The Worst CPU & GPU Purchases of 2019

[Julio Franco]

For the third year in a row, before the year comes to an end, lets look back at some of the worst CPU and PC graphics products released in 2019. Just like we have guides dedicated to the best CPUs and best GPUs you can buy, this is our hall of shame equivalent. Not meaning to create controversy, take this piece as informational light reading for the holidays.

Read the full article here.

https://www.techspot.com/article/1964-worst-cpu-gpu-purchases-2019/

 

[QuantumPhysics]

#1 when you say "worst purchases", I'm only considering a CPU or GPU "worse" if it returns poor performance or suffers from material/ build quality flaws.

I am not considering a product of this nature "worse" just because there's another product made by another company that may outperform it in some aspects for the equivalent money.

We all know by now that workstations typically benefit from AMD while gamers get consistently higher performance from Intel CPU.


#2 I built a computer using a Core i9 9900K about a week or two before I even heard of the Core i9 9900KS - which had a price difference around $200, but saw a significant price drop almost immediately - with another during Black Friday-Cyber Monday.

$699 on the sticker... $449 today.

Pricing of these things has been completely volatile.

#3 It must be taken to account that people who are upgrading to a new CPU are not likely to upgrade their motherboards to accommodate a CPU from a different maker due to the high price of motherboards - especially in gaming. Until there's a motherboard that can accept a CPU from either maker, people who buy one CPU will pretty much be locked into that CPU's line.

#4 The 1650 isn't "useless". There are people out there - as well as corporations - building dirt cheap entry-level gaming desktops and the 1650 is most likely gonna be in them not only because it's cheap, but because it will work on a low-end PSU.

 

[veLa]

To me the stand out item on this list is the Asus TUF Gaming X3 Radeon RX 5700 XT.

Before I bought PowerColor's Red Devil variant, I took a look at it because of the low price. Boy am I glad I did my research. The lack of VRM cooling has this model running dangerously hot and the customer reviews online really reflect what an unacceptable product it is.

At least the other products on this list work as expected without frying themselves by running at over 100C at stock.

 

[Manu Arg]

I don't see why the 9900kf was a bad product, here in my country the price difference between K and KF was 120usd less, so it was actually a good deal

 

[neeyik]

#4 The 1650 isn't "useless". There are people out there - as well as corporations - building dirt cheap entry-level gaming desktops and the 1650 is most likely gonna be in them not only because it's cheap, but because it will work on a low-end PSU.

At $150, the 1650 is not compelling for gaming nor office applications. Why? Because the same price gets you an 8GB Radeon RX 570 or a GeForce 1650 Super for $10 more. Where gaming isn't important but multiple monitor outputs are, then you could have a Quadro NVS 310 for half the price or a 4x DP Quadro NVS 450 for the same price.

 

[JayNor]

Cascade lake x has dual avx512 per core, each including dlboost for ai acceleration. Can't get dual avx512 execution units per core in any other Intel chip at this price, and AMD has 0 avx512 units. If you're doing ai inference, this is the cpu for you. Next year, if there's a Cooper Lake X, it will have bfloat16 capabilities added to avx512 ... so you can have simd training and simd inference speed-up.

 

[JimboJoneson]

Ok everyone, now's the time for all your best "why Intel shouldn't be on this list" tirades. I see we have a few entries already, let's give it your best!

More seriously though, I thought this list was pretty spot on, but maybe the 5500xt should be in there in as well ... Although even that is a better value (and performance) than the 1650 so if you have to go with one of two, 1650 is, I suppose, the worse choice.

 

[theruck]

So techspot lists the intel 9900ks in the best and in the worst cpus now. bravo!

 

[JimboJoneson]

Cascade lake x has dual avx512 per core, each including dlboost for ai acceleration. Can't get dual avx512 execution units per core in any other Intel chip at this price, and AMD has 0 avx512 units. If you're doing ai inference, this is the cpu for you. Next year, if there's a Cooper Lake X, it will have bfloat16 capabilities added to avx512 ... so you can have simd training and simd inference speed-up.

In the context of this article, that's like saying the Radeon 7 wasn't a disappointing GPU because it could do openCL compute better than a Titan.

Which reminds me -- why isn't the Radeon7 on this list? The pricing on that was horrific.

