What is the verdict on this processor? I bought one a year ago for $500+tax and haven't really been able to put it to as much use as I thought. It also was not as powerful in rendering as I thought, giving about a 90% increase over a 2700x despite having double the cores and 30%+ single core performance.
Was the 5950x a flop or not?
Other urls found in this thread:
anandtech.com
twitter.com
>30%+ single core in 2 generations
sounds good to me
nope, it's solid, I love mine, and it was actually almost fully utilized in a couple of games, too, so that was a treat to see. Frankly, the problem with the 5950x is there is no more HEDT, so it's essentially the best workhorse CPU short of an old threadripper or a new $3000 32-core threadripper pro. There needs to be a 32-core zen part in the $800-1200 range.
>Was the 5950x a flop or not?
You probably weren't even pushing the 2700x as much as you thought. 5950x is a good processor but it's not always worth the upgrade.
Also what BIOS revision are you on, IIRC 5xxx series had some real issues with performance with older bios even if it was "supported" there were a few post support bios fixes out there.
definitely not a flop, but not as much as of a revolution like the 3950X was. 16 core desktop CPUs are common now.
>ou probably weren't even pushing the 2700x as much as you thought.
maybe not in gaming or photo editing, but with video production it was definitely pinned at 100% when rendering. My 5950x is only hitting like 56% utilization, although that might be because I have the free version of Resolve.
>I'm not sure about that, I may have updated the BIOS when I bought the motherboard a year ago, but definitely haven't since then.
yeah, true. I'm still hoping to get a long-term use out of it though. Hoping that it doesn't get obsoleted soon by whatever is available for AM5
>fully utilized in a couple of games, too
What games need 16 cores, user?
>although that might be because I have the free version of Resolve.
Or you have a storage bottleneck, or possible XMP is disabled on memory, or maybe the encoding method used 5950x just doesn't do all that much better. As far as I know Free has no performance limits to the CPU only lacks GPU features.
Could be a few things here. For all I know the video file is capping at the throughput of you HDD or cheapass SSD, or maybe storage controller/chipset drivers are old as fuck.
hmmm, I hadn't considered that. I do render off a cheap scratch disk, maybe I should upgrade that to a Crucial P2 or something. Think that would be fast enough to improve the render performance?
Not sure your OS but on windows 8/10 windows will easily show you disk usage in task manager.
Run some benchmarks see what's actually going on, latency to disk, etc. Depending on what you come back with and file sizes you work with, could easily be a shitty disk bottleneck, especially if it's a mechanical drive where most you are going to be looking at is ~120MBps
For gaming you don't need more than 6c/12t
If your processor is sitting at ~50% utilization it's most definitely a bottleneck somewhere else, if you aren't running dual/quad channel right that will hurt it but a shitty mechanical disk for doing your data on will just make the CPU sit and wait for data to R/W off it.
What are your export settings? I have faster CPU renders on h264 compared to any other codec.
That's because h264 has a good encoder and everything else has shit ones
Slower than my 2018 cpu
Why is amd perpetually behind?
i think you forgot the part where the workstation is 124% compared to the 9900's 90 something percent
4k/24 with h.264 usually, automatic bitrate. I checked the render speed both with reading off the scratch disk (a spinning turd) and off the OS disk (m.2) and there wasn't any difference. I wonder if the bottleneck is with my RAM somehow.
Who cares? The 5950x has double the cores. Not everyone buys a CPU solely for video games.
In what universe? Yawn... If you want better, go with the i9 12900k... It's so much better it's not even funny.
You're right, you should buy it for it's actual performance instead of useless shit like core count. The 5950x
The 5950x is still bested by the 12900k.*** Sorry fucking auto post.
higher core count isn't really useless. I used it to render a video and encode another one at the same time, while editing an image. It's crazy how much work this thing can do with 16 cores. Not sure why you care so much about other people's processor choice though. I don't mind if other people use intel. Has nothing to do with me.
>intel bench
at least try to bait user.
You should have gotten the i9 12900k instead. You got ripped off. Amd faggots btfo.
Show me 1 benchmark where the 5950x is better than the 12900k. Go ahead I'll be up for a bit, I need to poop. Take your time. I'll wait.
I'm not sifting through that wall of text, show me.
Nice try. Your link shows the 5950x being slower than the 12900k by 10%~22%... It's comparing things to the 10th gen but you didn't show what you thought you did. Amd ripped you off. Deal with it noob.
It's amazing you can still find the Intel i9 7970xe for way less than the 12900k and 5950x and blow it away if you can find the motherboard. Losers going to lose I guess.