I switched from LGA1700 to AM5, here are my thoughts

[ShrimpBrime]

You’re kidding yourself.

Going to a faster more efficient processor is not a downgrade, even if it’s a small margin of performance improvement. We don’t need OP to post benches to know that.

It's faster at gaming by a small amount for gaming only. His 13th Raptor would beat it in everything else. Efficiency comparison is hog wash. He's using a GPU capable of 300w.

My point was hopeful that OP would have collected data from both of HIS rigs to show these differences. Not hear your silly opinion that isn't backed by any facts here.

So first, he purchased a top AMD X3D cpu and we are all comparing it to a 13th gen mid ranged cpu. Last gen. It's not even current.

How would we "feel" if he moved from a 14700KF? We'd still be comparing Intels mid ranged cpu to AMDs top "gaming" cpu, cause that's what it's good for and nothing more really.

 

[sethmatrix7]

It's faster at gaming by a small amount for gaming only. His 13th Raptor would beat it in everything else. Efficiency comparison is hog wash. He's using a GPU capable of 300w.

My point was hopeful that OP would have collected data from both of HIS rigs to show these differences. Not hear your silly opinion that isn't backed by any facts here.

So first, he purchased a top AMD X3D cpu and we are all comparing it to a 13th gen mid ranged cpu. Last gen. It's not even current.

How would we "feel" if he moved from a 14700KF? We'd still be comparing Intels mid ranged cpu to AMDs top "gaming" cpu, cause that's what it's good for and nothing more really.

My “opinion” about the speed of the CPU in gaming is backed by every review and test posted by the reviewers of this website, and every other reputable source that has compared the two CPUs.

I don’t know why you’re still replying. You stated it was a downgrade and for the OPs use case (gaming), it clearly isn’t.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

My “opinion” about the speed of the CPU in gaming is backed by every review and test posted by the reviewers of this website, and every other reputable source that has compared the two CPUs.

I don’t know why you’re still replying. You stated it was a downgrade and for the OPs use case (gaming) it clearly isn’t.

No, the downgrade is looking at the entire system as a whole. It's only good at gaming by a small amount. Whatcha figure? 10% give or take depending on the game and then loosing to Intel in some other games. So not even better at ALL games.

Core count, productivity, idle wattage on and on we go why the 13700K would had been better to stick with, or even upgrade to 14th gen. Gain 200mhz clock frequency within the same power envelope as well.

Reviews need to be taken with a grain of salt. I hope you understand that reviewers don't continue reviewing hardware after it's released. So on this note, we could say the AMD chip has better frame rates now long after release because of Agesa updates. Too bad you didn't think of this during your argument with me here.

But it's all good. Both 7800X3D and 13th gen Intel are old news. 9000 series AMD is available for purchase. He should just upgrade to a 9700X now!!!

But hey! Maybe you're right. It's not a down grade. Not sure if it's an upgrade though. 11fps increase probably doesn't justify an entire platform swap when he could have just slapped in a 14700K/F and call it an upgrade.

Good day.

 

[Solaris17]

Deleted a few. Try to keep it on topic or even better just go back on topic. If things dont make sense, or feel out of place please report them instead of becoming involved. You are not excluded from the issue if you report and then participate.

 

[Zach_01]

No, the downgrade is looking at the entire system as a whole. It's only good at gaming by a small amount. Whatcha figure? 10% give or take depending on the game and then loosing to Intel in some other games. So not even better at ALL games.

Core count, productivity, idle wattage on and on we go why the 13700K would had been better to stick with, or even upgrade to 14th gen. Gain 200mhz clock frequency within the same power envelope as well.

Reviews need to be taken with a grain of salt. I hope you understand that reviewers don't continue reviewing hardware after it's released. So on this note, we could say the AMD chip has better frame rates now long after release because of Agesa updates. Too bad you didn't think of this during your argument with me here.

But it's all good. Both 7800X3D and 13th gen Intel are old news. 9000 series AMD is available for purchase. He should just upgrade to a 9700X now!!!

