the Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 7 from Zen 4 doesn't make sense and at the same time the i9 and i7 from Raptorlake doesn't make sense. Too much money for the performance of 6 and 8 core Zen 4 while it's too much money for a dead platform for a 16 core and 24 core Raptorlake. Buy the i5 from 13th gen or buy the Ryzen 9s from Zen 4, only then these 2 platforms make sense for a new builder.
Ive had the ryzen 5 2600 since 2019 then upgraded to 5600x this year on my b450 board. So yeah, I will go AMD on this one. Basically for intel, you are buying the last LGA1700. The little performance gain aint worth the long term investment
Me too, in 2017 I had 1600x on A340, then 3700x on b450.. now R7 5800x on x570... so every new CPU carries new features that are supported on the new motherboard, few people don't care about that. So it comes to the same thing, new technologies new products. It will be the same with AM5... the first new CPU will bring with it a new motherboard, which "you won't buy".
@@predator9909 Your money your choice. I'm not sure if I'll have the money to upgrade for at least a year... and then, again, best by, .. whatever offers more for less money. I support both teams... and as far as I can see they are in agreement, each of them offers only a small difference compared to the competition. However, prices are falling compared to previous generations.
You can buy cheaper motherboards now for Intel. That makes it a much cheaper upgrade. And the performance gains are huge for the 13600k compared to any previous generation. AMD or Intel. I will be on the 13600k for many years when I upgrade, just as with my 8700k which has lasted me almost 5 years now, so it doesn't matter at all if it is the last Intel series supporting LGA1700. I can understand that on the other hand if you upgrade every year (or even 2 years) then the AMD makes more sense. But then again the added cost of both the more expensive CPU and Mobo eats that up on the AMD side. And if you really, really wanna cheap out, you can continue with DDR4 Ram on the intel side, buying a cheap mobo together with that. Then it doesn't matter at all if you have to upgrade the lot for the coming Intel generations. The combined cost will anyway be so much lower compared to the AMD side.
AMD confirmed support up to 2025 and later. However, going LGA1700 is a dead end. So you are trapped with a 13900k at max, that require AIOs and fast DDR5 to truly shine. In the meantime AMD Zen 4c will see the core count go from 50-100% more cores. The 7700x and 7600x are gaming CPUs.
Remember they almost cut the support for 5000 series. They only did it because it made a huge backlash. Up to means a lot of things. Don't buy on promises. But yeah , I will also be going for AMD and I'm just waiting for 70003d
2025 is just 3 years away. How many people will upgrade their system, including the CPU, in that time? How many new generation CPUs will introduce during that time? One more, maybe at most two more? And what if the socket is the same, but other functions on the motherboard are outdated, meaning you have to buy a new motherboard anyways? For most people, if they clearly think out their purchase in advance, I doubt they will update during that time, and especially just update to a new CPU. I've been a PC user since 1981 when IBM came out with their first PC, and I don't recall ever swapping out the CPU on a motherboard for a newer/faster one. There was always enough reasons besides just the CPU to want to upgrade the motherboard as well. Reuse the case, drives, etc., sure. But CPU and motherboard, nope. Of course it might be an advantage for some people, but I think the majority of people who think it's advantage haven't really thought it out enough.
@@aaronlee6821 I for sure will, let's remember here that pcie gen 5 GPU and SSD don't exist yet. So in 3 or 4 years I sure will be swapping cpu if AMD keeps the same trend as am4. Look at people buying 5800x3d now , they are almost sold out every where. But as I said I am not buying on promises. If I need a new platform by then or it's worth it to me , I will upgrade or go to Intel.
@@aaronlee6821 Yup! I used to upgrade every 2 years (or even more often) until I upgraded to Sandy Bridge (intel i7 2600k) in 2012 . Then it took me 6 years to update to i7 8700k, which i am on now. I don't think it matters at all if LGA1700 is the last socket for current Intel series if I still will be using a 12600k (Which I will update to) in at least 4-5 years. Everything else will probably also change on the mobo, as you said. It will be a "downgrade" in "class" from an i7 to an i5 for me, but I think the last two i5:s (12th and 13th gen) have been so strong that theres no need for an i7. Compared to 12th generation, the i5 also gained two more cores than the i7 (got closer to it)!
