PC Building Guide and Discussion #14

aleshemsky83

Registered User
Apr 8, 2008
17,828
431
I'm not sure that it makes sense to stay on AM4 in this case. The 5800X3D is $300, so you'd save only $40 off the cost of the 7800X3D. Also, you have only 16GB of RAM, so you'd have to buy 64GB of DDR4, which, again, is only about $40 less than the same in DDR5. The main cost difference is the new motherboard, but add the $170 for that and it's really only $250 more to move up to AM5. I think that that's worth it for the faster 7800X3D, the faster RAM and future upgradeability.

Edit: I was just reminded that the 5700X3D exists and is down to only $210 currently. That would be a more sensible choice than the 5800X3D and make the platform upgrade about $340, which is more substantial. That would make for a tougher decision if budget were a real concern, but it sounds like it's not and this system may be kept as long as the last, so a platform upgrade may still be worth it, IMO.

Speaking of the RAM, I recommend getting a 2x32GB kit instead of two 2x16GB kits. First of all, some people say that having two sticks is slightly better for performance than having four. Second, it's actually cheaper in this case. Instead of $236 for the two 2x16GB kits that you picked out, you can get one 2x32GB kit of the same make and model for only $210.

BTW, you can also save about $75 on the Windows 11 license by buying a key from a site like g2deal.com or vip-scdkey.com, instead. You can even make it a Pro license, even though you probably don't need it. The Windows 11 ISO can be downloaded for free from Microsoft, so all that you need is the key.
Sure but if this is a primarily 1440p gaming setup, 64 gb isn’t necessary. You could live with 32 gb or even leave it at 16. No game is really that hungry for system RAM.

Now obviously with a budget of $4000 you can get max out almost everything, my POV is moreso that it’s such a waste. 1600 to 5800x3D is like a 2.5x difference in a lot of games. It’s maybe the biggest upgrade you could ever do on a single socket without changing anything but the CPU. Yes obviously once you get the 5800x3D you have reached the dead end but so what? Jmo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Summer Rose

PeteWorrell

[...]
Aug 31, 2006
4,779
1,983
Sure but if this is a primarily 1440p gaming setup, 64 gb isn’t necessary. You could live with 32 gb or even leave it at 16. No game is really that hungry for system RAM.

Now obviously with a budget of $4000 you can get max out almost everything, my POV is moreso that it’s such a waste. 1600 to 5800x3D is like a 2.5x difference in a lot of games. It’s maybe the biggest upgrade you could ever do on a single socket without changing anything but the CPU. Yes obviously once you get the 5800x3D you have reached the dead end but so what? Jmo.
It seems that the person has a good budget and wants an upgrade that will last a long time. In that case, going to AM5 makes much more sense than staying on AM4.

A 5800X3D is the end of the line for AM4 while the 7600X easily keeps up with it on AM5 so imagine a 7800x3D. It also opens up the possibility of a good CPU upgrade down the line. DDR5 will also just keep gaining more advantages over DDR4 as the technology matures.
 

aleshemsky83

Registered User
Apr 8, 2008
17,828
431
It seems that the person has a good budget and wants an upgrade that will last a long time. In that case, going to AM5 makes much more sense than staying on AM4.

A 5800X3D is the end of the line for AM4 while the 7600X easily keeps up with it on AM5 so imagine a 7800x3D. It also opens up the possibility of a good CPU upgrade down the line. DDR5 will also just keep gaining more advantages over DDR4 as the technology matures.
This is true, but if that’s the case then I would say spend even more cause the 4070 will probably bottleneck you right off the bat with this build.

I could be wrong maybe the 4070 is a good match for the 7800X3D but I don’t think so. I’d need to take a look at some benchmarks.

Edit:

My suspicions appear to be confirmed here:

Youve got a pretty sizeable GPU bottleneck pairing the 7800X3D with a 4070. Even at 1440p and sometimes even at 1080p

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Summer Rose

Osprey

Registered User
Feb 18, 2005
27,346
9,850
For me, the issue with the 4070 is that it has only 12GB of VRAM. If I were not planning to upgrade again for at least 5 years, I'd want a card with at least 16GB. She says that she plays at 1080p, which 12GB is more than enough for, but she also suggests that she might like to move up to 1440p at some point, and 12GB could be an issue at that resolution in a year or two. If I were her, I'd strongly consider stretching the budget a little to go for at least the 4070 Ti Super (not the plain Ti, which is 12GB; the Ti Super has 16GB) or even one of AMD's 7900 series cards, if ray tracing isn't something that she cares about. That would also reduce the GPU bottleneck and give her ~50% higher framerates for only $200 more spent, which is well worth it.

I see your point that, if she's dead set on the 4070, the 5800X3D is a better match and she could save some money by re-using her motherboard. If she's set on upgrading to AM5 and the 7800X3D, though, she may just want to go all in and get a GPU with a little more VRAM and performance than the 4070. It sounds like budget isn't a concern, while longevity of the system is, so that seems to me like it may be the better option for her.
 
Last edited:

mouser

Business of Hockey
Jul 13, 2006
29,384
12,782
South Mountain
For me, the issue with the 4070 is that it has only 12GB of VRAM. If I were not planning to upgrade again for at least 5 years, I'd want a card with at least 16GB. She says that she plays at 1080p, which 12GB is more than enough for, but she also suggests that she might like to move up to 1440p at some point, and 12GB could be an issue at that resolution in a year or two. If I were her, I'd strongly consider stretching the budget a little to go for at least the 4070 Ti Super (not the plain Ti, which is 12GB; the Ti Super has 16GB) or even one of AMD's 7900 series cards, if ray tracing isn't something that she cares about. That would also reduce the GPU bottleneck and give her ~50% higher framerates for only $200 more spent, which is well worth it.

I see your point that, if she's dead set on the 4070, the 5800X3D is a better match and she could save some money by re-using her motherboard. If she's set on upgrading to AM5 and the 7800X3D, though, she may just want to go all in and get a slightly better card than the 4070. It sounds like budget isn't a concern, while longevity of the system is, so that seems to me like it may be better option for her.

Agreed. I'd highly recommend spending the extra ~$200 to get a 16GB 4070Ti Super instead of a 12GB 4070. Unless you're planning on buying one of the next generation GPUs in the next year or two.

That 16GB will probably give you a longer effective lifetime as game video memory bloat moves forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Summer Rose

Osprey

Registered User
Feb 18, 2005
27,346
9,850

One part of me wants to wait for the 5800X3D goes on sale, the other part of me says why wait for 300 measly Megahertz.
That's a nice deal. It's $33 less than the price on Amazon, though there's $4 shipping.

According to Wikipedia, the base and boost clocks are both 400MHz less than the 5800X3D, not 300. They're 700 and 500 lower than my 5600X, which is disappointing. I almost wish that I had a 3600X or older so that I could justify the upgrade.
 

aleshemsky83

Registered User
Apr 8, 2008
17,828
431
That's a nice deal. It's $33 less than the price on Amazon, though there's $4 shipping.

According to Wikipedia, the base and boost clocks are both 400MHz less than the 5800X3D, not 300. They're 700 and 500 lower than my 5600X, which is disappointing. I almost wish that I had a 3600X or older so that I could justify the upgrade.
Hmmm, doing more research its like an 8-10% downgrade from the 5800X3D, I feel like I'm just gonna wait for it to go on a deeper sale.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad