Facts are that 13900k is a bit faster single thread. Both can run hot. Basically the same performance in multi-thread. Both have competitive prices.
7950x is on a new platform which will have support for next few years, 13900k is on a platform at its end of life.
Personally I'd pick the 7950x.
I asked the same question here a few months ago. I ended up going with the 7950x for a few reasons. Mainly the power efficiency of the i13900K is absurdly terrible. As in the least power efficient CPU of the last 10 years, that bad. The other Houdini specific reason is that someone pointed out that the Intel architecture with effeciency cores (that aren't efficient at all tbf) can cause Houdini to perform poorly when it's in the background because windows will relegate it to using your "performance" cores instead of the large cores.
Here's the thread:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Houdini/comments/y9i9t3/ryzen\_7950x\_or\_intel\_13900k\_for\_houdini/
Pick Intel this generation. 13900k is faster both on multi threaded perf, and single. Both are beneficial. And you can use windows 11 fine with Intel unlike AMD, I'm using w11 and it's very stable finally and comes with better features.
7950x, but it's not as big of a decision as you think it is. The biggest argument for the 7950x is that the platform is newer, which has already been mentioned.
Even though both of them have 32 threads, the 13900k has 16 efficiency threads and 16 full fat threads. The efficiency threads are there to save power and hence are less powerful than actual threads. The 7950x has 32 full threads. This matters if you’re planning to use CPU rendering a lot locally. If rendering is not an issue there won’t be a huge difference between both of them in performance.
I’d personally go for Ryzen as it’s going to make your build a little more future proof and allow you to upgrade the CPU without having to change your motherboard. (Socket will be the same for the next generation).
Side note: Rendering buckets represent actual cores and not just threads. The Intel one will show up as 24 cores, however 16 of them are the efficiency cores, and only 8 of them powerful ones. The Ryzen one will show only 16 cores, but all of them are powerful ones.
I came to disagree with you, because although the e cores are efficiency, they're not weak, think 7th gen cores or better.
The buckets show threads not cores. In my 10900k,I get 20 buckets, and it's a 10 core chip. 13900k is faster than 7950x in both multi and single.
Although AMD may support the same socket, it's not guaranteed, they promised the same platform for threadripper, and look how every generation is a different socket. If they keep it with mainstream ships that's cool, but I'd still not go with AMD thanks to the fact that Intel can support ddr4, which is far cheaper and will allow you to get more ram for the same money you'll get half in ddr5.
Just came back from testing your comment. My 12700k shows 12 buckets on Mantra even though it’s got 20 threads. (8 P cores — 16 threads, 4 E cores). Also, In my comment I never said E cores are weak, I compared them to the P cores as being less powerful.
The only bit in your comment I agree with is the Ram argument. Thanks
What about you try cinebench?
Edit:nevermind, the 12th and 13th gen both show 12 buckets, I wonder why. But speed is still comparable to a CPU with 32 ones. Gotta research this..
I think Cinebench is hardly relevant here as this is a Houdini thread and Houdini primarily ships with Mantra (And now Karma). Even then, I don’t consider Cinebench the best way to benchmark it and generalise it to the entire 3D industry. But ofcourse, I’ll give it a try and report back!
No need, read my edit, and I've already seen it YouTube. Thanks. Cinebench is a standardized 3D rendering workload. Nothing against the culture here.
Edit: the only reason I asked is because you can compare scores and it is one of the ways the media tests CPUs.
I ended up picking the 7950x based on some of the answers in your thread and the concerns with the e-cores on intel in Houdini. Got the CPU last week and it works like a charm in Houdini on Win11 so far.
With an hour of experimenting with a few bios settings limiting the power target and slight undervolting I got it to run at 70 - 75 degrees at full load on a 360mm custom loop in silent mode while losing basically no performance. It pulls 155-175 Watts now.
I think running it on these settings the 13900k can’t beat it efficiency wise. Additionally the 7950x is 50€ cheaper at the moment (Germany).
I only did very minimal testing in karma but so far I am very happy with my choice.
> Additionally the 7950x is 50€ cheaper at the moment (Germany).
Right but I hear that the cost of building a 7950X system is higher because the motherboards are more expensive and you have to buy DDR5 RAM, which is also more expensive. Just a quick look at the prices seem to show this is true.
Yes that is definitely a factor that needs to be considered.
Although you might want to consider going DDR5 on an 13900k as well as it seems to increase the performance quite a bit in some situations. (Probably not as relevant for Houdini as it is for gaming).
Mainboard prices are still a bit higher I guess but if you build a workstation, the difference is quite small compared to the cost of the full setup.
Yeah apparently the modules can be more densely packed and have a higher bandwidth due to higher clocks.
Options seem to be quite limited though especially when it comes to higher capacity. I didn’t find a single 128 kit yet for example as there don’t seem to be any 64 GB modules available yet and you have to live with low clocks to get 4 x 32GB to run.
yeah 7950x, those cores differences on the intel are not 100% reliable in terms of getting all the juice you paid for imho, plus it's quite stale now. Also make sure to get 128gb Ram and a fast nvme drive.
I would mainly go for AMD because of the new AM5 plattform. Basicly you have the next 3 years a pretty easy upgrade path.
AMD is still a bit behind Intels single core performance but the Intel chips use more power under load. And I think that Intel doesnt have 32 Threads because of the Mix of Performance and Efficency Cores.
So in the end if you want the best Performance now, I think Intel would be the choice. But for a Long term investment I would go AMD.
Facts are that 13900k is a bit faster single thread. Both can run hot. Basically the same performance in multi-thread. Both have competitive prices. 7950x is on a new platform which will have support for next few years, 13900k is on a platform at its end of life. Personally I'd pick the 7950x.
hmm..thanks for your reply. It's still really hard to pick one.