What I'd relly like to know is how a 13600k+ddr4 performs vs 7700x+ddr5. "Normal" ram. DDR4 3600 C16 vs DDR5 6000 c36. With DDR4 at half the price of DDR5 here in Europe. Combo of Gaming x z690 (same as Aereo G) +64gbDDR4 +13600k is 850 euro right now in Europe. If you go with DDR5, either with a Intel or AMD, you are at +100 euro for half the amount of RAM. If I was a gamer I'd go the AMD DDR5 route, but as a budget conscious photographer who wants a rig both for photo and light video editing, atm the 13600k is very very very tempting.
7700x could be worth it with reduced price. But oh boy value proposition isn't great. 7600x and 7700x feel like beta CPUs before 3d v-cache variants come out.
exactly what i said to myself this shouldn't cost more than 300 dollars considering it's performance compared to 13600k it barely matches it and they wanna charge 400!!! idk what they was thinking pricing these cpus and with the cost of b650 it's no go and impossible recommendation
I just got an Asus x570 PorArt for $365 usd. I want to build my wife a video editing workstation. Is the 5900x good enough for video editing? Or should I just go for the 5950x since I was able to save some cash with the deal I got on the x570 ProArt motherboard? Edit: Forgot to add that she uses Adobe Premiere Pro.
@@barryobrien1890 I think I might upgrade later when my budget is more flexible. For now I think I'll stick to Ryzen 9. The thing is that she's used to edit on her laptop, on a 10th gen Intel processor, so the 4th gen Ryzen processor will be a huge improvement. She does very small projects but wants to start doing longer videos soon. Once I'm able to make a 12th/13th gen build, which should be within a year, I'll keep the current build and let her have the latest one. I wanted to know if the difference between the 5900x and the 5950x is worth it, especially since this will be my first build of a dedicated workstation.
this is behind the time. but in the 7000 AMD group... this is the most refined. look all this data doesnt going flying around - with no mistakes. I work with layer one data. the layer you build on. this CPU seems to have its foundation well in hand. Ill still choose it over the 7900x3D. your prossor is the cunductor of your machine... give it only one job.
What a long term upgrade mantra for AMD... I don't believe that when anyone buys a new CPU with new features, they don't want to buy a new motherboard to unlock those new features!!! Intel does it in a slightly more direct way, but everything is basically the same. Personally, I don't care if someone buys AMD or Intel... Whoever gives money makes the choice, I see no reason to cheer. These two companies dose progress a shade above each other anyway.
@@Magnus_Loov Nahh I don't need any of the stuff Intel are currently going with, primarily I am a gamer - with occasional basic photoshop. Both my rigs are now all AMD. I was hoping ARC was going to be better, maybe in a couple more generations I will consider them again. Nothing wrong with the 13600k though, I don't get all this tribal nonsense. Both are extremely similar in my opinion.
@@DailyCorvid I totally agree, and I think that that AM5's only real disadvantage is that you can only use ddr5, but mostly for people who are upgrading an already existing system
@@DailyCorvid I would have gotten the AMD if it was any better in performance/price. As it is now it is nowhere near the 13600 in that respect (Especially since the motherboards are much more expensive now that there are additional options that are cheaper for Intel than the ones in the video). The one thing that 'AMD does better though is energy consumption, something that maybe somewhat will make up for the price difference now that the energy prices are so high here in Europe (Sweden for me). But then again, the multicore performance for my user case, DAW(music production) is so much more beneficial for Intel anyway...
sorry my 13900kf is the fastest octacore cpu in the world. e-cores sucks for everythign but photo/video editing. And why would u bother with gettign such expensive boards when the cheapest z690 boards like the msi z690 pro a/wifi or asus z690 a prime will be good enough with 4 nvme slots?
E-cores doesn't suck at all for DAW performance (music production which can be extremely demanding when emulating soft synths and digital effects in real time when recording/playing). It has been shown that it works extremely well with Cubase 12 in Windows 11. And I think it seems the e-cores works very well for most other apps too, including games, when you upgrade to Windows 11 which has support for the new thread hypervisor. I mean the e-cores are way, way more powerful than on the Apple M-cpu:s. They are on a level of the normal full cores of just a couple of generations ago (up until 10th which was still a derivate of the old skylake architecture at its base)...
i buy my pc ryzen 3600 only to find out that if i need to upgrade something like ryzen 9000 (when they come out later) i will need to change my motherboard, and my ram too. its like changing the whole set.
hello guys :) I'm on a 3700X, only working with it : webdesigner, developper, loud illustrator files, photoshop, blender etc I hesitate between a 12700KF (i have a 3060 GPU) or the last AM5 7700X... what should i take ?
