Out of the loop for a while, could someone help clear up some confusion?

[Luca1]

Hi

There seem to be a LOT more options going on than when I last upgraded (2008).


I am eyeballing the 7800x and an ASUS Strix x299 board.

I edit and render a lot of video and play a lot of VR games.

My current PC has an ASUS P6t with OC's Xeon 5670 @4.2GHz.


Questions:

1 - Is the X platform (X99, X299) geared more towards editing/rendering PC's etc, and the z (z170, z270) platform aimed more at gaming?

2 - What type of real world (roughly) rendering time gains could I expect to see with the new CPU?

3 - USB ports, what does it mean by 4 mid board? I'd ideally like 8 ports on the back (and on 2 different controllers so 1 for VR sensors and 1 for VR headset). Can I do this with these new boards?

4 - I'd like to OC this thing up to 4.2Ghz-4.5Ghz but have read about VRM warnings or something on the x299 platform, is this something I should worry about?

5 - Anything from coffee lake that sounds like I should really wait? If we're talking 5-10% gain for around the same price vs X299 having kinks ironed out by then and being stable I'd prolly rather just pull the pin now..

Thanks!!

_Luca

 

[ManofGod]

If you want Intel only, you are better off sticking with the older X99 platform. It is far more stable and better than Intel's newest X299 conflagration. Otherwise, wait until Threadripper is released or if cost is a factor, go with the 1800x instead.

 

[Luca1]

If you want Intel only, you are better off sticking with the older X99 platform. It is far more stable and better than Intel's newest X299 conflagration. Otherwise, wait until Threadripper is released or if cost is a factor, go with the 1800x instead.

Thanks. Yeah, am keen to stick with Intel.

What makes you say X99 is better? Do you think X299 is flawed?

 

[ManofGod]

Thanks. Yeah, am keen to stick with Intel.

What makes you say X99 is better? Do you think X299 is flawed?

Well, with the X99 platform, it is mature and stable. With the X299 platform, it is in an identity crisis and also, the CPU's that are created for it are running hot, literally.

 

[Archaea]

Thanks. Yeah, am keen to stick with Intel.

What makes you say X99 is better? Do you think X299 is flawed?

Watch this vid starting at about 2:20



^
This guys a well known German overclocker. He says the first iteration of x299 boards are all flawed. The 8 pin power cables hits up to 65*c.

Linus says it's a mess too,









Probably better to wait six months if buying x299

You might look into threadripper too.

I think AMD has a gem there.

 

[Shintai]

x299 is fine despite the FUD.

And lol about TR gem.

 

[Archaea]

x299 is fine despite the FUD.

And lol about TR gem.

^ this guy is an @$$

Anything AMD related - he goes out of his way to crap on.

Seriously - check out Threadripper for yourself. More PCI-E lanes than Intel, More cores for the money than Intel. It's not out yet, but should be on the market by the time the 2nd iteration X299 boards hit. (that's why Intel assumably botched the x299 launch -- because they were in a hurry to annouce/launch before some serious competition entered the space).

In disclosure, I have an Intel X99 system as my main system, and an Intel 1150 system now as my former main system. (and I just picked up three Ryzen 1700 systems).

If I was in the market for a new system in six months with main goal of productivity - I'd be giving Threadripper a long hard look.

 

[ob1]

I am kind of in the same boat, although my use cases are different, I was wanting to upgrade as well. With all of the he said she said on the current 299 and i9 CPU's, I'm going to wait a bit and look at the next offering instead. Plus the fact that buying a modern video card is just silly right now due to pricing/mining. I don't have a loyalty to one company or another, but honestly, I will probably wait for the next Intel product and chipset, unless AMD comes along with something better specific to my use cases.

 

[ManofGod]

x299 is fine despite the FUD.

And lol about TR gem.

Dude, it is not FUD, please do the research yourself. It is not hard to see that the things being said about it are far from FUD. Oh well, if you want to mislead the OP, go for it, that is not on me nor is it my money, enjoy.