 

[Cycloid Torus]

Severe flaws and unexpected issues (like the missing VESA mode 103 on R series AMD's GNC video cards - just try to run one on some of the older Dell systems), there is little reason to consider overly aggressive pricing a reason to classify as 'worst'.

I would buy a GTX 1650 for $110 any day. $150 is merely ridiculous.

 

[bviktor]

There's a 3rd low-profile 1650, the Asus GTX1650-O4G-LP-BRK. It comes with a nice backplate too.

And then you say it has nothing against the RX 570. Yeah, it's "only" TWICE as power efficient. 150W vs 75W TDP.

And to be frank, I'm getting really pissed that literally no one seems to care about power efficiency. Not even these days. We talk about pollution caused by coal and nuclear power, but somehow noone seems to realize that most important thing about reducing pollution is reducing power usage.

But efficiency? Nah, that doesn't matter. It's only for pussies. All that matters is price. What the heck.

 

[JimboJoneson]

Ok everyone, now's the time for all your best "why Intel NVidia shouldn't be on this list" tirades.
...

That's better ...

What, no AMD whiners? There's three AMD branded parts on this list ... can we get a little hate for that to even things out here?

The article is "worst purchases" ... not "worst products" - context people, context. The article even states why they chose the products they did ...

 

[Nobina]

There's a 3rd low-profile 1650, the Asus GTX1650-O4G-LP-BRK. It comes with a nice backplate too.

And then you say it has nothing against the RX 570. Yeah, it's "only" TWICE as power efficient. 150W vs 75W TDP.

And to be frank, I'm getting really pissed that literally no one seems to care about power efficiency. Not even these days. We talk about pollution caused by coal and nuclear power, but somehow noone seems to realize that most important thing about reducing pollution is reducing power usage.

But efficiency? Nah, that doesn't matter. It's only for pussies. All that matters is price. What the heck.

You guessed it. Efficiency matters little. It amounts to **** all over time. Not having a GPU at all is better than any GPU because it's more power efficient (0 watts).

I would also add any smartphones that cost around 1k are also shitty purchase considering how little they improved.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

There's a 3rd low-profile 1650, the Asus GTX1650-O4G-LP-BRK. It comes with a nice backplate too.

And then you say it has nothing against the RX 570. Yeah, it's "only" TWICE as power efficient. 150W vs 75W TDP.

And to be frank, I'm getting really pissed that literally no one seems to care about power efficiency. Not even these days. We talk about pollution caused by coal and nuclear power, but somehow noone seems to realize that most important thing about reducing pollution is reducing power usage.

But efficiency? Nah, that doesn't matter. It's only for pussies. All that matters is price. What the heck.

The minuscule power usage difference between a 570 and 1650 is nothing compared to the rampant pollution created by the processor manufacturing industry, the pollution created to ship that chip from china to the US, or the toxic byproducts that leak into the soil when said chips are discarded.

If the pollution difference between 150 and 75 watts is THAT big of a deal to you, stop buying all electronics altogether and live with nature, that is the only truly sustainable way to live. computers and electronics are all extraneous unnecessary items.

Of course this means going without the internet, so 99.99% of eco-warriors will never dream of doing this, and will settle for complaining about "muh power usage" on internet forums instead.

 

[hahahanoobs]

@JimboJoneson
3600X missing from this list. You're paying an extra $50 for nothing.
Athlon 3000G is missing too.
And the 5500XT. If NVIDIA has too many 1080Ti's, AMD has too many RX 480/580's.

 

[loki1944]

Coming from a 1080Ti @3440x1440p, buying a 2080Ti was the worst gpu purchase I have ever made; the tangible difference is nothing compared to going from 780Ti to 980Ti to 1080Ti.

 

[neeyik]

Cascade lake x has dual avx512 per core, each including dlboost for ai acceleration. Can't get dual avx512 execution units per core in any other Intel chip at this price, and AMD has 0 avx512 units. If you're doing ai inference, this is the cpu for you. Next year, if there's a Cooper Lake X, it will have bfloat16 capabilities added to avx512 ... so you can have simd training and simd inference speed-up.

For that specific application, the pricing of the Xeon Bronze and Silver models is pretty good - the Platinums, though, are far less attractive. Outside of that market and CLX struggles to offer much for the price.

So techspot lists the intel 9900ks in the best and in the worst cpus now. bravo!