I will be building an AM5 system because of AMD's proven track record of providing a better long term upgrade path. These biased reviews that attempt to paint Intel as a better value are not compelling. I don't think that an objective analysis of the total cost of ownership vs. long term system performance supports rolling the dice on an Intel CPU.
It only matters if you update every 1.5-2 years. For many of us powerusers we don't update as often now. I will stick to the 13600 for at least four years when I update, like with my 8700k up until now. When it comes to performance, the 13600k is simply outclassing the 7700x in multithreaded tasks in most tests. My usecase? Mostly DAW, music production which have been proven to work extremely well with the DAWBENCH test. It utilises the E-cores very efficiently in Cubase 12 in Windows 11. But also some other video encoding stuff...
Can someone plz tell me if i should get an i7 12700 or the Ryzen7 5700g....for editing 4K 150mbps type mp4 footage on PrePro. Which will give me the fastest timeline scrub/grading/fx performance (renders i dont care...i can wait). Urgent suggestions needed plz. First few months i want to edit without a graphics card only using IGPU.
@@b1g_j3rm > Im going to work for 6 months on it using only the IGPU. Will the 5700G be much lesser in performance or only slightly lower than 12700 ? Thanks
![DON'T BUY THIS CPU! 👉 4 Mistakes to AVOID as Creators! [More Expensive & WORSE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8M_zoDKw7XA/mqdefault.jpg)
![DON'T BUY THIS CPU! 👉 4 Mistakes to AVOID as Creators! [More Expensive & WORSE]](/img/tr.png)
![Why Your Creator PC Bottlenecks! 👉 How to find & FIX the problem? [Video, Photo & 3D]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/s2O7P7Bmvg8/mqdefault.jpg)
Huge thanks for CCL again for providing these Ryzen 7000 CPUs!
Check them out here: geni.us/4090inUK
I've just started using CCL. They were the only retailer that had decent memory in stock that didn't cost an absolute fortune, it still wasn't cheap though.
You must test the new AMD gpu cards in this kind of workloads... Thank you.
Just wanted to say thank you for continuing to mention 4 sticks/128GB! Would love to see more practical tests with it too!
I would ❤ to see Capture One and Unreal Engine 5 benchmarks included. To me Adobe Suite is history. I use Davinci Resolve and Capture One on both Win and Mac. And I’m slowly getting into Blender and UE5
DAW use means lots of plugins in memory and instruments' sample data too. So it takes fastest memory setup which is DDR5 mobo and two combs to get 64GB. My very free form setup would be two RME Raydat pcie-cards( 72 free routable channels) and four AD/DA devices. That way I get most out of loopback devices and such audio lab has unlimited possibilities to route (RME mixer allow loop outputs back to appear as input i.e loopback and includes windows ouputs too) signal without need for outboard devices. In a DAW build it would be nice to
1. Use built in GPU to free pcie lanes to your self.
2. Connect both sound cards directly to processor.
Of course I have not that system yet so I cannot even say if this is correct thinking(considering pci-lanes) but it would be nice to have Tech Notice's take on DAW at current stage of processors and memory because it is getting very interesting for DAW builders. Well - I have one Raydat 36 channels and two ADDAs so I know exactly how magnificent thing loopback chance is with Windows 10 Pro. "Actually Hardcore Overclocker" was beautifully whining about mobo manufacturers holding back allowing PCI-lanes available connected directly to processor. There should be much more of that whining in the world.
yeah in the same boat too.....the alternative is the threadripper wrx8 socket, but the ST clock speeds arent that fast compared the raptor lake. So you are stuck with limited full bandwidth PCIE lanes Vs better single core frequencies. DAW users may need PCIE nvme SDD's + PCIE sound cards + GPU for video encode/decode, so that already needing min 3 PCIE full bandwidth slots. The max you get with consumer level AM5 or intel raptor is 1 PCE at x16 or x8 shared with2 PCIE's.........on the other side WRX8 has 7 x16 full bandwidth, but lower singe core clock speeds + higher cost.
