Return to Level1Techs.com

Upgrade Opinions: 6700k to 3900x?

Hello All,

Quick question, 6700k upgrade to a 3900x worth? thoughts?

thanks guys, i appreciate it a lot.

Best.

What does your 6700k not do well for your current workload?

1 Like

Not yet. The 6700K is still pretty good at single core stuff.

AM4, as a socket offering, is bound to run out of steam soon ( within next year or two). I can imagine Zen 3 on AM4 but I would expect Zen 4 to have enough of a performance and feature uplift to demand a new socket (DDR5 and PCIe 5.0 et al).

Tl;dr
Change platforms when Zen 4 comes out. 6700K is good enough for now imo.

What are you doing with the machine?

Depending on what you are using the system for.
I would say it’s worth it, when you also do productivity stuff.
If you don’t do that much productivity stuff,
then a 3900x isn’t worth considering.

For gaming depending on the games you play and how you play them.
A 6700K is pretty decent for many games.
But some games can benefit from having more cores / threads.
So that scenario a Ryzen5 3600X or Ryzen 7 3700X / 3800X could be a benefit,
depending on the gpu also.
A 3900X isn’t worth it for gaming at all.

I’d jump on it.

Less in the wild security issues, 200% more cores and roughly equal or better single threaded performance.

Plus newer board support for PCIe4 SSDs, etc.

edit:
Again, does depend what you’re doing but… 4 cores aint much these days. If you do anything other than gaming, the 3900X will destroy it.

I have a 6700 non k at work and a 2700x at home… it isn’t even close (for multi-threaded stuff). The 3900x is 50-60% on top of that…

1 Like

Yup agree.
Skylake is pretty old by now.
So for certain use cases it could be worth considering upgrading.

Yeah, put another way - i don’t think you’d upgrade and feel let down by it. It’s a much, much larger step than intel has offered to their top end consumer platform customers in living memory.

even back in the 90s, a 70-100% jump from say 386DX to 486DX was almost unheard of.

The two biggest jumps i’ve seen in my life were 386-486 and 486-pentium… and this is a bigger jump than that.

Admittedly now though GPU is where stuff is at for games. So long as you have “enough” cpu. And a 6700k is just barely enough (maybe some things will struggle with <6 cores today), depending on your card.

1 Like

Yoi will shit your pants in excitement do it

1 Like

Bump diddy bump.

Thank you, all for your input i will consider every viewpoint when making my decision.

$40 of the ASUS TUF AMD4 board made me buy it. but im thinking of returning it and holding off a bit due to this whole COVID-19 stuff that will effect my work/pay.

thanks again, sorry for late reply, been busy with COVID-19 bullshit.

Imagine going from an Athlon 64 to a q6600 over the course of 1-2 years.

That was 4x the cores and if OCed a good chunk more ST performance.

1 Like

I actually went Pentium D 930 to q6600 which would have been a similar jump. Around the same time frame at least.

But at that point the focus was mostly (or at least significantly) on GPU.

Back in the 386-486-pentium days, GPUs (or rather 3d accelerator cards) didn’t exist, and a CPU that ran 2x faster generally translated directly into game frame rate, almost 1:1 correlation :slight_smile:

I’m a bit younger than you but I do recall a PD 930 being more powerful overall than a single core A64 (though not the X2s)

I never really got to live through software rendering though. I’ve pretty much ALWAYS had some sort of GPU.