But hey! Maybe you're right. It's not a down grade. Not sure if it's an upgrade though. 11fps increase probably doesn't justify an entire platform swap when he could have just slapped in a 14700K/F and call it an upgrade.

Good day.

Is it me or you are consistently ignoring some of @Evelynn statements on the first and later posts and maybe fabricating a few?

I didn’t read anywhere that the reason of swapping was to upgrade. Why keep fixating on this?

And in the middle of this Intel 13/14th uncertainty proposing to go to the more unrefined 14700 that Intel literally farted in a rush (14th in general) because they didn’t have anything else to show?

yeah… add more heat, more uncertainty about longevity, more headaches, unease of mind.
Evaluation of a product can by subjective some times and it’s fine.

Yes the platform swap costs. Op got the Intel platform and in the process of using it, felt like making a mistake (and those cost to rectify).

Paid the price, but at least now has a platform with a few years of upgradability with a CPU mature enough with out problems and uncertainty and top tier to the main usage type.

How dare you @Evelynn ditching Intel’s finest for AMD… bad @Evelynn
This is feelings thread, so feel bad…

 

[dgianstefani]

yeah… add more heat, more uncertainty about longevity, more headaches, unease of mind.
Evaluation of a product can by subjective some times and it’s fine.

Both CPUs run cooler in games than the 7800X3D, and the 14700K actually runs cooler than the 13700K, likely due to a larger die, sure, they use ~50 W more under gaming load, but also ~25 W less the rest of the time. If the problem is heat dumped into the case, then a GPU switch or a PSU upgrade would have been more effective, ignoring the fact that OP has an AIO so the heat should be exhausted directly outside of the case.

I think the general vibe of the response hasn't been "but why didn't you move to a different Intel CPU rather than do a platform change to AMD", it's been "why did you do a platform change for a ~10% faster gaming CPU (with a 4090 at 720p) that is slower in everything else, on a now last generation architecture, shortly before Arrow Lake and Zen 5 X3D release".

If OP wanted less "heat" there's many simple (and free) BIOS changes they could have made without losing any gaming performance, just a bit of Cinebench epeen. Or even ditching the 240 mm AIO, air cooling gets better numbers. But it's somewhat telling that the wattage they're complaining about is so far off TPU testing and what other RPL owners report, with the same CPU in the same games, but with a much stronger GPU, so a more demanding scenario.

Buying new parts for the simple enjoyment of the PC hobby is one thing. Framing it as some necessity caused by RAM woes (despite losing 1200 MT by switching), wattage etc, the possibility of future instability (but not the experience of it) is another.

I don't think a single person in this thread thinks the 7800X3D is a bad CPU, or wishes OP has a bad time with it, but there's certainly a lot of confusion surrounding the logic of making that switch (as opposed to not spending $600+ on a side grade, or doing something more effective in achieving stated goals, such as replacing the GPU).

 

[Taraquin]

Plus an extra 25 W at all times when not under load.

View attachment 360088
If you're so concerned about power draw why are you using an AMD GPU?

I'm also a little confused as to -

Compared to what? AMD's setup that can't go past 6400? Or more realistically, 6200 MT. Raptor Lake can do 7200 on any four DIMM board, 7600 on any two DIMM board, and with some effort, 8000+. Karhu stable.

This results in ~125 GBs/read/write/copy with ns around 45-50 compared to Zen 4/5 ~70-80 GB/s @ 55 ns.

As for the degradation issues, it's been patched, if that's still not enough, simply set voltages manually, presto, problem solved. If that's still not enough, Intel extended the warranty by two years on top of the base warranty.

Anyway, it's an odd time to sidegrade to the competing platform, with Zen 5 X3D around the corner along with Arrow Lake.

The idle powerdraw on Zen 4 is high if you enable default expo as it sets SOC to 1.25v-1.3v and VDDP to 1.1v-1.15v. I lowered vddio by 100mv, vdd misc by 100mv abd vdd18 by 200mv. I tuned my 7800x3d system at 6000, raised fclk to 2200. Ended up with SOC at 1.08v snd VDDP at 0.95v. CPU package now draws 11-14W idle vs 22-26W stock. Idle powerdraw from wall measured with plug is now 48-49W vs around 70W prior to voltagetuning.

 

[Onasi]

@dgianstefani
Solid post overall, but this caught my eye:

Both CPUs run cooler in games than the 7800X3D, and the 14700K actually runs cooler than the 13700K, likely due to a larger die,

1. The dies themselves are identical. There was no silicon change between RL and RL Refresh.
2. 13700K has less E-cores active, so more dark silicon. If anything, it should be cooler. It’s not, yeah, but just goes to show that better RL Refresh temps are not necessarily tied to the die itself.

The idle powerdraw on Zen 4 is high if you enable default expo as it sets SOC to 1.25v-1.3v and VDDP to 1.1v-1.15v. I lowered vddio by 100mv, vdd misc by 100mv abd vdd18 by 200mv. I tuned my 7800x3d system at 6000, raised fclk to 2200. Ended up with SOC at 1.08v snd VDDP at 0.95v. CPU package now draws 11-14W idle vs 22-26W stock. Idle powerdraw is now 48-49W vs around 70W prior to voltagetuning.

Sure, but it’s still higher than Intel. It’s not really something that can be avoided. There is a reason why AMD still uses monolithic chips on laptop - as long as they have a cIOD that’s ALWAYS on and draws power they will have higher idle draw. Granted, the difference is largely academic in practice for normal desktop use. Nobody is going to be too disappointed about relatively minor idle power difference.

 

[dgianstefani]

2. 13700K has less E-cores active, so more dark silicon. If anything, it should be cooler. It’s not, yeah, but just goes to show that better RL Refresh temps are not necessarily tied to the die itself.

IDK, more active cores means tasks can be bounced around on them I suppose, spreading out the heat. But 14th gen does generally run cooler than equivalent 13th gen for some reason, besides the 14900KS.

 

[Onasi]

IDK, more active cores means tasks can be bounced around on them I suppose, spreading out the heat.

I dunno about that, the die itself is tiny and the E-core part of it even more so. I am not sure that there is enough space there to make any real thermal density difference.

But 14th gen does generally run cooler than equivalent 13th gen for some reason, besides the 14900KS.

A small IHS change or just generally somewhat less leaky chips due to binning and/or matured process? I agree that it runs cooler, but as to why - itz a mistary.

 

[FreedomEclipse]

IDGAF what any of you think about the purchases I make with the money I wake up and earn.

I think the point was that bros dont let other bros make stupid decisions.

You are welcome to ignore advice but if I said I could save you $100-200 on your car insurance because I knew a thing or two. You'd be asking me how to do it not shouting "fuck you, I got money beyatch!" in my earholes.

Otherwise I 100% agree and standby you doing what you want with your own money. We are trying to help you get the most out of your buck. (most of the time)

 

[Zach_01]

Both CPUs run cooler in games than the 7800X3D, and the 14700K actually runs cooler than the 13700K, likely due to a larger die, sure, they use ~50 W more under gaming load, but also ~25 W less the rest of the time. If the problem is heat dumped into the case, then a GPU switch or a PSU upgrade would have been more effective, ignoring the fact that OP has an AIO so the heat should be exhausted directly outside of the case.

I think the general vibe of the response hasn't been "but why didn't you move to a different Intel CPU rather than do a platform change to AMD", it's been "why did you do a platform change for a ~10% faster gaming CPU (with a 4090 at 720p) that is slower in everything else, on a now last generation architecture, shortly before Arrow Lake and Zen 5 X3D release".

If OP wanted less "heat" there's many simple (and free) BIOS changes they could have made without losing any gaming performance, just a bit of Cinebench epeen. Or even ditching the 240 mm AIO, air cooling gets better numbers. But it's somewhat telling that the wattage they're complaining about is so far off TPU testing and what other RPL owners report, with the same CPU in the same games, but with a much stronger GPU, so a more demanding scenario.

