Skip to main content
alex.furer
alex.furer
Known Participant
April 6, 2019
Question

Intel Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0

  • April 6, 2019
  • 3 replies
  • 2630 views

Sooo... I ordered and paid a Intel Core i7-7820X (plus motherboard, ram etc) 3 months ago. Unfortunately Intel is incapable of delivering this CPU and I have to decide whether I keep waiting, switch to a higher model i9-9820X/i9-9900X or go a step down to the i7-7800X. Or even switch to AMD. But reliable source have tested and found that they are 20 - 30% slower on Adobe products.

Another option would be to return everything I have and switch to the 1151 platform...

I chose the X-299 platform because of 4 channel memory and the ability to eventually go to 128 GB of ram. I know that the i7-9900K can eat 128 GB of ram as well but on a 2 memory channel architecture. And I don't want to have to go back to selecting a motherboard.

My main question is, what's the experience of you out there which might have  a CPU that uses Intel® Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0 technology, if it's worth it to cough up more coin to switch up, or get the i7-7800Xone (similar specs in terms of clocking and so) but without Intel® Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0.

As far as I know the Adobe apps are not champions at using more cores, but rather prefer less cores with higher frequency. Which is Turbo Boost Max 3's premise.

Any input on this would be  greatly appreciated. I am mainly using Lightroom and Photoshop with large stitched panoramas and multi layer documents.

Thanks in advance for your five cents!

-Alex

This topic has been closed for replies.

3 replies

Ussnorway7605025
Ussnorway7605025
Legend
April 7, 2019

alex.furer  wrote

Where do you get the information that AMD out performs Intel with Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom?

I get it from experience and testing,

https://windowsforum.com/threads/ryzen.226374/

alex.furer  wrote

I guess it will be a different story for After Effects and Premiere

not so far

not tring to change your religion, if Intel is what you want to use thats fine, AMD had some issues at the start because board makers had not put the effort in but as long as you don't allow Microsoft to control drivers things are better now

alex.furer
alex.furerAuthor
Known Participant
April 7, 2019

Thanks again Ussnorway​!

Ha ha ha, I feel you about the religion thing. I admit, I am an Intel boy. But then again I also got there from experience.

Somehow I am tempted to go for the AMD... I like adventures, and I like speed. But tweaking drivers like in the good old days. Gotta admit I got lazy at micromanaging my system. Rather use my time creatively.

Anyways, thanks, I'll sleep on it.

Ussnorway7605025
Ussnorway7605025
Legend
April 6, 2019
  1. Ryzen out performs Intel [flat statment]
  2. ime no it's not worth it and Adobe will not use the extra punch so you only end up spending more money on something that runs hotter for no benefit
  3. your understanding that Adobe apps ignore extra cores is mostly correct, Dimension is the main champion of modern cpu options and an I7 will run that fine but yes an I9 ir Ryzen will run even better

overall I agree with Mylenium but its your money mate

alex.furer
alex.furerAuthor
Known Participant
April 6, 2019

Thank you Ussnorway​!

I already spend the money 3 months ago as I said in my initial post. That said, the distributor here would actually switch my motherboard, cooling and sell me a Thread Ripper 2920X instead of the i7-7820 I can't get. But I am concerned about money and I would actually spend about 250 more doing this.

I had an AMD system a few years back and had trouble. But I was running Maya 3D at this time and I am pretty sure AMD improved. Still I don't like the T Junction of AMD at 68 degrees Celsius.

Where do you get the information that AMD out performs Intel with Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom? I guess it will be a different story for After Effects and Premiere. But from what I read so far form Pugetsystems and others that AMD is 20 - 30& slower..

Would you have some links I could read up?

Mylenium
Mylenium
Legend
April 6, 2019

Those are internal optimizations determined by how the app is compiled and by the processor's own smarts. It may never even kick in and if it does, you probably won't notice any difference between "conventional" TurboBoost and some advanced feature that gives you another one or two percent boost on top. You are seriously overthinking this. So for what it's worth, get whatever your budget allows and if you save 50 bucks in the process to have a nice dinner with your friends then al lthe better...

Mylenium

alex.furer
alex.furerAuthor
Known Participant
April 6, 2019

Thank you for your input Mylenium​

I guess you are right. I was hoping that the 500 Mhz higher frequency on one or two cores factually 25% more speed and I'd expect maybe 10 - 15% more in the real world. Those 500 Mhz in itself is faster then the machine I used to do 3D on 20 years ago... I wish the Adobe apps would run better on multiple cores. But I read it's happily crashing along when Turbo Boost 3 is enabled besides not making use of more than 4 cores. or getting slower over time...

But yeah, besides loosing 8 PCIe lanes I guess I will go with the i7-7800 and upgrade in the future as $500 in price difference can actually buy a lot of friends many dinners.

Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices