if you have read that, then it’s a sensible choice.
Ryzen 9’s are really good. i haven’t used an intel cpu since my last pentium celeron 900mhz so i can’t speak for them. but i’ve hard ryzen are a good choice.
mine is a 5950x with a base clock of 3.8 so i’d say a 7900X is really good. the X versions seems to be a good extra value, but beware of the price differential.
the 3d seems to be 3dvcache (man what’s wrong with the people naming products). personally i’d avoid new tech like that, it’s usually immature and introduce weird bottlenecks and quirks. and are potentially more expensive to produce (due to being new, have new production pipelines, and have less market share), so less value. i rather a more powerful cpu like the 7900x. personally.
you might also get a lot more oomph going to ryzen 9 (opposed to 7). since i’m a developer and i use cpp a lot, i prefer the ryzen 9.
but beware you might find a big diff due to market.
on my local market i see a diff of 180usd. is up to you and your workflow if it’s worth it. both are good.
if i were to find a … 30% discount on the 78 and i were in your situation i’d think it thrice.
keep in mind i use a 5950x and i’m fine. so don’t worry too much.
90% of the time is just sitting there idle.
it only helps when recompiling the whole engine (which you wouldn’t do), packaging the game for the first time (which you do only once until you delete the cache), or modifying materials that have ton of permutations (which you should try to optimize).
and like i said, faster core is better than more cores once you go above… 8 i think.
i can’t say what you need to do. but if it makes sense to you. i’m not entirely sure you’ll need those extra 4gb, but with lumen and ray tracing it might give you a boost.
yeah i think so. good point also to think of your system as a “starter” one. not go for ultimate before you started.
i used to use amd gpus and i liked them. imho they tend to have better support on linux. amd tend to be much more cooperative to open source.
nvidia has a lot of vendor-lockin which i don’t like. tend to be more aggressively closed. but that’s a preference.
so both amd and nvidia have different techs. like fsr and dlss.
or cuda. it usually matters if it really matters to you. otherwise they are comparable.
imho its more a matter of preference, since, if you are making a game, you can’t control what card your players will use. so someone will use the card you haven’t.
there’s a considerable group of ppl that don’t enjoy upscaling and taa/tsr (which i think works in both). so fsr/dlss are less valuable than they seem on (marketting) paper.
on windows nvidia works well, there is a particular bug with corrupted ui that gets fixed by completely uninstalling and reinstalling the drivers (potentially due to an old driver).
on linux it works well too, though the last driver has an annoying bug with the compositor. not fatal but annoying.
i haven’t come across to bugs on amd on the forum. maybe by chance, maybe due to market share. dunno.
if you’re using windows i’d say both are stable and pretty on par. they differ on the very cutting edge, one day one the next the other.
cutting edge tech is bound to change and get dropped, sometimes it gets standardized and all cards do it.
i havent used amd for the past 4 years so i cant say. all i know is that on linux there’s one person that had an issue, but they still can work with it. i haven’t heard of amd or nvidia specific issues on linux on the last 6 months.
so i’d say both are pretty much the same unless you go for specific tech, which, if you’re starting, i would not worry about.