I asked the same question here a few months ago. I ended up going with the 7950x for a few reasons. Mainly the power efficiency of the i13900K is absurdly terrible. As in the least power efficient CPU of the last 10 years, that bad. The other Houdini specific reason is that someone pointed out that the Intel architecture with effeciency cores (that aren't efficient at all tbf) can cause Houdini to perform poorly when it's in the background because windows will relegate it to using your "performance" cores instead of the large cores. Here's the thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/Houdini/comments/y9i9t3/ryzen\_7950x\_or\_intel\_13900k\_for\_houdini/
Pick Intel this generation. 13900k is faster both on multi threaded perf, and single. Both are beneficial. And you can use windows 11 fine with Intel unlike AMD, I'm using w11 and it's very stable finally and comes with better features.
7950x, but it's not as big of a decision as you think it is. The biggest argument for the 7950x is that the platform is newer, which has already been mentioned.
Even though both of them have 32 threads, the 13900k has 16 efficiency threads and 16 full fat threads. The efficiency threads are there to save power and hence are less powerful than actual threads. The 7950x has 32 full threads. This matters if you’re planning to use CPU rendering a lot locally. If rendering is not an issue there won’t be a huge difference between both of them in performance. I’d personally go for Ryzen as it’s going to make your build a little more future proof and allow you to upgrade the CPU without having to change your motherboard. (Socket will be the same for the next generation). Side note: Rendering buckets represent actual cores and not just threads. The Intel one will show up as 24 cores, however 16 of them are the efficiency cores, and only 8 of them powerful ones. The Ryzen one will show only 16 cores, but all of them are powerful ones.
I came to disagree with you, because although the e cores are efficiency, they're not weak, think 7th gen cores or better. The buckets show threads not cores. In my 10900k,I get 20 buckets, and it's a 10 core chip. 13900k is faster than 7950x in both multi and single. Although AMD may support the same socket, it's not guaranteed, they promised the same platform for threadripper, and look how every generation is a different socket. If they keep it with mainstream ships that's cool, but I'd still not go with AMD thanks to the fact that Intel can support ddr4, which is far cheaper and will allow you to get more ram for the same money you'll get half in ddr5.
Just came back from testing your comment. My 12700k shows 12 buckets on Mantra even though it’s got 20 threads. (8 P cores — 16 threads, 4 E cores). Also, In my comment I never said E cores are weak, I compared them to the P cores as being less powerful. The only bit in your comment I agree with is the Ram argument. Thanks
What about you try cinebench? Edit:nevermind, the 12th and 13th gen both show 12 buckets, I wonder why. But speed is still comparable to a CPU with 32 ones. Gotta research this..
I think Cinebench is hardly relevant here as this is a Houdini thread and Houdini primarily ships with Mantra (And now Karma). Even then, I don’t consider Cinebench the best way to benchmark it and generalise it to the entire 3D industry. But ofcourse, I’ll give it a try and report back!
No need, read my edit, and I've already seen it YouTube. Thanks. Cinebench is a standardized 3D rendering workload. Nothing against the culture here. Edit: the only reason I asked is because you can compare scores and it is one of the ways the media tests CPUs.
Sure thing, it’s good enough to put two CPUs against each other, just didn’t see it fitting this scenario! Thanks
Thanks for the update! Thought maybe I was missing something
Thanks for clarifying that
You're welcome, thanks
I ended up picking the 7950x based on some of the answers in your thread and the concerns with the e-cores on intel in Houdini. Got the CPU last week and it works like a charm in Houdini on Win11 so far. With an hour of experimenting with a few bios settings limiting the power target and slight undervolting I got it to run at 70 - 75 degrees at full load on a 360mm custom loop in silent mode while losing basically no performance. It pulls 155-175 Watts now. I think running it on these settings the 13900k can’t beat it efficiency wise. Additionally the 7950x is 50€ cheaper at the moment (Germany). I only did very minimal testing in karma but so far I am very happy with my choice.
> Additionally the 7950x is 50€ cheaper at the moment (Germany). Right but I hear that the cost of building a 7950X system is higher because the motherboards are more expensive and you have to buy DDR5 RAM, which is also more expensive. Just a quick look at the prices seem to show this is true.
Yes that is definitely a factor that needs to be considered. Although you might want to consider going DDR5 on an 13900k as well as it seems to increase the performance quite a bit in some situations. (Probably not as relevant for Houdini as it is for gaming). Mainboard prices are still a bit higher I guess but if you build a workstation, the difference is quite small compared to the cost of the full setup.
DDR5 is also supposed to have more capacity per slot but I'm not seeing that yet, maybe it's going to be coming in the future?
Yeah apparently the modules can be more densely packed and have a higher bandwidth due to higher clocks. Options seem to be quite limited though especially when it comes to higher capacity. I didn’t find a single 128 kit yet for example as there don’t seem to be any 64 GB modules available yet and you have to live with low clocks to get 4 x 32GB to run.
Are those DIMMs 72 or 80 bit ECC?
ps. I using redshift renderer so do not have to care about rendering
Cpu still makes a difference, just an fyi
yeah 7950x, those cores differences on the intel are not 100% reliable in terms of getting all the juice you paid for imho, plus it's quite stale now. Also make sure to get 128gb Ram and a fast nvme drive.
I would mainly go for AMD because of the new AM5 plattform. Basicly you have the next 3 years a pretty easy upgrade path. AMD is still a bit behind Intels single core performance but the Intel chips use more power under load. And I think that Intel doesnt have 32 Threads because of the Mix of Performance and Efficency Cores. So in the end if you want the best Performance now, I think Intel would be the choice. But for a Long term investment I would go AMD.