Upgrade 7820x to 10900x?

Nirad9er

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 18, 2004
Messages
2,500
I've had the 7820x (@ 4.7ghz) for several years now and was wondering if the 10900x would be worth upgrading to. I'd overclock the 10900x of course (4.9ghz ?)

I recently upgraded to the Asus ROG Strix XG438Q 43" 4K 120Hz monitor and I primarily game on the following types of games using a watercooled 1080Ti (likely upgrade to next Gen cards in 2020)

The Division 2
Company of Heroes 2
Apex Legends
Battlefield V
COD Black Ops 4
Borderlands 3
Destiny 2
 

thecold

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 12, 2017
Messages
407
I'm going to doubt it. The 200-300mhz you might get will not get you a noticeable difference.
 

UnknownSouljer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 24, 2001
Messages
6,271
You can go online and check out benches. But basically the 10900x is DOA as it doesn't really offer any gains. It's just something that Intel has up there as a placeholder on the top of their HEDT stack.
If you have just tons of cash sitting around that you feel like lighting on fire, then go ahead, but otherwise I wouldn't bother.

I also wouldn't bother at all either if all you do is game. You'd actually get better performance out of a 9900KS.
 

Nirad9er

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 18, 2004
Messages
2,500
You can go online and check out benches. But basically the 10900x is DOA as it doesn't really offer any gains. It's just something that Intel has up there as a placeholder on the top of their HEDT stack.
If you have just tons of cash sitting around that you feel like lighting on fire, then go ahead, but otherwise I wouldn't bother.

I also wouldn't bother at all either if all you do is game. You'd actually get better performance out of a 9900KS.
Thanks for the input. I'm not going to change motherboards to basically side grade to a 9900k which actually has less pci-e lanes. It would be easiest to pop in a new chip but I guess I'll wait for the next gen. Hopefully that'll be compatible with x299.
 

techie81

[H]ard for [H]ardware
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
5,070
I have the same CPU and agree with the other posters. Save your $$, you are going to see very similar performance with a 10900X.

If I don't see some IPC gains in the future ill probably switch over to Ryzen (but I would like to keep my x299 platform since its been rock solid).
 

thesmokingman

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
5,796
A real improvement would be a 3900x. I used to run a 7820x and even at 5ghz it gets beat soundly by my 3900x.
 

thesmokingman

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
5,796
Are you talking gaming multi-core work loads?
I didn't think a 3900x was better at gaming.
Definitely in content creation, multi-core workloads, and as far as gaming, I can game with more consistent fps while having work like encoders run in the background. There's so many cores so I don't find myself ever solely gaming anymore. Always stacking it with more workload, then I'll start a game. I couldn't do that with a 7820x smoothly.
 

Jandor

Gawd
Joined
Dec 30, 2018
Messages
533
I've had the 7820x (@ 4.7ghz) for several years now and was wondering if the 10900x would be worth upgrading to. I'd overclock the 10900x of course (4.9ghz ?)

I recently upgraded to the Asus ROG Strix XG438Q 43" 4K 120Hz monitor and I primarily game on the following types of games using a watercooled 1080Ti (likely upgrade to next Gen cards in 2020)

The Division 2
Company of Heroes 2
Apex Legends
Battlefield V
COD Black Ops 4
Borderlands 3
Destiny 2
If it's for gaming you should keep the 7820x for a while. It's just the GPU that will very likely make a change in 2020. You will need to get a high en gaming card, wait for Ampere probably. AMD seems to be doing catch-up only. Will let you run 4K with ray tracing and the CPU may still not matter if it's already 8 cores.
 

evilmedic

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 17, 2005
Messages
184
I've had the 7820x (@ 4.7ghz) for several years now and was wondering if the 10900x would be worth upgrading to. I'd overclock the 10900x of course (4.9ghz ?)

I recently upgraded to the Asus ROG Strix XG438Q 43" 4K 120Hz monitor and I primarily game on the following types of games using a watercooled 1080Ti (likely upgrade to next Gen cards in 2020)

The Division 2
Company of Heroes 2
Apex Legends
Battlefield V
COD Black Ops 4
Borderlands 3
Destiny 2
If you are gaming, you should probably ask yourself? Have you maximized the performance of your 7820x yet ? A few questions.

