X99 vs X79 for new build
Tags:
- Hewlett Packard
-
Systems
- New Build
Last response: in Systems
MrRealitySpeaks
September 30, 2014 5:53:19 AM
I'm working towards building an editing rig for myself to replace my horrid 3 year old, factory made HP desktop. Essentially I want to know whether I should stick with the older chipset, or move onto the newer X99. The reason why I don't want to really make that jump is because I'm for the most part, uninformed about it. I know that it supports the new Broadwell CPUs and DDR4 RAM. Other than that, my knowledge is minimal. Any suggestions or tips are welcome.
More about : x99 x79 build
-
Reply to MrRealitySpeaks
JackNaylorPE
September 30, 2014 7:02:21 AM
USB 3.0 and DDR4 are the most obvious .... but with X79 being 3 years old, it's not long before it enters end of life stage .... been there before .... had two users with 1156 boards fail and replaced under warranty .... problem was they replaced with 1155 as 1156 stock was depleted which meant buying new CPUs
http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/X79-vs-X99-Wh...
http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/X79-vs-X99-Wh...
-
Reply to JackNaylorPE
m
0
l
mapesdhs
September 30, 2014 7:08:13 AM
Haswell-E, not Broadwell, are the new CPUs. And yes, DDR4 is costly.
X79 builds can still be very potent, especially if done via the best of what is available
from the used market (I just bagged a new 3970X for only 245 UKP, works peachy!).
What apps do you want to use? Tasks like After Effects need a lot of RAM, so an X99
build with DDR4 would be expensive (ie. 32GB+ recommended).
If you can exploit CUDA for acceleration of the apps you use (eg. AE, Octane Render
plugin, Blender, etc.) then the newer 5820K's limited PCIe lanes are annoying - in
that respect an older 3K or 4K series CPU does have an advantage. If you can afford
it, the 5930K is probably optimal (shame the 8-core is so expensive).
Search my posts on toms, I've posted a lot about these issues, especially wrt AE and CUDA.
A used GTX 580 (preferably 3GB) is an excellent card for CUDA with apps like AE, Blender, etc.
My system has four of them, it's faster than two Titan Blacks for AE. Hope to test soon with a
980, should be interesting.
Do you have the budget to buy all-new? Or do you want to save on costs by obtaining used parts
where that's sensible? (or indeed new items via normal as I've done with the 3970X) I've saved
more than $1500 buying used or near-new 1475W PSUs (Thermaltake Toughpower XT Gold), ditto
SSDs, mbds, cases, coolers, etc. I tend to buy the RAM and case fans new though.
It's possible to get some nice X79 board bargains - I keep buying the ASUS P9X79 WS, sorting out
another two builds atm, one with a 3930K, the other with the aforementioned 3970X. H100i coolers
in both cases, usually in a HAF 932; 4.7GHz minimum overclock is no problem. I use Nanoxia Deep
Silence PWM fans throughout (replace all stock Corsair/Coolermaster fans for better noise, etc.)
Now to the caveats, which I expect some responants might jump on without reading ahead...
The down side of X79 is it's outdated degree of SATA3 provision, ie. only two native SATA3 ports,
which is very annoying. 3rd-party controllers such as Marvell really aren't any good, performance
is often faster from an Intel SATA2 port (and Marvell's drivers can be problematic at times). I've
not tested an ASMedia SATA3 controller yet, not had time. X79 boards also don't have M.2 or
SATA Express, and PCIe v3 is only possible with 4K series CPUs (though often the difference in
real world tasks is negligible).
Thus, the real gain from X99 is the much larger number of native Intel SATA3 ports, M.2 provision,
SATA Express in some cases, PCIe v3 by default, etc. If you can afford it overall, I'd recommend
X99 purely for these reasons alone (I would get the ASUS X99-E WS).
If you're budget limited though, especially if used parts are the only way you can afford to put
together a decent system, then x79 certainly has a lot of utility, offering good performance
without breaking the bank. The provided ports are enough for a fast C-drive and general data
SSDs on the Intel SATA3 ports, a windows paging SSD on an Intel SATA2 port (helps relieve
space & usage from the C-drive in systems with lots of RAM - the units I build normally have 64GB),
and the Marvell/ASMedia ports are ok for a RAID1 of two rust spinners (normal HDDs I mean). Having
the max 64GB RAM alone in an X79 build will be half the cost of the same capacity for an X99 setup.
So, it all depends on your budget. Note that I've made an assumption you would benefit from GPU
acceleration, and thus my mbd suggestion errs towards a board with lots of slots and loads of PCIe
provision. You could use a lesser board if you don't intend on using multiple GPUs, but that's not
really building in much future proofing.
Here's a typical X79 build I did a while ago for someone, give you some idea of what I mean:
http://www.sgidepot.co.uk/sgidepot/feedback.html#PC1
CUDA discussion with respect to AE:
forums.creativecow.net/thread/2/1019120
CUDA benchmark showing GPU scaling (hmm, seems to be down atm, try later):
http://www.randomcontrol.com/arionbench
My own AE system, another typical X79 build exploiting largely used parts (eg. the mbd was only 170 UKP):
http://www.sgidepot.co.uk/misc/3930K_quad580_13.jpg
And what I'd used on whoever at Intel decided never to upgrade the X79 chipset with more Intel SATA3
and not release an 8-core CPU...
http://www.sgidepot.co.uk/misc/TigerII.jpg
Hmm, ditto whoever decided the max RAM for X99 would still be a measly 64GB.