Yes, looking at getting 64 Gb Ram. Doubting to go for a 13600k or 7700x. Single core performance means more or heavier plugins per track. Seems there the Intel and AMD are roughly equal. Plus for the Intel 13th gen would be a better (e.g. faster) memory controller, but there are (possible?) better upgrade paths for the AM5 platform.
I've noticed the ASRock LiveMixer B650 mobo has two PCIe slots going to the CPU. So that's on my "to get" list. Haven't seen any review yet.
It's not that easy a choice.
As for the converters, I'm using a firewire Mytek, so I'll have to get some Firewire PCIe card and cross my fingers that it works. Sadly there's no stable multi-converter setup possible on Windows (there is on Mac OS with the "aggregate device" option. Which limits my i/0 to 8 (coming from a cheesegrater mac pro with 16 tracks). I'm frustrated about that. Windows OS audio drivers are billions of years old now. Considered getting a 16 Ch Ferrofish. But decided I don't want to sell the Mytek because of the quality of it's sound.
I've used RME Hammerfall PCIe cards in the past and those were rocksolid. Best drivers in the business. RME stuff is quite good.
Another thought: Maybe use the new PC as a processing node for the old Mac Pro using audiogridder over a LAN. The Mac Pro is still a good machine (after 10 yrs!) but severely lacks memory bandwidth. Have to test that option.
@@reptilespantoso I'm using Behringer ADA8200 and 8000 for adda. 8000 is trash because the output channels keep turning off if there is no signal present. That is crazy design bug. I still can use 8000 for midbass and sub outputs by feeding faint noise to channel to keep it on. On contrast ADA8200 is so good no even above average listening person could never complain. The goodness of 8200 can be also measured and made visible with measuring mic and sine sweeps and observing noise floor. Time with digital speaker system have taught me passive crossovers are responsible 80% of perceivable bad in speaker's sound. That is why my main listening system have no single passive crossover - they all are in Cubase group tracks. There is full freedom to change crossover characteristic at any given time in realtime. I would like an other Raydat to just grow the channels so there is good abundance of them. Currently with one Raydat I need to consider too much to how arrange test situation but with two Raydats that would be cured and more energy left for programming and research. RME Raydat has prooved so stable it has never betrayed me in 8 years. Sensible buffersize is 512 which is enough for occasional guitar noodling too.
@@reptilespantosoThis is in my case: Another thing to consider is two Cubases in the same machine. One raydat for song writing and musical sounds and other for speaker management and research programming. At least song writing one could be non pro version. That way they both would have quite a lot abundance in Raydat routing. Something to ask from RME is if the driver can aggregate identical interfaces as one device - which at least Cubase 10 wants. There should be multi interface support in those vst hosts without being forced to revert to asio4all.
@@reptilespantoso That LiveMixer is real contender. But maybe little out of my league.
I think if your creating, the intel 13-700k would be the better bang for buck.
Been using CCL online for at least 8 yrs, always reliable, excellent customer service, and you can always get a great deal on there if you're patient.
Got your PC packed ;)
@@theTechNotice Awesome news thank you,
and to everyone @TN for all the work u guys/gals put in, especially during this hectic time of the year. 👍
Correct findings. 12600k upto 20 tracks and 12700k for 100+ tracks. Better go for 12700k and don't look back.
I edit volume photos. I don't use Lightroom, but a program a lot like Lightroom. The active number, or the editing number is what is important to me. When I export photos I usually do it when I am in bed. The passive score is not really all that important to me so the overall score is not all that important. The active score is important, because that is my time. I know that the newer CPUs are faster, but do I need the fastest. I can only do things so fast. When mirrorless cameras first came out, it seems that they all were in a contest to make the smallest camera. They found out that they were not making the people using them any smaller and could not really work the tiny cameras. They are now making mirrorless cameras for professionals bigger. Have CPUs gotten faster than the people using them? Speed for speed's sake doesn't make much sense to me.
For your profession it needs no high specification gear.
@@HarvinderSingh-yy8th No. I build a new I-5 every few years. I live in Las Vegas, heat is a bit of an issue here, but editing photos used a lot of RAM and almost no GPU. You can't buy a prebuilt with 64 or 128 gb of RAM that uses integrated graphics. I had a 10600k and it was showing its age a bit. I found updating your computer every few years is much more important than a CPU with high specs.