 

[ManofGod]

^ this guy is an @$$

Anything AMD related - he goes out of his way to crap on.

Seriously - check out Threadripper for yourself. More PCI-E lanes than Intel, More cores for the money than Intel. It's not out yet, but should be on the market by the time the 2nd iteration X299 boards hit. (that's why Intel assumably botched the x299 launch -- because they were in a hurry to annouce/launch before some serious competition entered the space).

In disclosure, I have an Intel X99 system as my main system, and an Intel 1150 system now as my former main system. (and I just picked up three Ryzen 1700 systems).

If I was in the market for a new system in six months with main goal of productivity - I'd be giving Threadripper a long hard look.

5 SYSTEMS! Come one dude, just buy a Threadripper system when they enter the market, you know you want too. Nice setups.

 

[David-Duc]

Lots of people here and on the internet have very short memory and don't know how to read. That "well-known" der8auer is already back pedalling on his saying. 7900X and X299 will only overheat when OC to 4.5Ghz+ with AVX loads... Which is totally normal. I have an X299-A with 7900X at 4Ghz and the VRM sits at around 65°C when full load with no additional cooling.

It's always recommended to have active cooling for VRM when pushing voltage since the days of X38/48, P45, X58, X79 and X99. Now we have a bunch of noobs think only the X299 need that? Lol. Can any of you show a video or source say an X99 with 6950X OC to 4.5Ghz+ DOESN'T need active cooling for VRM? Because I can find a lot of source recommended active cooling for VRM on X99.

And I guess no one remember when AM3+ boards keep dying because of overheating VRM...

http://www.overclock.net/t/1632665/intel-x299-socket-2066-vrm-thread

/Edit: It's stunning to see how many people prefer to get their facts and information from YouTube nowadays instead of reading specs sheet.

 

[ManofGod]

Lots of people here and on the internet have very short memory and don't know how to read. That "well-known" der8auer is already back pedalling on his saying. 7900X and X299 will only overheat when OC to 4.5Ghz+ with AVX loads... Which is totally normal. I have an X299-A with 7900X at 4Ghz and the VRM sits at around 65°C when full load with no additional cooling.

It's always recommended to have active cooling for VRM when pushing voltage since the days of X38/48, P45, X58, X79 and X99. Now we have a bunch of noobs think only the X299 need that? Lol. Can any of you show a video or source say an X99 with 6950X OC to 4.5Ghz+ DOESN'T need active cooling for VRM? Because I can find a lot of source recommended active cooling for VRM on X99.

And I guess no one remember when AM3+ boards keep dying because of overheating VRM...

http://www.overclock.net/t/1632665/intel-x299-socket-2066-vrm-thread

/Edit: It's stunning to see how many people prefer to get their facts and information from YouTube nowadays instead of reading specs sheet.

LOL! So, I have not seen any recommendations from either of you guys for the OP. Specific boards, processors, cooling? Too busy bashing to help I guess.

 

[David-Duc]

LOL! So, I have not seen any recommendations from either of you guys for the OP. Specific boards, processors, cooling? Too busy bashing to help I guess.

I did do the OP a favor: refrain from listening to people like you.

 

[ManofGod]

I did do the OP a favor: refrain from listening to people like you.

That's cool, I have no skin in the game, it is up to the OP if he wants to listen to me or not, not my money. (Still have not seen a single recommendation from you though.)

 

[David-Duc]

Well, with the X99 platform, it is mature and stable. With the X299 platform, it is in an identity crisis and also, the CPU's that are created for it are running hot, literally.

That's cool, I have no skin in the game, it is up to the OP if he wants to listen to me or not, not my money. (Still have not seen a single recommendation from you though.)

Still have not seen a single proof that the X299 boards and CPUs are running hot though. I have both and I have seen them not running hotter than X99 platform.

 

[TahoeDust]

Running a 7800x at the speeds the OP is talking about will result in zero issues with VRM heat and a decent AIO will cool the chip very effectively.

