i7-9850H vs i9-9980HK for 4k video editing

Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by jack574, Dec 13, 2019.

  1. Padraig O Cuinn

    Padraig O Cuinn Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    13
    Messages:
    240
    Likes Received:
    38
    Trophy Points:
    41
    I work as a character TD and always go for xeon models. Keep in mind that any DCC will only use 1 core anyway so it depends really what else you will be doing but on another note remind yourself that cons will have 2 less cores to i9
     
  2. jack574

    jack574 Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    10
    Messages:
    198
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Thanks for the reply. What does DCC mean?

    What are "cons"?
     
  3. Charles P. Jefferies

    Charles P. Jefferies Lead Moderator Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    22,084
    Messages:
    36,423
    Likes Received:
    4,503
    Trophy Points:
    681
    If you needed ECC, yes you'd have to get the Xeon, otherwise I think it wouldn't be worth the extra money.

    Charles
     
    Dennismungai and jack574 like this.
  4. jack574

    jack574 Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    10
    Messages:
    198
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Great, thanks for the advice!
     
  5. tilleroftheearth

    tilleroftheearth Wisdom listens quietly...

    Reputations:
    4,965
    Messages:
    12,347
    Likes Received:
    2,348
    Trophy Points:
    631
    This would depend on the $$$ difference between them and the number of years the platform would be expected to be in service for.

    Note: not just the cost difference between the CPU's; but rather the entire platform difference (O/S, RAM price differences and any other requirements for the Xeon system.

    See:
    https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-i9-9980HK-vs-Intel-Xeon-E-2286M/3451vs3491

    There are minor nominal performance differences in favor of the Xeon platform, but the biggest benefits may not be seen in such metrics. Rather, they may be seen in the more stable/glitch-free operations until the platform is retired (vs. a consumer platform).

    Your call on whether the price difference is significant or not to you. For myself; even an additional 20% total cost would make this platform move worthwhile to me over the next 5 to 7 years... if it was still within my budget and if it was also in a chassis that wouldn't limit its performance in any way too. ;)

    In addition; for the level of CPU's you're considering, the RTX3000 is not what I would choose for long-term use. The RTX5000 or at the very minimum, the RTX4000 instead for a purchase made today.

    Specifically to your question of what is the better processor? The Xeon, of course. Inside the Dell Precision 7740 specifically?

    See (be sure to translate to English):
    https://www.51nb.com/review/20190802/870.html

    The Dell has some major quirks and very suboptimal keyboard/pointing device issues. But for 'performance', it seems to be near the top right now.

    Yeah; I'm very surprised. Still I would be sticking to a TP myself. ;)

     
  6. jack574

    jack574 Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    10
    Messages:
    198
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Thanks. The cost increase is about £110 to go from the i9 to the xeon.

    The jump in performance from the i7 to the i9 (6 cores to 8 cores and 12MB cache to 16MB cache) seems like quite a bit (based on cpubenchmark etc) but the jump from i9 to xeon seems a lot less, and on the face of it not worth the money.

    https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compar...on-E-2286M-vs-Intel-i7-9850H/3451vs3491vs3478

    However, the point of my post was to ask if there was anything else to consider other than theoretical benchmark performance. Why would it be more worthwhile to you over the next 5-7 years? Would that apply to a laptop too?

    And yes, my question was specifically in 7740 ideally...

    I will have a read of https://www.51nb.com/review/20190802/870.html. Was there anything specific in there you were highlighting?

    Regarding the GPU - obviously the RTX 4000 and 5000 are better than the 3000, but from what I've seen the 3000 should be fine. The 4000 is an extra £370 and the 5000 is an extra £1,100. Is there a specific reason you think the 3000 won't be good enough?

    Thanks again
     
  7. tilleroftheearth

    tilleroftheearth Wisdom listens quietly...

    Reputations:
    4,965
    Messages:
    12,347
    Likes Received:
    2,348
    Trophy Points:
    631
    £110 is negligible for the upgraded CPU. The total cost of the platform is more important though (especially 128GB non-ECC RAM vs. 128GB ECC RAM plus any additional O/S or other licensing fees, if any). Speaking just on the CPU performance; easily worth the one time cost over the next 5 to 7 years though.

    There are also these points to consider if the three main differences are important to you:

    See:
    https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/compare.html?productIds=192993,192990

    As for that review, the touchpad/TrackPoint/keyboard weaknesses are, IMO, glaring. There is also the slightly schizophrenic nature of the M.2 Slot assignments (although I've seen that in other platforms too).

    I don't know if the RTX 3000 will be good enough for you in 5 to 7 years down the road? Even if it is sufficient for your workloads today.

    Again, £1,100 over the next 5 to 7 years is negligible when you also consider that you will be enjoying the top-end performance from day one to day done too.

    I would rather pay for this performance increase than any 'insurance' to keep the computer going for a few more years. :)
     
  8. jack574

    jack574 Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    10
    Messages:
    198
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    41
    The £110 includes the upgraded OS (£30 extra for the xeon, £80 extra for the OS). I don't need ECC RAM, so as far as I can see I'd be paying £110 for a 4% increase in performance...

    I don't understand the significance of the three main differences...

    Tbh, I think the RTX 3000 is way more than I need now, so I'm already factoring in possible future needs. I get by OK with my CAD and Photoshop work on my 7 year old i7-3840QM and Quadro K4000M (although some advance filters in PS run slowly). I can't edit 4k video, but from what I've read the i9 and RTX 3000 should be more than enough for that.

    Who knows what I'll get into in the future? But I guess even the RTX 5000 is low spec compared to some desktop setups.

    £1100 extra now exceeds my current funds, and perhaps that money would be better spent towards my next upgrade in 5-7 years time...

    Regarding the touchpad - I've always had Dells so am used to them - almost never use the PC without a mouse anyway really.

    It's a good article though, thanks for digging it out.
     
    tilleroftheearth likes this.
  9. jack574

    jack574 Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    10
    Messages:
    198
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    41
    I'm now considering your suggestion of an RTX 4000 instead of the 3000...

    Seems like the 3000 might not be so good for 4k video editing after all...
     
    tilleroftheearth likes this.
  10. tilleroftheearth

    tilleroftheearth Wisdom listens quietly...

    Reputations:
    4,965
    Messages:
    12,347
    Likes Received:
    2,348
    Trophy Points:
    631
Loading...

Share This Page