Usually photo editing uses alot of ram. I use LRC with the latest update it uses my vram alot (2080ti) i think because of ai analysis of photos.
At average I use ram 20gb with a single wedding
Why use the X570 ProArt board with the 5900X? This is madness, far far cheaper X570 alternatives available.
some reviewers are smoothbrained
Good video. Loving the Davinci Resolve benchmarks. Can't find that anywhere else.
The motherboard manufacturers support higher memory frequencies so with runnign dual rank memory you can use 6000 instead of just 5200. If you could do an update video on the correct speeds and any other updates AM5 has made since launch that would be great.
I'll second this. DDR5 5200 is WAY below AMD's recommended SPEC for optimal performance. ( 6000 CL30 ) Ryzen gets a BIG bump from proper RAM speed and timings. (* Intel will also get a performance bump, but not as much.) This has been the case since ZEN 1. Many tech tuber channels either tested with the correct RAM initially, or re-tested again with proper RAM.
If you are a creator... do you really buy a PC? No, if this is your job, you buy a workstation or a 7950x with a x670e-Creator ProArt.
Or the I7 13700K Or I5 13600K with a ASUS Z790 ProArt. Either choice will serve you well.
I don't see the x670e proart price/functions benefit. I really don't need PCIe gen 5 slots. But everyone's different.
I have question does buying r7 7700 230 dollars over r7 7700x 310 dollars worth it ?Does r7 7700 support any B650 motherboards like Asus tuff ones.
@@reptilespantoso Some need USB output
If ur a creator on a budget the 7700x wit da microcenter bundle for 400$, its insane for its price
youve shown a platform cost of $1200 for the 7700x , $1080 for 13600k, and $1100 for 12700k. excluding the i7-13700k is pretty misleading , even with the small bump in cpu price, the i7-13700k still lands below the cost of AM4 w/ 7700x , and you get so much more for your $... (not a fan boy, I really like both cpus but I wish AM4 was priced better for what it is)
he used a 660 pound mobo for the 5900x... isn't this weird for you? Open your eyes..
True.
excellent video but I still have several doubts I am an architect and I am thinking of setting up a PC with a Ryzen 9 5900X and an MSI X570S Ace Max board but I don't know if it is the right thing to do, what do you recommend? greetings from Honduras 🇭🇳
That crossed my mind. (I'm not an architect, though)
I had a nice ASRock AM4 motherboard reserved but the shop sold it. So now I'm going for a newer CPU.
You may need 64 Gb of RAM, if you have some big project files.
The choice is simple.
If you are building a new system, then the Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 7 from Zen 4 doesn't make sense and at the same time the i9 and i7 from Raptorlake doesn't make sense.
Too much money for the performance of 6 and 8 core Zen 4 while it's too much money for a dead platform for a 16 core and 24 core Raptorlake.
Buy the i5 from 13th gen or buy the Ryzen 9s from Zen 4, only then these 2 platforms make sense for a new builder.
Why does i7 not make sense?
Ive had the ryzen 5 2600 since 2019 then upgraded to 5600x this year on my b450 board. So yeah, I will go AMD on this one. Basically for intel, you are buying the last LGA1700. The little performance gain aint worth the long term investment
Me too, in 2017 I had 1600x on A340, then 3700x on b450.. now R7 5800x on x570... so every new CPU carries new features that are supported on the new motherboard, few people don't care about that. So it comes to the same thing, new technologies new products. It will be the same with AM5... the first new CPU will bring with it a new motherboard, which "you won't buy".
me too going from 3900xt to 5950x last upgrade for this rig then i will jump to the am5
@@predator9909 Your money your choice. I'm not sure if I'll have the money to upgrade for at least a year... and then, again, best by, .. whatever offers more for less money. I support both teams... and as far as I can see they are in agreement, each of them offers only a small difference compared to the competition. However, prices are falling compared to previous generations.
You can buy cheaper motherboards now for Intel. That makes it a much cheaper upgrade.
And the performance gains are huge for the 13600k compared to any previous generation. AMD or Intel.
I will be on the 13600k for many years when I upgrade, just as with my 8700k which has lasted me almost 5 years now, so it doesn't matter at all if it is the last Intel series supporting LGA1700.