Too many people talk about this platform with zero first hand experience while quoting early sensationalized youtube videos and extreme usage cases.

 

[ManofGod]

Running a 7800x at the speeds the OP is talking about will result in zero issues with VRM heat and a decent AIO will cool the chip very effectively.

Too many people talk about this platform with zero first hand experience while quoting early sensationalized youtube videos and extreme usage cases.

What board, what AIO cooler, what ram, what case, active cooling on the VRM? So, anyone going to actually suggest to the OP an X299 setup or just simply argue their POV?

 

[rtangwai]

OP, is the video editing/rendering for work reasons or just a hobby? What resolutions are your videos?

How much RAM were you planning to install?

What software do you edit videos with? If you are using Premiere Pro you may benefit from a video card upgrade from your current GTX 770.

Are you under a tight schedule ie. your main rig is dying and needs to be replaced soon?

Since you are rendering a high core count could be useful, but given the immaturity of the currently release high core-count platforms (both Threadripper and i9) it may be in your best interest to wait at least a few months. Ideally wait for the next release/refresh as most of the bugs will be squashed and any remaining limitations will be well-documented and well-explored. If you are on a tight schedule the x99 platform may be a more stable choice, but naturally it will have to be upgraded sooner than a newer platform.

 

[TahoeDust]

What board, what AIO cooler, what ram, what case, active cooling on the VRM? So, anyone going to actually suggest to the OP an X299 setup or just simply argue their POV?

If OP asks for setup suggetions, I will be glad to give them some.

 

[Luca1]

OP, is the video editing/rendering for work reasons or just a hobby? What resolutions are your videos?

How much RAM were you planning to install?

What software do you edit videos with? If you are using Premiere Pro you may benefit from a video card upgrade from your current GTX 770.

Are you under a tight schedule ie. your main rig is dying and needs to be replaced soon?

Since you are rendering a high core count could be useful, but given the immaturity of the currently release high core-count platforms (both Threadripper and i9) it may be in your best interest to wait at least a few months. Ideally wait for the next release/refresh as most of the bugs will be squashed and any remaining limitations will be well-documented and well-explored. If you are on a tight schedule the x99 platform may be a more stable choice, but naturally it will have to be upgraded sooner than a newer platform.

Apologies, I upgraded my sig, I have a GTX 1070 now.

I'm thinking:

RAM: 32GB - Gskill RIPJAWS 4 (F4-3000C15Q-16GRR) maybe?

Software: Sony Vegas, rarely Premiere, occasionally After Effects

Cooling: Coolermaster H100i (want quiet for audio recording/production)

Drives: I have 3 x Samsung SSD's and 2 x 2TB HDD's

USB: I really would like 8 on the back, can be a mix of USB 3 and 2 but on different controllers (1 for VR, 1 for everything else)

Waiting time: As soon as possible really, but how long realistically do you think until next round is in retail?


What do you think?

 

[David-Duc]

If it is purely production then Threadripper is worth waiting for since, IMO, 16 cores for $999 is a very good value. However, if you bring gaming into the mix then Skylake-X can't be beat. Very good single & multi threaded performance. Period. The only thing is, I'd wait a bit since there's a chance Intel might drop the price of the 7900X... Who knows?

My suggestion:
CPU: i9 7900X or i7 7820X (there's a huge price gap between them, with 12-core threadripper at $799, 7900X might be $899 in the future?)

Mobo: Asus X299-A or X299 TUF Mark 1, Aorus X299 Gaming 7 is also a solid choice except for all of the LEDs. Do not get the STRIX since it is the same as a X299-A with WiFi and all of the useless LEDs (unless you want onboard WiFi and LEDs).

RAM: Any Quad Channel kit should work. Skylake-X should not have problem with 2666Mhz+ kits like X99. Also, avoid buying 2 x dual channel kits if you can since the XMP profile on them are qualified for dual channel only.

Cooling: H100i is more than enough for stock or light OC.

