[Unix_Man]

Alright so I'm in the market to get a new workstation build. I bought the AMD FX 8350 about 10 years ago... worst decision ever since it never helped as a workstation.

So it seems AMD is the prime CPU of today...

Have no task in playing video games, will be doing the following tasks:

4K Video Editing, Music Production Ableton (Shit Load of Plugins), Programming, Web Development, Photoshop, Solid Works, ANSYS, Matlab, Blender and yea, you get the idea...

Now which of the following CPU should I get? (All the prices are from MicroCenter)

AMD Ryzen 7 5800X - 8 Cores, 16 Threads, 3.8 GHz (4.7GHz O.C), 7nm, TDP 105W - $359.99

AMD Ryzen 5 5600X - 6 Cores, 12 Threads, 3.7GHz (4.6GHz O.C), 7nm, TDP 65W - $259.99

AMD Ryzen 7 3700X - 8 Cores, 16 Threads, 3.6GHz (4.4GHz O.C), 7nm, TDP 65W - $239.99

Intel Core i9 10850K - 10 Cores, 20 Threads, 3.6GHz (5.2 GHz O.C), 14nm, TDP 125W - $319.99

Intel Core i7 11700K - 8 Cores, 16 Threads, 3.60 GHz (5.0 GHz O.C), 14nm, TDP 125W - $319.99

I'm thinking to go for the Intel i7-11700K, since it was released this year (2021) and it can utilize PCIe 4 which is future proof for an upgrade of a much better GPU. But in a dilemma to go for the Ryzen.

Most of the softwares I'll be using are designed to work great on Intel CPUs since they had the upper hand in the past decade. It's only matter of speculation and question if developers of these softwares will start seriously optimizing their software for Ryzen CPUs.

I'm also leaning towards the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X since I read that it is decent for ANSYS CFD. Has the fastest clock speed for a single core. Also the AMD Ryzen seems to be more economical with motherboard selection. It's amazing how AMD got their transistor size down to 7nanometers, that alone makes me want to get the AMD.

When I use Ableton I do not want the CPU to start glitching like how the FX 8350 does when loaded with plugins.

Need a rock solid worthy CPU, the AMD FX 8350 is completely useless over the 10 years for the softwares I use, just good at browsing the internet and gaming when paired with a good GPU since day one, don't want to make the same mistake with the purchase of a Ryzen CPU.

Majority of the gaming benchmarks is meaningless to me.

So anyone with experience between the two CPUs can shed some light which is a better CPU to get? Anyone here transitioned from an Intel i7 or i9 (10th Gen/11th Gen) to a Ryzen CPU for their workstation? Anyone encountered any issues for the particular software used in the Ryzen CPU workstation?

Any advice will be appreciated, Thanks

---merged posts---

Hello everyone.

I'm going to start learning and practicing Solidworks and ANSYS FEM and CFD simulations.

This is just for me to start learning for fun and personal use and maybe later on I might get a much more expensive bigger build if needed.

Any recommendations for a build that is $800 or under?

Im considering to get an intel i9-10850K or the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X since both are similarly priced. Perhaps someone here might have better ideas for a build.

I'm not sure if I should get a good GPU or CPU.

Any advice will be much appreciated. Thanks.

[flotus1]

Do you already have a graphics card you can use for this PC? That's a huge factor in todays market, especially with a tight budget. And some of the software you mentioned can leverage GPU acceleration. Some even benefits from Intels integrated GPUs in particular.
If you don't have a graphics card at hand, buying Intel with an integrated GPU is very likely the cheaper option right now.
For a lot of the tools you mentioned, Puget Systems publishes benchmarks all the time. They are worth a look, e.g. https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/ar...-Roundup-2106/

It's amazing how AMD got their transistor size down to 7nanometers, that alone makes me want to get the AMD

It really shouldn't. Process names are just that: names. Nothing in these CPUs measures 7nm or 14nm, and the density is actually quite similar. There are much better ways to compare CPUs, like performance, price, power efficiency, platform features...
Another side-note here: the process node is not AMDs achievement. TSMC produces their "7nm" chips.

[Unix_Man]

Originally Posted by flotus1

Do you already have a graphics card you can use for this PC? That's a huge factor in todays market, especially with a tight budget. And some of the software you mentioned can leverage GPU acceleration. Some even benefits from Intels integrated GPUs in particular.
If you don't have a graphics card at hand, buying Intel with an integrated GPU is very likely the cheaper option right now.
For a lot of the tools you mentioned, Puget Systems publishes benchmarks all the time. They are worth a look, e.g. https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/ar...-Roundup-2106/


It really shouldn't. Process names are just that: names. Nothing in these CPUs measures 7nm or 14nm, and the density is actually quite similar. There are much better ways to compare CPUs, like performance, price, power efficiency, platform features...
Another side-note here: the process node is not AMDs achievement. TSMC produces their "7nm" chips.

Thank You for replying.

I bought the AMD Radeon RX 580. But I have seen many used graphics cards going for $200-$400. Like the Nvidia Quadro k5200 8gb.

What brings me interests on this forum is that I have seen people mentioning about using server grade hardware for their workstations. Whats even more interesting is that Apple's Mac Pro also uses the idea for utilizing server grade hardware, but it's the latest and greatest which costs an arm and a leg.

Now for around $800 I don't know whether it would be more beneficial to get old server grade hardware or latest consumer grade hardware (i9 vs Ryzen).

I already have 3 graphics card, total of ~$400, I could sell them.
So my ideal total budget now is somewhere $1,200.

I have seen all of those benchmarks and it seems Intel i9 10850K or i7 11700K seems like the overall better decision in term of price and performance as for a workstation.

So, what would you buy with a $1,200 budget as for a workstation?

Speaking of TSMC, they just copy and paste AMD's work files into their highly regulated ASML's EUV Lithography $120 million machine lol

[flotus1]

Now for around $800 I don't know whether it would be more beneficial to get old server grade hardware or latest consumer grade hardware (i9 vs Ryzen)

Depends on your priorities. For CFD solvers, an older dual-socket Xeon system (e.g. E5-2678v3) can offer superior performance per dollar. Especially if you need lots of RAM.
For all other software you mentioned, a current-gen Mainstream CPU with at least 8 cores is the better choice. The only thing they are less effective for in terms of CFD is the solver phase. If solver times are not your primary concern, old server hardware isn't for you.

I already have 3 graphics card, total of ~$400, I could sell them.

I would recommend selling two of them, and keeping the last one for your new workstation. Preferably an Nvidia card, because hardware acceleration with with your software mostly works with CUDA, not OpenCL.
Be quick, GPU prices are dropping already

Speaking of TSMC, they just copy and paste AMD's work files into their highly regulated ASML's EUV Lithography $120 million machine lol

Pretty sure that's not how things work, but let's not get side-tracked here.

[Unix_Man]

Thanks for replying.

I guess I would go with the modern CPU route. I really do not need much heavy CFD at the moment but in the future will need to solve some complex problems. I guess at that point will come back here and ask for some insights for a server hardware build to solve CFD problems in a timely manner.

Thanks for clarifying the main use case of server grade and consumer grade hardware, much appreciated.