Ian.
PS. I've dealt with a lot of video pro people in recent years. USB3 really isn't that
relevant at all. Handy for backups, but eSATA makes more sense as then one
can use SSDs without the device being hamstrung by the USB controller.
X79 builds can still be very potent, especially if done via the best of what is available
from the used market (I just bagged a new 3970X for only 245 UKP, works peachy!).
What apps do you want to use? Tasks like After Effects need a lot of RAM, so an X99
build with DDR4 would be expensive (ie. 32GB+ recommended).
If you can exploit CUDA for acceleration of the apps you use (eg. AE, Octane Render
plugin, Blender, etc.) then the newer 5820K's limited PCIe lanes are annoying - in
that respect an older 3K or 4K series CPU does have an advantage. If you can afford
it, the 5930K is probably optimal (shame the 8-core is so expensive).
Search my posts on toms, I've posted a lot about these issues, especially wrt AE and CUDA.
A used GTX 580 (preferably 3GB) is an excellent card for CUDA with apps like AE, Blender, etc.
My system has four of them, it's faster than two Titan Blacks for AE. Hope to test soon with a
980, should be interesting.
Do you have the budget to buy all-new? Or do you want to save on costs by obtaining used parts
where that's sensible? (or indeed new items via normal as I've done with the 3970X) I've saved
more than $1500 buying used or near-new 1475W PSUs (Thermaltake Toughpower XT Gold), ditto
SSDs, mbds, cases, coolers, etc. I tend to buy the RAM and case fans new though.
It's possible to get some nice X79 board bargains - I keep buying the ASUS P9X79 WS, sorting out
another two builds atm, one with a 3930K, the other with the aforementioned 3970X. H100i coolers
in both cases, usually in a HAF 932; 4.7GHz minimum overclock is no problem. I use Nanoxia Deep
Silence PWM fans throughout (replace all stock Corsair/Coolermaster fans for better noise, etc.)
Now to the caveats, which I expect some responants might jump on without reading ahead...
The down side of X79 is it's outdated degree of SATA3 provision, ie. only two native SATA3 ports,
which is very annoying. 3rd-party controllers such as Marvell really aren't any good, performance
is often faster from an Intel SATA2 port (and Marvell's drivers can be problematic at times). I've
not tested an ASMedia SATA3 controller yet, not had time. X79 boards also don't have M.2 or
SATA Express, and PCIe v3 is only possible with 4K series CPUs (though often the difference in
real world tasks is negligible).
Thus, the real gain from X99 is the much larger number of native Intel SATA3 ports, M.2 provision,
SATA Express in some cases, PCIe v3 by default, etc. If you can afford it overall, I'd recommend
X99 purely for these reasons alone (I would get the ASUS X99-E WS).
If you're budget limited though, especially if used parts are the only way you can afford to put
together a decent system, then x79 certainly has a lot of utility, offering good performance
without breaking the bank. The provided ports are enough for a fast C-drive and general data
SSDs on the Intel SATA3 ports, a windows paging SSD on an Intel SATA2 port (helps relieve
space & usage from the C-drive in systems with lots of RAM - the units I build normally have 64GB),
and the Marvell/ASMedia ports are ok for a RAID1 of two rust spinners (normal HDDs I mean). Having
the max 64GB RAM alone in an X79 build will be half the cost of the same capacity for an X99 setup.
So, it all depends on your budget. Note that I've made an assumption you would benefit from GPU
acceleration, and thus my mbd suggestion errs towards a board with lots of slots and loads of PCIe
provision. You could use a lesser board if you don't intend on using multiple GPUs, but that's not
really building in much future proofing.
Here's a typical X79 build I did a while ago for someone, give you some idea of what I mean:
http://www.sgidepot.co.uk/sgidepot/feedback.html#PC1
CUDA discussion with respect to AE:
forums.creativecow.net/thread/2/1019120
CUDA benchmark showing GPU scaling (hmm, seems to be down atm, try later):
http://www.randomcontrol.com/arionbench
My own AE system, another typical X79 build exploiting largely used parts (eg. the mbd was only 170 UKP):
http://www.sgidepot.co.uk/misc/3930K_quad580_13.jpg
And what I'd used on whoever at Intel decided never to upgrade the X79 chipset with more Intel SATA3
and not release an 8-core CPU...
http://www.sgidepot.co.uk/misc/TigerII.jpg
Hmm, ditto whoever decided the max RAM for X99 would still be a measly 64GB.
Ian.
PS. I've dealt with a lot of video pro people in recent years. USB3 really isn't that
relevant at all. Handy for backups, but eSATA makes more sense as then one
can use SSDs without the device being hamstrung by the USB controller.
-
Reply to mapesdhs
m
0
l
Read discussions in other Systems categories
!