The only thing I had to do when I got my X299-A was to update to the 0402 BIOS and that is it. Rock stable with 7900X and 4x8GB Crucial 2400 DDR4. One of the nicest thing is the turbo clocks @ 4Ghz with all core loaded so you'll enjoy a nice performance boost even without OC. Probably a 50% performance boost comparing to the X5670 if you get the 7900X.

 

[Luca1]

If OP asks for setup suggetions, I will be glad to give them some.

Hi mate,

What do you suggest at this time?

I'm thinking 32GB RAM, Coolermaster H100i, Strix mobo and 7800 but am open to suggestions.

 

[Luca1]

If it is purely production then Threadripper is worth waiting for since, IMO, 16 cores for $999 is a very good value. However, if you bring gaming into the mix then Skylake-X can't be beat. Very good single & multi threaded performance. Period. The only thing is, I'd wait a bit since there's a chance Intel might drop the price of the 7900X... Who knows?

My suggestion:
CPU: i9 7900X or i7 7820X (there's a huge price gap between them, with 12-core threadripper at $799, 7900X might be $899 in the future?)

Mobo: Asus X299-A or X299 TUF Mark 1, Aorus X299 Gaming 7 is also a solid choice except for all of the LEDs. Do not get the STRIX since it is the same as a X299-A with WiFi and all of the useless LEDs (unless you want onboard WiFi and LEDs).

RAM: Any Quad Channel kit should work. Skylake-X should not have problem with 2666Mhz+ kits like X99. Also, avoid buying 2 x dual channel kits if you can since the XMP profile on them are qualified for dual channel only.

Cooling: H100i is more than enough for stock or light OC.

The only thing I had to do when I got my X299-A was to update to the 0402 BIOS and that is it. Rock stable with 7900X and 4x8GB Crucial 2400 DDR4. One of the nicest thing is the turbo clocks @ 4Ghz with all core loaded so you'll enjoy a nice performance boost even without OC. Probably a 50% performance boost comparing to the X5670 if you get the 7900X.

Brilliant, thanks for that!!

The 7820X is out of my price range, as it works out to AU$859.. So I may be stuck with 7800X, what are your thoughts on that chip?

Mobo: Noted, nah I don't need that extra stuff, looking like the Tuff Mark 1 is the go (dust covers which benefit cooling). Thanks!

RAM: Perfect. I'll look for a Quad Channel kit. Is there a real world benefit vs price on getting anything more than 2666 do you think?

Cooling: Nice. Done

BIOS: Awesome, thanks for the tip. I would be happy with a 50% performance boost over what I have, in addition to more current support.

 

[David-Duc]

Brilliant, thanks for that!!

The 7820X is out of my price range, as it works out to AU$859.. So I may be stuck with 7800X, what are your thoughts on that chip?

Mobo: Noted, nah I don't need that extra stuff, will look into the TUF Mark1. I've also seen a Tuff Mark 2 coming up?? What's the go there?

RAM: Perfect. I'll look for a Quad Channel kit. Is there a real world benefit vs price on getting anything more than 2666 do you think?

Cooling: Nice. Done

BIOS: Awesome, thanks for the tip. I would be happy with a 50% performance boost over what I have, in addition to more current support.

If you're not in need of a new PC, I'd suggest wait for Coffee Lake and Z390 since it will likely have 6 cores / 12 threads and for sure will be faster than the 7800X while cost lest (motherboard should be cheaper). The only reason to get the 7800X is if you plan to upgrade to 8-10-12+ cores CPU later. 7800X doesn't make sense to me, sorry.

Regarding motherboard, it appeared that the TUF Mark 2 doesn't use IR3555 Driver MOSFET like the rest of Asus's boards (X299-A/STRIX: 7 x IR3555, TUF MARK1/Deluxe: 8 x IR3555). I can only assume the VRM on the Mark 2 has lower quality component than the rest (should be enough for stock or light OC though).

 

[Luca1]

If you're not in need of a new PC, I'd suggest wait for Coffee Lake and Z390 since it will likely have 6 cores / 12 threads and for sure will be faster than the 7800X while cost lest (motherboard should be cheaper). The only reason to get the 7800X is if you plan to upgrade to 8-10-12+ cores CPU later. 7800X doesn't make sense to me, sorry.

