New PC Build AMD v Intel

[Artcrimes147]

Hi everyone,

Apologies if this is redundant (search didn't bring up anything very recent for some reason) but I am in the process of spec'ing a new workstation, and often hear conflicting things between Intel and AMD.

I have always had Intel chips but from benchmarks I keep seeing how amazing it seems AMD chips and running, so I am looking at the following, budget permitting:


AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX (128 MB Cache, 32 Cores, 64 Threads, 4,0 GHz bis 5,3 GHz, 350 W)

AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX (256 MB Cache, 64 Cores, 128 Threads, 3,2 GHz bis 5,1 GHz, 350 W)—not sure this is at all feasible financially

vs

Intel® Xeon® w7-3465X (75 MB Cache, 28 Cores, 56 Threads, 2,5 GHz bis 4,8 GHz Turbo, 300 W)—cheaper than the one below, but seems to perform better somehow?

or

Intel® Xeon® w9-3475X (82,5 MB Cache, 36 Cores, 72 Threads, 2,2 GHz bis 4,8 GHz Turbo, 300 W)

My typical approach has always been to max out my CPU knowing this won't change anytime soon, and then see what else I can afford. For a video card I would probably stick to the <NVIDIA® RTX™ A4000, 16 GB GDDR6, 4 DP, 7960T> which has seemed to serve me fine.

Any experts here who could weigh in, I would be most appreciative!

[James Vella]

Im far from an expert but this is how I would weigh it up.

Higher cache is better. Not sure if this thread is related to C4D or 3dsmax but the faster the single core speed the better for general tasks in 3dsmax (I would assume the same for C4D but cant confirm). Ignore the Turbo its not sustained for longer renders, does speed up the scene when doing viewport changes or general tasks, short renders etc.

For general 3D use I would put them in this order (best to worst):
1. AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX (128 MB Cache, 32 Cores, 64 Threads, 4,0 GHz bis 5,3 GHz, 350 W)
2. AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX (256 MB Cache, 64 Cores, 128 Threads, 3,2 GHz bis 5,1 GHz, 350 W)
3. Intel® Xeon® w7-3465X (75 MB Cache, 28 Cores, 56 Threads, 2,5 GHz bis 4,8 GHz Turbo, 300 W)
4. Intel® Xeon® w9-3475X (82,5 MB Cache, 36 Cores, 72 Threads, 2,2 GHz bis 4,8 GHz Turbo, 300 W)

For rendering I would put them in this order (best to worst):
1. AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX (256 MB Cache, 64 Cores, 128 Threads, 3,2 GHz bis 5,1 GHz, 350 W) (409ghz total/average)
2. AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX (128 MB Cache, 32 Cores, 64 Threads, 4,0 GHz bis 5,3 GHz, 350 W) (256ghz total/average)
3. Intel® Xeon® w9-3475X (82,5 MB Cache, 36 Cores, 72 Threads, 2,2 GHz bis 4,8 GHz Turbo, 300 W) (158ghz total/average)
4. Intel® Xeon® w7-3465X (75 MB Cache, 28 Cores, 56 Threads, 2,5 GHz bis 4,8 GHz Turbo, 300 W) (140ghz total/average)

[Artcrimes147]

James, my dear man, thank you so much for your input!

This was my general consensus as well, but having never built a machine with AMD for my work, I just wasn't sure. Budget wise it seems the best bang for your/my buck is the AMD 7975.

I appreciate your time and input!

[clemens_at]

Intel is no competition for the new Threadrippers right now, so I would definitely go down that route.

Both the 7975WX and the 7985WX are good choices.

My take is the same as Jame's. The 7975WX, with the higher baseclock will be better for basically all tasks that don't take advantage of all cores, which are still a lot.

If its pureley rendering performance you need, then the 7985WX is a no brainer. 

Also keep in mind the 7985WX runs much cooler than the 7975WX.   

[James Vella]

This was my general consensus as well, but having never built a machine with AMD for my work, I just wasn't sure.

You're welcome. I have/use the intel, xeon, amd and they are all basically no different in terms of how they function in general (from a consumer perspective). Maybe someone can chime in if they have experienced something different, I think I seen some comments in the past in this thread that might be worth skimming over.

Basically the selling point for xeon was always 'rock solid stable'. Meaning they are good for render farms since you can run them for months/years on end and they shouldn't break on you - as long as they are cooled sufficiently and relatively dust free (maintained). But speed wise they were never great for workstations. Even opening 3dsmax on a standard intel/amd machine is noticeably faster, as well as just general tasks such as @clemens_at said. Most applications in general run better with a faster base clock so yeah if I was building a PC now I would also go with AMD. The last time I updated was in 2021 from intel to AMD, I have no issues currently either.

[Artcrimes147]

James, Clemens, Thank you both so much.

It all makes a lot of sense!

I've always been a pseudo expert with this stuff, only know so much as "get the most number of cores at the highest Ghz possible" in the CPU-driven Corona world, knowing this is the biggest pain in the ass to consider upgrading compared to other components.

In the end, the 7975 is about 4800Euros cheaper (buying this build in Europe) compared to the 7985, so that'll be it for me budget wise.

If i could, I'd buy you both a beer! Cheers!