I can understand that on the other hand if you upgrade every year (or even 2 years) then the AMD makes more sense. But then again the added cost of both the more expensive CPU and Mobo eats that up on the AMD side.
And if you really, really wanna cheap out, you can continue with DDR4 Ram on the intel side, buying a cheap mobo together with that. Then it doesn't matter at all if you have to upgrade the lot for the coming Intel generations. The combined cost will anyway be so much lower compared to the AMD side.
Good idea.
AMD confirmed support up to 2025 and later. However, going LGA1700 is a dead end. So you are trapped with a 13900k at max, that require AIOs and fast DDR5 to truly shine. In the meantime AMD Zen 4c will see the core count go from 50-100% more cores. The 7700x and 7600x are gaming CPUs.
Remember they almost cut the support for 5000 series. They only did it because it made a huge backlash. Up to means a lot of things. Don't buy on promises. But yeah , I will also be going for AMD and I'm just waiting for 70003d
2025 is just 3 years away. How many people will upgrade their system, including the CPU, in that time? How many new generation CPUs will introduce during that time? One more, maybe at most two more? And what if the socket is the same, but other functions on the motherboard are outdated, meaning you have to buy a new motherboard anyways? For most people, if they clearly think out their purchase in advance, I doubt they will update during that time, and especially just update to a new CPU. I've been a PC user since 1981 when IBM came out with their first PC, and I don't recall ever swapping out the CPU on a motherboard for a newer/faster one. There was always enough reasons besides just the CPU to want to upgrade the motherboard as well. Reuse the case, drives, etc., sure. But CPU and motherboard, nope. Of course it might be an advantage for some people, but I think the majority of people who think it's advantage haven't really thought it out enough.
@@aaronlee6821 I for sure will, let's remember here that pcie gen 5 GPU and SSD don't exist yet. So in 3 or 4 years I sure will be swapping cpu if AMD keeps the same trend as am4. Look at people buying 5800x3d now , they are almost sold out every where. But as I said I am not buying on promises. If I need a new platform by then or it's worth it to me , I will upgrade or go to Intel.
@@aaronlee6821 Yup! I used to upgrade every 2 years (or even more often) until I upgraded to Sandy Bridge (intel i7 2600k) in 2012 . Then it took me 6 years to update to i7 8700k, which i am on now.
I don't think it matters at all if LGA1700 is the last socket for current Intel series if I still will be using a 12600k (Which I will update to) in at least 4-5 years. Everything else will probably also change on the mobo, as you said.
It will be a "downgrade" in "class" from an i7 to an i5 for me, but I think the last two i5:s (12th and 13th gen) have been so strong that theres no need for an i7. Compared to 12th generation, the i5 also gained two more cores than the i7 (got closer to it)!
What I'd relly like to know is how a 13600k+ddr4 performs vs 7700x+ddr5. "Normal" ram. DDR4 3600 C16 vs DDR5 6000 c36. With DDR4 at half the price of DDR5 here in Europe. Combo of Gaming x z690 (same as Aereo G) +64gbDDR4 +13600k is 850 euro right now in Europe. If you go with DDR5, either with a Intel or AMD, you are at +100 euro for half the amount of RAM. If I was a gamer I'd go the AMD DDR5 route, but as a budget conscious photographer who wants a rig both for photo and light video editing, atm the 13600k is very very very tempting.
7700x could be worth it with reduced price. But oh boy value proposition isn't great. 7600x and 7700x feel like beta CPUs before 3d v-cache variants come out.
exactly what i said to myself this shouldn't cost more than 300 dollars considering it's performance compared to 13600k it barely matches it and they wanna charge 400!!! idk what they was thinking pricing these cpus and with the cost of b650 it's no go and impossible recommendation
You can run 5900X on good B550 mobo (like MSI MAG B550 TOMAHAWK AM4). You don't need to buy overpriced mobos (X570).
I just got an Asus x570 PorArt for $365 usd. I want to build my wife a video editing workstation. Is the 5900x good enough for video editing? Or should I just go for the 5950x since I was able to save some cash with the deal I got on the x570 ProArt motherboard?
Edit:
Forgot to add that she uses Adobe Premiere Pro.