Regarding motherboard, it appeared that the TUF Mark 2 doesn't use IR3555 Driver MOSFET like the rest of Asus's boards (X299-A/STRIX: 7 x IR3555, TUF MARK1/Deluxe: 8 x IR3555). I can only assume the VRM on the Mark 2 has lower quality component than the rest (should be enough for stock or light OC though).

You're right, looking in to it the Tuff Mark 1 and 2. Definitely looks like Mark 1 seems to be the go (a little extra $$ for a better quality) especially for some OC'ing.

If I were to stretch to a 7820X, does that chip make sense to you vs what you would expect to see out of Coffee Lake?

 

[n=1]

There's no replacement for displacement MOAR CORES!!

If you're not in need of a new PC, I'd suggest wait for Coffee Lake and Z390 since it will likely have 6 cores / 12 threads and for sure will be faster than the 7800X while cost lest (motherboard should be cheaper). The only reason to get the 7800X is if you plan to upgrade to 8-10-12+ cores CPU later. 7800X doesn't make sense to me, sorry.

Regarding motherboard, it appeared that the TUF Mark 2 doesn't use IR3555 Driver MOSFET like the rest of Asus's boards (X299-A/STRIX: 7 x IR3555, TUF MARK1/Deluxe: 8 x IR3555). I can only assume the VRM on the Mark 2 has lower quality component than the rest (should be enough for stock or light OC though).

100% agreed. Coffee Lake should bring both IPC and further efficiency improvements.

If choosing between 7800X or Coffee Lake, I'd personally wait for Coffee Lake. If the choice is between Coffee Lake or 7820X, then 7820X wins.

 

[Shintai]

100% agreed. Coffee Lake should bring both IPC and further efficiency improvements.

There is no IPC improvement with CFL-S, besides what 12MB cache may give over 8MB. Its a plain SKL/KBL mainstream core just in the count of 6. Clocks however should be surprisingly good.

 

[Luca1]

There's no replacement for displacement MOAR CORES!!



100% agreed. Coffee Lake should bring both IPC and further efficiency improvements.

If choosing between 7800X or Coffee Lake, I'd personally wait for Coffee Lake. If the choice is between Coffee Lake or 7820X, then 7820X wins.

Haha MOARRR CORES!!

Thanks for the input, I'm now looking at going the 7820X.

I think the final question is, editing in Sony Vegas, I saw a post where the 7700k was faster for editing, but render times were dominated by the 7820x and 7900x. Does that make sense?

Is editing better with faster single cores?

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Microcenter had the i7-6850k (x99 based) on sale for $300 (in-store only) and this sale may be going on still - you might want to check it out, as Microcenter typically also gives discounts on motherboards when you buy a CPU.

The x299 processors are fine CPUs but contrary to what Shintai says, there are definitely issues which need to be resolved. Sometimes he has some good input, but he is so obviously biased that I'd take everything with a boulder of salt. I still laugh at him arguing with me last year at AT when he guaranteed that the 10-core BDW-E would be $999 and I told him there was no way it would happen - he was very, very wrong. I own and use both AMD (two Ryzens) and Intel and see pluses and minuses with both. I'm not a brand fanboy - I just want what suits my needs at the lowest cost.

 

[David-Duc]

Microcenter had the i7-6850k (x99 based) on sale for $300 (in-store only) and this sale may be going on still - you might want to check it out, as Microcenter typically also gives discounts on motherboards when you buy a CPU.

The x299 processors are fine CPUs but contrary to what Shintai says, there are definitely issues which need to be resolved. Sometimes he has some good input, but he is so obviously biased that I'd take everything with a boulder of salt. I still laugh at him arguing with me last year at AT when he guaranteed that the 10-core BDW-E would be $999 and I told him there was no way it would happen - he was very, very wrong. I own and use both AMD (two Ryzens) and Intel and see pluses and minuses with both. I'm not a brand fanboy - I just want what suits my needs at the lowest cost.