Buying new parts for the simple enjoyment of the PC hobby is one thing. Framing it as some necessity caused by RAM woes (despite losing 1200 MT by switching), wattage etc, the possibility of future instability (but not the experience of it) is another.

I don't think a single person in this thread thinks the 7800X3D is a bad CPU, or wishes OP has a bad time with it, but there's certainly a lot of confusion surrounding the logic of making that switch (as opposed to not spending $600+ on a side grade, or doing something more effective in achieving stated goals, such as replacing the GPU).

View attachment 360402

If I remember correctly TPU measured the power of 13700k to be 100-105w… hence the 65C, and on what cooler? Was it 240mm AIO?
OP talked about 140+ up to 165W and some thermal throttle. And I saw other users here and on other forums also having gaming power north of 150W.
Something is inconsistent here…

And the IHS bending? Unheard of…
And 7200MT/s but a bit unstable.
Is that why TPU reviews 13/14th with 6000MT/s?

To be honest I think a key role to this swap was the situation that’s been going on the last few months with Intel. It was just the last big drop on a full glass.
And at this point AM5 with Zen4 (at least if not Zen5 too) offers better stability, upgradeability and longevity.
And AMD after that SoC fiasco replaced CPUs asap, no questions asked short of speak.
Intel?

Most of us here at least are willing to deal with the quirks of a platform. I remember adopting Zen2+X570 only a month after release. It wasn’t the best ride on first 3-4months. Especially with DRAM compatibility. But I didn’t have the fear of failing + the fear of not get reimbursed in any way.

I’ve watched almost every video @buildzoid posted the last month or so. When he says the platform is a mess and it was rushed with flaws that Intel tries to mitigate now after almost 2 years because it started biting in the ass… I believe him and I don’t need much more. I would’ve swap too after seeing also what is going on around.

The matter is complicated, multi dimensional no matter how some trying to downplaying it with a few numbers here and there.

LGA1700 could’ve been truly a great platform but Intel’s greed got in the way.

No thanks… Maybe next time

 

[maxfly]

OP created a thread to share their experience. No malice intended that I can see. Clearly not looking for buying advice as the deed is done. And yet, here we are 4 pages later...members still making assumptions, shoving opinions down throats and throwing forum etiquette out the window. Using the weak, "Cuz reviews sez so" excuse to justify passive aggressive posts.

It's always been difficult for some here to have a civilized discussion about anything CPU or GPU but this newly minted boorish attitude is stinkin the joint up.

 

[dgianstefani]

Is that why TPU reviews 13/14th with 6000MT/s?

To make a fair testing environment.

Intel can do 8000 MT/s+ but AMD can't, at least without breaking ratio, leading to generally worse performance.

Can you imagine the outrage if Intel was tested at 8000 MT and the competition was tested at 6000 MT?

The other option would be to test at official rated speeds, I.E. 5200 MT for AMD and 5600 MT for Intel.

Raptor Lake also scales with memory much better than X3D Zen 4, because it doesn't have that massive cache on top.

So the numbers for RPL at 6000 MT is showing what it can do with (relatively) slow memory, essentially.

Whereas X3D numbers are essentially in their sweet spot.

You can get a decent FPS improvement just from memory.

Min lows getting better is most beneficial, IMO.

 

[Taraquin]

To make a fair testing environment.

Intel can do 8000 MT/s+ but AMD can't, at least without breaking ratio, leading to generally worse performance.

Can you imagine the outrage if Intel was tested at 8000 MT and the competition was tested at 6000 MT?

The other option would be to test at official rated speeds, I.E. 5200 MT for AMD and 5600 MT for Intel.

Raptor Lake also scales with memory much better than X3D Zen 4, because it doesn't have that massive cache on top.

So the numbers for RPL at 6000 MT is showing what it can do with (relatively) slow memory, essentially.

Whereas X3D numbers are essentially in their sweet spot.