1.) What voltage are you using to run at 4.7GHz ?
2.) What mesh speed are you running at ?
3.) What memory are you using ? What speed? What timings?
4.) What memory latency are you seeing in AIDA64 tests?
5.) What case are you using ? and what type of cooling solution are you using? Air / AIO / Custom water cooling.
 

Nirad9er

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 18, 2004
Messages
2,500
Now I'm hearing about the 10 core 10900k with boost clock to 5.3ghz. If you could overclock all cores to 5.3ghz then I'll definitely be buying a new motherboard and CPU. All I do is game so maybe the HEDT wasn't the best for me.
 

kirbyrj

Fully [H]
Joined
Feb 1, 2005
Messages
25,492
Now I'm hearing about the 10 core 10900k with boost clock to 5.3ghz. If you could overclock all cores to 5.3ghz then I'll definitely be buying a new motherboard and CPU. All I do is game so maybe the HEDT wasn't the best for me.
Yes, the mainstream part is definitely better for gaming due to the ring bus (Mainstream) vs mesh (HEDT).

I'd wait and see what actually happens with the 10900k. I'm not saying it won't be able to hit 5.3Ghz all core, but I'd want to see before I paid what Intel is going to be asking for that CPU.

If it's for gaming you should keep the 7820x for a while. It's just the GPU that will very likely make a change in 2020. You will need to get a high en gaming card, wait for Ampere probably. AMD seems to be doing catch-up only. Will let you run 4K with ray tracing and the CPU may still not matter if it's already 8 cores.
I agree with this. Your monitor isn't going to leverage the CPU gains as you will be GPU limited anyway. So no sense in upgrading your CPU for gaming. You could game on a $100 processor and not see the difference between what you have now at 4K.
 

somebrains

Gawd
Joined
Nov 10, 2013
Messages
896
Here's my build arc of the past 2 years:

7820x + 1080tis bc all of the sudden I went from simple cloud native .js builds to needing a local Kubernetes and python validation box. The AWS spend just throwing spaghetti against the wall from serverless and machine learning was truly stupid. Also played a lot of Blackout in my downtime. Got off the 7820x bc I was playing more than working late 2018.

That arc got straightened out so I decided to screw around with Ryzen just to see what it was about on Win10 and Linux. Rhel and Ubuntu worked fine, Android emulator issues made it a no go. This was March 2019 or around the lead in to 1903 so it was fun seeing everything Ryzen could do in a more stable state.

Got off mobile fronted applications that needed a bunch of data tier testing and bought a 2600 to game. Games just felt a little off during the whole ryzen arc. Flick movement was off, shots felt a little sticky.

Game builds mid 2019 started to show 100% core useage so a 1700x went in. Recording sucked at times due to OBS issues. All that went away with +2 cores. Went back to nvenc. MW beta felt off. Sold off that Ryzen platform and ran a 3600 briefly in my other b450 rig that my buddy had me build. It fixed some of the 1% lows that made gaming feel off but wasn't as good as an 8700k. Linux was good, especially for those builds that used to take 20mins.

Currently on a 9700kf for games, everything feels good again. I don't want Ryzen as my primary gaming platform, it's fine for Dev. I'm too sensitive to stickyness.

The whole time I was using an aio cooled 1080ti.
Bought an X34, xb1, Asus 180hz 1080p rog monitor. Gpu and monitor speed drives everything. Pure gaming no Dev I'd get a Dell 27" 1440p tn panel bc that looked fine and felt the fastest. I wouldn't want to stare at a pair of them for 8+ hours a day. I need a 1080ti minimum at low graphics settings or fps gaming is pointless.

Cpu does matter to tighten up moments when you need to wipe a quad on your own or get 3rd partied and need to hit a 10+ kill streak. It's doable on Ryzen, it's just easier on 8c consumer Intel.

X299 is fine for gaming, it's not as bad as Ryzen.
I wouldn't spend more on it, the $ is better served on gpu/monitor.
If that's maxed out then a consumer platform if ideal for a consumer workload.
1600af + b450 is cheap enough to try my arc.
 