The 6800k or 6850k is far from ideal for OP's usage (productivity and gaming). Multi threaded performance is worse than Ryzen 7, single threaded perf is worse than 7700k or Skylake-X. If I'm buying a $300 CPU now, there's no way I'd get a 6800k or 6850k. It's either Ryzen 7 or 7700k. The best cpu for OP right now, IMO, is the 7820X. If money is not an issue then 7900X.

And except for initial release BIOS, the X299 platform with latest BIOS is rock stable right now (at least with the Asus X299-A).

/Edit: Or find a used X99 + 6900k/6950X and OC it to around 4-4.2Ghz.

 

[Archaea]

The 6800k or 6850k is far from ideal for OP's usage (productivity and gaming). Multi threaded performance is worse than Ryzen 7, single threaded perf is worse than 7700k or Skylake-X. If I'm buying a $300 CPU now, there's no way I'd get a 6800k or 6850k. It's either Ryzen 7 or 7700k. The best cpu for OP right now, IMO, is the 7820X. If money is not an issue then 7900X.

And except for initial release BIOS, the X299 platform with latest BIOS is rock stable right now (at least with the Asus X299-A).

/Edit: Or find a used X99 + 6900k/6950X and OC it to around 4-4.2Ghz.

Interesting take. ironic that two people can look at the same data set and make a different decision.

My take:
Multiperformance on 6850 is only slightly worse than Ryzen. IPC is better than Ryzen by 15% or so.
Single core performance on 6850 is only slightly worse than 7700k -- giving up maybe a FPS or 2 on games at 1080P.

In my particular case -- since my acquisition price is equitable between all three -- I chose a 6850k as my new primary rig just in the last couple days. (I have on hand three Ryzen 1700 systems, and recently built and sold a 7700k setup -- so I've had the privilege of having hands on the three system types all in the last couple, three weeks). The 7700k was at 4.8GHz, the Ryzen was at 3.8GHz, the 6850K was at 4.3GHz.

7700K system I recently sold.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/222550595831?ssPageName=STRK:MESOX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1559.l2649

Ryzen 1700 system I recent sold.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/222584236437?ssPageName=STRK:MESOX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1559.l2649

System I'm keeping. x99 Gigabyte Gaming Ultra + I7 6850K

My primary use is gaming with occasional youtube video creation or movie editing. I feel like the 6850k at the current pricepoint at microcenter was the middle ground of the options. Plus later (and relatively quickly - compared to x299 boards) I'll be able to buy a used Xeon for next to nothing on ebay and have up to 24 cores on the same X99 platform.

In further discussion - What new tech has x299 brought to the table compared to X99? (X99 has 40 PCI-E lanes (good for SLI or Crossfire) has NVME PCI-E x4 speed SSDs, has USB 3.1) So I'm not sure what I'm missing that I would likely use?

I didn't see a perk to moving to x299 when considering the steeply discounted prices now available on x99. If all were equal pricewise - sure x299 for future proofing more -- but they certainty aren't equitable prices now. X99 is discounted heavily since they are closing down the line. Probably 1/2 to 1/3 the overall cost for a comparable system if you have a Microcenter nearby. Cheaper now, Cheaper to Upgrade the CPU in a couple years (and supports up to 256GB of DDR4 RAM), and isn't lacking anything I can imagine having use for compared to X299? That was my thought process anyway.

 

[rive22]

I second the 7820x. If you're going to upgrade go for more cores. Don't worry about the 7700k, the IPC improvement is minuscule. For a multipurpose video editing/rendering rig you will love the 7820x.

Also regarding overheating x299 VRMs, just point a fan at them like any OC'd rig should have anyway and they stay cool.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

The 6800k or 6850k is far from ideal for OP's usage (productivity and gaming). Multi threaded performance is worse than Ryzen 7, single threaded perf is worse than 7700k or Skylake-X. If I'm buying a $300 CPU now, there's no way I'd get a 6800k or 6850k. It's either Ryzen 7 or 7700k. The best cpu for OP right now, IMO, is the 7820X. If money is not an issue then 7900X.