I would go 12th/13th gen Intel for video. It will last her quite a few years
@@barryobrien1890 I think I might upgrade later when my budget is more flexible. For now I think I'll stick to Ryzen 9. The thing is that she's used to edit on her laptop, on a 10th gen Intel processor, so the 4th gen Ryzen processor will be a huge improvement. She does very small projects but wants to start doing longer videos soon.
Once I'm able to make a 12th/13th gen build, which should be within a year, I'll keep the current build and let her have the latest one.
I wanted to know if the difference between the 5900x and the 5950x is worth it, especially since this will be my first build of a dedicated workstation.
5900x will serve you the best. 5950x is rarely required for 120+ tracks.
Amd sucks. I would stay away from amd at any cost. Intel is very smooth and fast on Pr
@@galloe if you don't object should I gift M 1 ultra for your hard working wife.
this is behind the time. but in the 7000 AMD group... this is the most refined. look all this data doesnt going flying around - with no mistakes. I work with layer one data. the layer you build on. this CPU seems to have its foundation well in hand. Ill still choose it over the 7900x3D. your prossor is the cunductor of your machine... give it only one job.
What a long term upgrade mantra for AMD... I don't believe that when anyone buys a new CPU with new features, they don't want to buy a new motherboard to unlock those new features!!! Intel does it in a slightly more direct way, but everything is basically the same. Personally, I don't care if someone buys AMD or Intel... Whoever gives money makes the choice, I see no reason to cheer. These two companies dose progress a shade above each other anyway.
No doubt it's the best.. and it is a tad better than the 7700x in games but it gets hotter than the amd and consumes more power out of the box.
Just bought my 7700x for $240 😮💨 feels great
How is the x3d CPUs for editing... Very curious to know..
is bios on 600 chipsets ready for 13th gen without having to flash it for newer one?
No, but some mainboards have a bios flash button, which means you can Upgrade Your bios without cpu or ram (just with psu)
The Joker answered it.
7700X absolute monster
In price, otherwize mostly crushed by the much cheaper 13600k when it comes to multicore performance.
@@Magnus_Loov Nahh I don't need any of the stuff Intel are currently going with, primarily I am a gamer - with occasional basic photoshop.
Both my rigs are now all AMD. I was hoping ARC was going to be better, maybe in a couple more generations I will consider them again.
Nothing wrong with the 13600k though, I don't get all this tribal nonsense. Both are extremely similar in my opinion.
@@DailyCorvid I totally agree, and I think that that AM5's only real disadvantage is that you can only use ddr5, but mostly for people who are upgrading an already existing system
@@DailyCorvid I would have gotten the AMD if it was any better in performance/price.
As it is now it is nowhere near the 13600 in that respect (Especially since the motherboards are much more expensive now that there are additional options that are cheaper for Intel than the ones in the video).
The one thing that 'AMD does better though is energy consumption, something that maybe somewhat will make up for the price difference now that the energy prices are so high here in Europe (Sweden for me).
But then again, the multicore performance for my user case, DAW(music production) is so much more beneficial for Intel anyway...
@@timvanranderaad7833 I am still using the same base PC as my old R3200G was using!
£1800 later I am on a par with your £3000 Intel machine.
I also see that you didn't include the temps for all 4 processors.. that is a big deal IMO...
I will build a pc using Intel i5 13600k
12700k will serve you better. 12600k ( upto 20 tracks) and 12700 ( upto 100+ tracks). I little more dose pl.
@@HarvinderSingh-yy8th THANK YOU FOR YOUR ADVICES
sorry my 13900kf is the fastest octacore cpu in the world. e-cores sucks for everythign but photo/video editing. And why would u bother with gettign such expensive boards when the cheapest z690 boards like the msi z690 pro a/wifi or asus z690 a prime will be good enough with 4 nvme slots?
E-cores doesn't suck at all for DAW performance (music production which can be extremely demanding when emulating soft synths and digital effects in real time when recording/playing). It has been shown that it works extremely well with Cubase 12 in Windows 11. And I think it seems the e-cores works very well for most other apps too, including games, when you upgrade to Windows 11 which has support for the new thread hypervisor. I mean the e-cores are way, way more powerful than on the Apple M-cpu:s. They are on a level of the normal full cores of just a couple of generations ago (up until 10th which was still a derivate of the old skylake architecture at its base)...