You can get a decent FPS improvement just from memory.
View attachment 360431

Min lows getting better is most beneficial, IMO.

View attachment 360432

I think it is fair that they test at 6000. First of all many sticks based on Samsung and Micron can bare go past 6000. Secondly most motherboards are 4dimms that at best can do 7200, in some cases below. You usually need 2dimm boards or very high end 4dimm to do 7600+

 

[sethmatrix7]

It would be nice to see 7800x3d with 6000mt tuned ram vs 14900k 8000mt

 

[igormp]

To make a fair testing environment.

Agreed on fairness, but I also believe that's way more representative of what most people will be running their sticks at.
I doubt most buyers of either CPU will be looking towards anything faster than 6400MHz.

 

[SalemTheKit]

So, uh, not to be that guy or anything, but if this VR use case is specifically a game like VRChat, then something lost in this thread is that x3d chips of any variety perform far better than intel in regards to frame dips. Furthermore, that would easily explain the GPU choice as that game also just EATS vram like no other game I've come across.

 

[SOS_Earth]

When you consider how Intel has handled the entire Raptor Lake degradation debacle, I don't see going to a 7800X3D as a "downgrade" from a 13700K. Intel was at first blaming board partners as to why their CPUs were unstable, to finally admitting that there's indeed issues with CPUs degrading (and also the oxidation issue they decided to never admit until recently, despite it happening in 2023), and then releasing a BIOS update with the microcode fix that ended up introducing new bugs in the BIOS. For instance, disabling the baseline BIOS settings completely disables the voltage limit for some god forsaken reason, even though Intel's exact reason for this update is to implement a hard voltage limit that can be requested. Those issues were documented on Buildzoid's channel. It took Intel forever to finally admit there was an actual issue when there were documented crashes occurring on Raptor Lake as early as late 2022, they didn't even bother recalling any CPUs that were potentially affected by the oxidation issue, and all they did was increase your warranty by two years. Sure, that's great, but considering how Intel has tried to squirm their way out of this and sweep it under the rug until it got really bad for them when Wendell and GN Steve called them out, I wouldn't trust that they'll honor RMAs for every affected CPU. I've also read some people saying that Intel basically would ghost them whenever they would inquire about a replacement CPU due to experiencing crashes.

Yeah, Ryzen 7000 CPUs were blowing up in the past due to SoC voltage being pumped way too high by default when enabling EXPO. However, AMD made absolute sure to have it fixed ASAP and made it right for those who were affected. It's not about companies having issues with faulty products, it happens. What matters is the response to it and what actions said company takes to alleviate those issues.

Besides, AM5 also will have future CPU releases, whereas LGA1700 is completely finished as of this fall/winter when Arrow Lake arrives. And I'm not very keen on trusting that Arrow Lake won't have issues with degradation considering the fact that clock speeds seem to still be 5.5+ GHz for ST workloads, but we'll have to see.

Oxidation
Intel solved the problem during the production of the 13th series, but did not specify when. If you bought the processor when it was released, it is very likely that you have this problem, but there is a 5-year warranty. It's huge! Imagine that a Ryzen 3700X owner, bought in 2019, returns the defective processor this year. After almost 5 years of use, he receives ~$330 in his account. It doesn't sound bad.

Degradation
In my opinion, only those who have pushed their processors beyond the limit can have this problem. Neither Intel nor AMD has room for overclocking for daily use. On the contrary, you need some knowledge in the field because motherboard manufacturers push processors beyond the limit. The first test I did with 14700K, with the default settings and according to HWINFO, took the processor consumption to 320W!!!! Safe victim with these default settings.

 

[Redwoodz]

The GPU question is moot. If OP chooses to they can get a more efficient card with either cpu.

Powerdraw has more effect than just the cost of electricity. Anyone that lives in a hot part of the world will tell you it matters alot, it will def. make your room hot, which takes more energy to regulate. Idle power is not going to do this as much.