And except for initial release BIOS, the X299 platform with latest BIOS is rock stable right now (at least with the Asus X299-A).

/Edit: Or find a used X99 + 6900k/6950X and OC it to around 4-4.2Ghz.

Errr, what? I'd buy the Ryzen 7 over the 6850 too, but the OP said he preferred Intel and given that he was looking at the 7800, I made the assumption that his budget was around that level. Note that I just mentioned there was a good sale at MC right now that the OP might want to check out. Archaea provides some additional good information about it as well.

There is no way I'd spend $300 on a 7700k right now, nor would I recommend it unless they ONLY care about gaming. The value is not there and if the OP wants Intel and wants to spend $300 on the CPU, the MC 6850 is a much better option given his stated use than the 7700k. I'm more ambivalent about the 7820k and am personally considering it myself, but the 7900 is not a good choice right now IMO given the heat issues and the fact TR may put significant downward pricing pressure on it.

 

[Archaea]

I'd buy the Ryzen 7 over the 6850 too

Mind elaborating why?

I've now played with six different Ryzen motherboards and 1700 or 1700x in each. I have some reservations about the motherboards that may or may not be fixed via bios updates. My experience is antecdotal, so I hesitate to share, but I'm not convinced the motherboards are ready for prime time even at current bios revision levels based on my experiences.

Here are some of my concerns

x370 Gaming Pro Carbon - you can't run NVME, m.2, and all Sata ports as the same time. When you use a m.2 a sata port goes out, when you use NVME, another sata port goes out. I installed this on a productivity based vulnerability scanning machine. I spent a lot of time trying to figure this one out - why my drives weren't recognizing or kept dropping out when I switched sata ports -- it was in the manual - but who reads those until you are truly stuck? On a positive note: I overclocked a 1700x to 3.9 GHz with the one click setting in the BIOS - and it has worked perfectly since - air cooling on a Evo 212. It's blazing fast in that role. Literally scans that used to take two days on a old Q6600, now take two hours. This is Nessus Vulnerability scanner.

ASRock Taichi - I've had experience with four of these boards. They are problematic -- weird problems with two of them. WiFi super weak on one, Firmware updates erase all settings, If you install an image in RAID mode and the BIOS update switches back to AHCI mode you lose your RAID data (and even your RAID array) If you overclock your system in RAID mode and push it too far and it locks up, you have to reset the CMOS button, which resets the drive controller to AHCI - which then again destroys your RAID array and data. I couldn't get the RAID controller to recognize two 4TB drives - it only recognized like half their size - when trying to do a mirror. This is super frustrating. I lost a day's work here, so did my friend on a new system we built. Fan controller header info in the BIOS is not intuitive at all. One board PWM/DC switch for fan header didn't work right - if you had a three pin fan you should use DC, but DC turned the fan off. PWM worked, but then couldn't control RPM. Silk screen printing on board is super hard to read. Overclocking is weak - (despite reviews otherwise - antecdotal again I admit) -- Overlocked two 1700, to 3.8GHz on two (water cooling), and couldn't get a stable overclock on a third. (evo 212) (leading to all the frustrations with the RAID array listed above. My friends Taichi board takes 15-30 seconds to even post -- newest bios revisions on all.

ASRock Fatal1ty K4 - Good board so far - could only overclock a 1700 to 3.8Ghz. 3.9 and 4.0 fail - despite water cooling.