True. Both are base for creators.
i buy my pc ryzen 3600 only to find out that if i need to upgrade something like ryzen 9000 (when they come out later) i will need to change my motherboard, and my ram too. its like changing the whole set.
09:13 someone coughed
Rolf
its a ghost, boutta sneak the creators 3090
That's sound of RTX 3090Ti GPU powering on 😄
so if i'm using only 2 slots of 4 of ddr5 ram at 6000mHz it's better to use an intel?
actually 7700x is the same price with the 13600k now
You could use B650 motherboard instead of x670e to reduce cost and pair it with 7700x
he used a 660 pound mobo for the 5900x.. this guy is hilarious... i don't care if he's biased, but he's hilarious....
@@Delijohn 🤣
I think go with X 670e. Professionals should not be crazy for their gear. Just finish soon and relax.
You can use B660 with 13600k and STILL SMASH AMD in performance AND price
Can you compare 5900x vs this one?
WHY ? It is obvious AMD has lost any pretence of value in the CPU arena
hello guys :) I'm on a 3700X, only working with it : webdesigner, developper, loud illustrator files, photoshop, blender etc
I hesitate between a 12700KF (i have a 3060 GPU) or the last AM5 7700X... what should i take ?
Did you choose anything? I’m thinking of upgrading too
@@mikhail4486 yes, 13700k 😉
@@adamu6941 are you happy with it?
you dont need a x670e or x570pro art at all as a 'creator' lol purposely inflates AMD price
he has no need to imnflate ,, Intel SMASHES Amd no matter how you look at it or use Amd shill lies
13600k really shocked me
13600K is best value CPU ever
Z80 looks disappointed!
@@DailyCorvid WHO???
12700 k is more than sufficient.
@@HarvinderSingh-yy8th 13600k is better, for same price..
I will be building an AM5 system because of AMD's proven track record of providing a better long term upgrade path. These biased reviews that attempt to paint Intel as a better value are not compelling. I don't think that an objective analysis of the total cost of ownership vs. long term system performance supports rolling the dice on an Intel CPU.
What's your workflow on your PC? What do you use it for most?
It only matters if you update every 1.5-2 years. For many of us powerusers we don't update as often now. I will stick to the 13600 for at least four years when I update, like with my 8700k up until now.
When it comes to performance, the 13600k is simply outclassing the 7700x in multithreaded tasks in most tests.
My usecase? Mostly DAW, music production which have been proven to work extremely well with the DAWBENCH test. It utilises the E-cores very efficiently in Cubase 12 in Windows 11.
But also some other video encoding stuff...
8 pcores in 13900k scores xD 24k in r23 damn this thing is fast.
7700x or 5900x
why do I feel you are trying very hard to make Intel look better :)
No that are actual and factual facts.
Funny when we look at these costs now lol
is the 7700x good for ue5 indie game creator ? 3d open world creator
Useless ,, get 13600k or 13700k
Perfectly fine. But 7950x and a cheaper gpu like 3060ti will be better regardless of bottlenecks.
Imagine that I stopped watching Russian channels on RUclips, they just don't pull
Are you from Isreal?!
Can i build 7700x rtx 3060ti
No
@3:30 7700x has 28 pcie lanes
Can someone plz tell me if i should get an i7 12700 or the Ryzen7 5700g....for editing 4K 150mbps type mp4 footage on PrePro. Which will give me the fastest timeline scrub/grading/fx performance (renders i dont care...i can wait). Urgent suggestions needed plz. First few months i want to edit without a graphics card only using IGPU.
The 12700k for sure
@@b1g_j3rm > HI in my question i mentioned i can go for 12700 or 5700g....not 12700K. Can you let me know. I have only the 2 options i mentioned.
@@simplysurfing 12700
But if you’re on a budget id go with 5700g
@@b1g_j3rm > Im going to work for 6 months on it using only the IGPU. Will the 5700G be much lesser in performance or only slightly lower than 12700 ? Thanks
who tf is using $500 motherboards tho
Not me ,, most i EVER spent on a mobo was $200
6:58 2 9:22
7700x is good for 4k video rendering or i need 7950x ?
You need 13600k or 13700k
-7700 Social Credit!
I got a 5900x for cheaper than that
I feel so sorry for your BAD choice
It seems every comparison you make between AMD and Intel, shows your bias towards Intel.
R97950