 

[Wolverine2349]

I am gonna bump this thread up as I actually kind of wanted to go Intel as I want more than 8 cores on a single die and even though they are e-cores, the Intel thread director at hardware level is good so much better than AMD dual CCD and core parking crap and garbage.

But but but degradation and stability issues and design flaw. I want a CPU that is stable and will last and mild overclocking should not cause fast degradation and only Intel 13th and 14th Gen have that problem. Even microcode update so many times now has it really fixed it or just a patch to delay the inevitable??

So OP did downgrade except they really did not as the 8 cores in 7800X3D with the 96MB cache are as fast for gaming as 8 Raptor Cove cores. But get less overall compute resources. But oh who knows how long the CPU will actually last and if you want reliability AMD is way to go over Intel 13th and 14th Gen.

Oh and Arrow Lake a total flop which is a shame as I thought it would be Raptor Lake or better level gaming with same topology/layout and it was anything but with horrible tile latency a terrible topology with e-cores crammed between P cores even if stability and degradation issues are fixed???

So after seeing that I went back to AMD and 9800X3D after selling prior 7800X3d PARTS late September thinking Arrow Lake would be answer and it turned out to be awful.

I'd like to believe 13th/14th Gen issues are fixed with microcode update but I hear so many inconsistent stories that it scares me away.

And oh yeah memory controller can go much higher on intel and boot into Windows and be usable. But oh is it truly stable on any 4 DIMM board even with 6000 to 6800 or 7000? I dare anyone who thinks it is to run OCCT Large Dataset test and it will spit out WHEA or CPU cores errors with XMP on even at 6000 where as turn XMP off and SPD 4800 and no OCCT errors. I have experienced it myself across. Non Asus 2 DIMM boards work well up to 7000 and do not have that issue.

But have seen CPUs that were run at manual reasonable voltages and lower clocks and ring pass all stability tests the weeks later throw a WHEA during same shader compilation when it was stable before.

AMD memory controller is only better than Intel in that oh at 6000 and usually 6200 1:1 it will be rock stable out of box set XMP/EXPO/DOCP and forget about it on 4 DIMM boards. On Intel forget about that as OCCT will throw errors eventually or randomly. But 2 DIMM boards Intel memory controller much better and much higher speeds stable on that side. But other degradation and stability issues for Intel 13th/14th Gen not IMC or RAM related rear their ugly head in my experience.

 

[kapone32]

Is AM5 bad? Depends on who is talking. The truth is that Intel are the ones that turned their chips to 11 and it had nothing to do with the user. Why? The MB vendors in an attempt to separate themselves turned the chips up to 12 and we saw where that led. Now how many CPUs can you buy for your AM5 MB (right now). 20? 24. I have not bothered to check but AM5 may be the most flexible system yet in terms of CPU availability. I don't mean a raft of 6 core CPUs but. APUs, CPUs X3D and even Epyc chips. We are only on the 2nd generation too so there are plenty more to come. As an example of progress I bought a 8600G and the 5Ghz boosts blows the 5600G away in 1080P Gaming on my 4K TV. Made sure I got an As Rock board for 120Hz support on the on-board HDMI. Yep all the Freesync/VRR glory in the full range of the monitor.

 

[freeagent]

As Rock

Spell check always gets it wrong, its AssRock. If you really want to get fancy you can plop a Deep Ass cooler onto it.

 

[kapone32]

Spell check always gets it wrong, its AssRock. If you really want to get fancy you can plop a Deep Ass cooler onto it.

LMAO check my pics in the Your Latest Purchase thread and you will see a familiar logo lit up in ARGB representing the Enthusiasts choice for Cooling. Thermalright for the Gold!!!!!!!!

 

[ShrimpBrime]

@Wolverine2349 Pros and Cons to everything. You're talking about new parts capable of 8000mt/s and beyond but talk about 6200 1:1.

You have money for Cooling 253w CPU with overclock, then you have top board and memory to accompany that. Go Intel.

If you are looking at Budget memory at 6400mt/s and less, go AMD then. You can slap this into a budget board on budget cooling. No problem. Good frame rates. Good performance.