Furious_Styles

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
1,608
At 4k I think you will see very little performance gains from changing CPUs. Definitely will with a 2080 ti or an upcoming 30xx.
 

evilmedic

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 17, 2005
Messages
184
If you want to get more frame rates at 4K.. Changing CPU will bring very little improvement.

Without spending more on current CPU and motherboard's You should consider upping the voltages to get more out of your SkyLake-X
- Up mesh voltage to allow for faster mesh. (Target ~ 3200 MHz)(
- Up CPU voltage to allow for higher clocks. (Target 4.8 or 4.9 GHz)
- Up RAM voltage to get tighter timings and overall lower memory latency. (Target < 50ns in AIDA 64)

Also, I presume you went 4K because you wanted more image quality. It's worth considering changing display to 48 inch OLED in 2020 too...
 

Stryker7314

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
Messages
340
Unless next gen cards make the cpu the bottleneck at 4k, current gpus don't, then a different cpu will be a net of zero fps gain.. Look up 4k cpu benchies with 2080ti.

Not sayin' don't upgade because I upgrade due to the bug all the time ;p
 
Last edited:

Halon

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 13, 2004
Messages
342
You're talking about a 25% nudge in core count and a small increase in default clocks, and it's manufactured on a more mature spin of the same process. It's undeniably a better processor, and it's likely but not guaranteed you could push the silicon harder. That doesn't mean the upgrade path makes a ton of sense for your use case.

If you found a great deal on a 10920x or higher *and* you were doing simultaneous CPU-driven transcoding work - like, say, x264 streaming to Twitch or the like - dramatically more cores could make a difference. But the new chips aren't a transformative leap ahead. If you're getting a reliable overclock and eight cores is enough for what you do, I'd hold your money back for a while.

edit: As Dan_D notes below, the upgrade will also give you 44 PCIe lanes versus the 7820x's 28, owing to the fact that the 10,000 series is all built on HCC silicon whereas the 7900x and below were built on LCC. But for gaming, I doubt that's gonna matter given that nobody's really doing SLI any more.
 
Last edited:

tangoseal

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 18, 2010
Messages
8,368
7820x still to this day is a monster gaming cpu. I'd be hard pressed to think you would see a difference at all.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
55,744
A 10900X would give you more PCI-Express lanes. 44 vs. 28. It will overclock better as well. However, as others have stated the clock speed increases may not net you a whole lot in the realm of gains in games. The 7xxx series used a shitty TIM rather than a soldiered IHS. These chips want to clock higher than they do, but keeping them cool is another matter entirely. I haven't tested a 10900X specifically, but the higher core count parts can perform, but overclocking is mandatory to do so. I tested the 10980XE against the 3950X and found the former faster more often than not. However, the heat and power consumption are unreal. I'm actually doing a follow up on the 10980XE now that I've had more time to overclock it and Intel's updated the microcode to allow for better overclocking. In any event, these things will clock, but unless your on a really good custom loop, I wouldn't bother. You woulnd't believe what it takes to really tame these CPU's even in the realm of water cooling.

Using a 480mm rad and a EKWB Velocity water block, I can hit 107c on some cores running Gooseberry, or the plain Blender Benchmark. That's 4.8GHz on all cores at 1.25v. It trounces the 3950X in most cases at those speeds, but its more expensive, its much harder to cool and it pulls as much power as many complete systems do. Frankly, you need both clocks and at least two extra cores to compete with AMD's offerings. That's where Intel is at right now.

As far as I am concerned, all of the Cascade Lake-X family is DOA outside of the 10980XE and possibly the 10940X. Everything else is a waste of money in most cases. The only reason to buy a LGA 2066 CPU of any kind right now is if you already have an X299 system. At that point, you'll get off cheaper than buying a 3950X and a top end X570 motherboard. You also really have to have a need for the extra PCIe lanes and memory bandwidth. If all the check boxes are met, then a Cascade Lake-X CPU might be a really good fit for you. But honestly, I'd wait until Intel's new CPU's launch and see what its new mainstream platform has to offer. I would also suggest waiting until we know what AMD's got in the works for the 4000 series Ryzen's. At that point, you can go either direction, or pick up a Ryzen 3000 series CPU at a healthy discount.
 

Nirad9er

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 18, 2004
Messages
2,500
I've been browsing around and almost all online retailers are out of stock or require special order. Even Amazon and Newegg have been out of stock for a while and only third party price gougers at like $800. There's maybe a couple stores selling it but I still refuse to pay $100 over MSRP

I've never seen such a terrible launch of a processor. Several months since launch, out of stock everywhere. I would imagine the demand is low with AMD offerings being much cheaper so I can't understand why no one is selling it.

I'm dumbfounded that Newegg has been out of stock for what seems forever. Nothing at Microcenter either.

I would have upgraded but I guess Intel is panicked and worried about bringing out something better to beat AMD.

I guess I'll see what 10900K is like but I really didn't want to get a new Mobo. I'm very disappointed in Intel since the upgrade path has been garbage. I'm regretting getting x299 since the 9 series sucked and now the 10 series can't be seen anywhere.
 
Last edited:

Darkswordz

Gawd
Joined
Jan 5, 2016
Messages
600
I've been browsing around and almost all online retailers are out of stock or require special order. Even Amazon and Newegg have been out of stock for a while and only third party price gougers at like $800. There's maybe a couple stores selling it but I still refuse to pay $100 over MSRP

I've never seen such a terrible launch of a processor. Several months since launch, out of stock everywhere. I would imagine the demand is low with AMD offerings being much cheaper so I can't understand why no one is selling it.

I'm dumbfounded that Newegg has been out of stock for what seems forever. Nothing at Microcenter either.

I would have upgraded but I guess Intel is panicked and worried about bringing out something better to beat AMD.

I guess I'll see what 10900K is like but I really didn't want to get a new Mobo. I'm very disappointed in Intel since the upgrade path has been garbage. I'm regretting getting x299 since the 9 series sucked and now the 10 series can't be seen anywhere.
I'm in the same boat, dude. I'm in a limbo zone with my 7820X @ 4.7Ghz. I'm was thinking of upgrading to Ryzen 3 later this year, but I believe it'll be the last CPU on AM4, so there won't be an upgrade path.

Maybe I'll just hold on and see what 2021 brings. :oldman:
 

Jandor

Gawd
Joined
Dec 30, 2018
Messages
533
I'm in the same boat, dude. I'm in a limbo zone with my 7820X @ 4.7Ghz. I'm was thinking of upgrading to Ryzen 3 later this year, but I believe it'll be the last CPU on AM4, so there won't be an upgrade path.

Maybe I'll just hold on and see what 2021 brings. :oldman:
Depending on what you're doing, but I don't feel you're that much in limbo. It's an 8 core with 4 channel of ram. It's probably better than 2700X stock maybe close to 3700X, not far from 3800X.
If you want something really bigger, you have the 3970X.
For gaming, the GPU is the difference. Wait for Ampere, not for new CPU.
 

Nirad9er

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 18, 2004
Messages
2,500
Would it make sense to jump to a 10900k instead with a chance to get 5.3ghz ish all core? How much advantage at 4k gaming compared to staying with x299 and maybe just dropping in a 10900x?

Maybe I have the upgrade itch since I was disappointed in the x299 CPUs since the 7 series was released. I could jump back to the mainstream platform (10 core area) and get better gaming performance at a cheaper cost.

I know a GPU makes the biggest difference at 4k and I plan on getting BIG NAVI or Ampere this year but trying to justify any changes to my CPU/Mobo/ram.
 

D-EJ915

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
1,134
Would it make sense to jump to a 10900k instead with a chance to get 5.3ghz ish all core? How much advantage at 4k gaming compared to staying with x299 and maybe just dropping in a 10900x?

Maybe I have the upgrade itch since I was disappointed in the x299 CPUs since the 7 series was released. I could jump back to the mainstream platform (10 core area) and get better gaming performance at a cheaper cost.

I know a GPU makes the biggest difference at 4k and I plan on getting BIG NAVI or Ampere this year but trying to justify any changes to my CPU/Mobo/ram.
I'd upgrade the GPU first then see if the new platform improves performance at all in reviews when it comes out.
 
Top