Anyway - yeah these experiences are antecdotal - but I know my way around hardware - and when 2/3's of the Ryzen boards I've touched have strange quirks -- (and I haven't encountered any of the memory issues that others most loudly complain about) -- then I'm a little standoffish on the platform --- For now. My experience is limited, and none of these quirks have been deal breakers. So my experience shouldn't be extrapolated --- but I can't help enjoying the very mature, stable platform of the X99 as compared to 370x. I got a one click overclock to 4.3Ghz on my 6850K -- I haven't even tried to increase voltages yet to see where I'll end up. -- hoping for 4.5GHz where my current I7-4770K CPU is (that is being replaced). My I7-4770k experience on a MSI z87 GD65 motherboard has been AAA. NEVER a problem. I'm probably stupid for getting rid of it - since not much of a performance improvement - and it's been so darn solid from day 1.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Mind elaborating why?

I've now played with six different Ryzen motherboards and 1700 or 1700x in each. I have some reservations about the motherboards that may or may not be fixed via bios updates. My experience is antecdotal, so I hesitate to share, but I'm not convinced the motherboards are ready for prime time even at current bios revision levels based on my experiences.

Mainly for the two extra cores but I do agree with you regarding the platform - it has seen large improvements but I still think it has some room for improvement.

 

[Archaea]

Mainly for the two extra cores but I do agree with you regarding the platform - it has seen large improvements but I still think it has some room for improvement.

I decided to share specific experiences above --- but fully acknowledging that my experience is just one person's --- and doesn't fairly extrapolate out further.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

I decided to share specific experiences above --- but fully acknowledging that my experience is just one person's --- and doesn't fairly extrapolate out further.

You're making me nervous - I have an Asrock X370 Taichi sitting next to me, waiting for the 1700X to arrive.

My first Ryzen build was with a Gigabyte X370 Gaming K5 and I was extremely disappointed in how Gigabyte handled that board. The latest BIOS seemed to resolve most of the issues I've had, but I decided no more Gigabyte for awhile.

As a disclaimer though, both of the Ryzen builds are secondary platforms for me. I had every intention of jumping on x299 and the 7900, but due to the issues being seen, I decided to hold off and look at the 7820 instead. If I had to buy x299 today, it would definitely be the 7820; but with Threadripper, the second wave of SKL-X, and even Coffee Lake scheduled to hit soon, I've taken a step back and will see how things play out before I build my new main rig.

 

[Archaea]

So truly?

What features did we gain with X299 over X99?

The ability to install the OS on a RAID array.... what else?

New CPUs and future support -- but nothing was wrong with (or slow) about the existing x99 CPUs.

 

[Luca1]

First of all thanks for all your help. Everyone. Much appreciated.

The 6800k or 6850k is far from ideal for OP's usage (productivity and gaming). Multi threaded performance is worse than Ryzen 7, single threaded perf is worse than 7700k or Skylake-X. If I'm buying a $300 CPU now, there's no way I'd get a 6800k or 6850k. It's either Ryzen 7 or 7700k. The best cpu for OP right now, IMO, is the 7820X. If money is not an issue then 7900X.

And except for initial release BIOS, the X299 platform with latest BIOS is rock stable right now (at least with the Asus X299-A).

/Edit: Or find a used X99 + 6900k/6950X and OC it to around 4-4.2Ghz.

Hi David, thanks for all your help, I have decided to go with the 7820X.

So truly?

What features did we gain with X299 over X99?

The ability to install the OS on a RAID array.... what else?

New CPUs and future support -- but nothing was wrong with (or slow) about the existing x99 CPUs.

Also thanks for all your first hand advice! Really good reading about those mobos. I know it one persons experience, but it awesome to see the range of experience you've had.

I looked in to 6850k's here in Australia, and even on Ebay they are only around $60-80 cheaper than a 7820X, and the retailers in AU won't drop prices, they never do :/

This is what I'm planning on:

Tuff Mark 1 mobo (has all USB ports I need for all audio, video and VR gear on back, also cooling benefits)
7820X (will OC to 4.2)
H110i cooler
PSU I reckon an 800w
RAM - Unsure, quad channel.

Is there any particular quad channel RAM kit anyone would recommend? Really not looking to break the bank here, but what would be a solid choice for editing/rendering/gaming etc..

 

[Luca1]

Argh, 7820X's out of stock everywhere here. ETA 2-3 weeks. Ffs Australia