The K version is on the ‘Best of...’, not the KS. For me, the latter deserves its place on this list because of the price difference between the two, for something that can be achieved with a bit tweaking, overclocking, and decent cooling. Yes, good coolers aren’t cheap but the one that comes with the retail versions of either CPU isn’t amazing anyway. The KF deserves its place because there is absolutely no reason to buy one over a K, or over any CPU for that matter...

Which reminds me -- why isn't the Radeon7 on this list? The pricing on that was horrific.

I have a bit of a soft spot for the Radeon VII. Yes, it's a thermonuclear monstrosity, but who doesn't want 16 GiB of HBM2 in their life? Newegg has one on sale for $500 at the moment, which is the same as a 2070 Super. They perform similar to each other but with the Radeon, you can drop '1 TB/s of bandwidth' into your daily conversations all the time. I mean, who needs to trace some rays, when you've got that kind of memory bandwidth?!

 

[godrilla]

How much was silicon lottery charging for a binned 9900k at 5ghz part again?
Update all core oc*
for reference.

 

[godrilla]

For that specific application, the pricing of the Xeon Bronze and Silver models is pretty good - the Platinums, though, are far less attractive. Outside of that market and CLX struggles to offer much for the price.


The K version is on the ‘Best of...’, not the KS. For me, the latter deserves its place on this list because of the price difference between the two, for something that can be achieved with a bit tweaking, overclocking, and decent cooling. Yes, good coolers aren’t cheap but the one that comes with the retail versions of either CPU isn’t amazing anyway. The KF deserves its place because there is absolutely no reason to buy one over a K, or over any CPU for that matter...


I have a bit of a soft spot for the Radeon VII. Yes, it's a thermonuclear monstrosity, but who doesn't want 16 GiB of HBM2 in their life? Newegg has one on sale for $500 at the moment, which is the same as a 2070 Super. They perform similar to each other but with the Radeon, you can drop '1 TB/s of bandwidth' into your daily conversations all the time. I mean, who needs to trace some rays, when you've got that kind of memory bandwidth?!

The xfx version was $450 on black Friday at newegg.

 

[JimboJoneson]

...
I have a bit of a soft spot for the Radeon VII. Yes, it's a thermonuclear monstrosity, but who doesn't want 16 GiB of HBM2 in their life? Newegg has one on sale for $500 at the moment, which is the same as a 2070 Super. They perform similar to each other but with the Radeon, you can drop '1 TB/s of bandwidth' into your daily conversations all the time. I mean, who needs to trace some rays, when you've got that kind of memory bandwidth?!

That's all you need ... a big number ...

It's not a bad card, especially if you can use some of its compute prowess. But I imagine paying the full MSRP at launch, then to see it disco'd just months later with a much lower priced 5700XT on its heals, may have caused some buyers remorse in some. Had the MSRP been $100 lower at launch, likely no one would have complained ...

 

[JimboJoneson]

@JimboJoneson
3600X missing from this list. You're paying an extra $50 for nothing.
Athlon 3000G is missing too.
And the 5500XT. If NVIDIA has too many 1080Ti's, AMD has too many RX 480/580's.

Fist of all, that "X" on the end of the model name is worth at least $50.

I think you missed the point though ... What I was asking was for people (AMD fanbois) to complain that AMD products were on the list to balance out the whining.

But I guess your suggested additions will do, (I already mentioned the 5500xt), not sure about the 3000G though ... for $50 it can hardly be a bad purchase ... (granted you aren't expecting quad core performance)

 

[Ravalo]

There's a 3rd low-profile 1650, the Asus GTX1650-O4G-LP-BRK. It comes with a nice backplate too.

And then you say it has nothing against the RX 570. Yeah, it's "only" TWICE as power efficient. 150W vs 75W TDP.

And to be frank, I'm getting really pissed that literally no one seems to care about power efficiency. Not even these days. We talk about pollution caused by coal and nuclear power, but somehow noone seems to realize that most important thing about reducing pollution is reducing power usage.

But efficiency? Nah, that doesn't matter. It's only for pussies. All that matters is price. What the heck.

So as an “eco warrior” myself (I just reuse old stuff and give it a new purpose or I just sell it) I plan on using my old pc as a minecraft server, and since the pc just consumes 90 watts (maybe even less because it’s a single core pc with integrated ati graphics) it might produce around 1,078 lbs of co2 (which can be reduced with solar panels or windmills)
The rx 570 itself will produce around 450 lbs of co2 while the gtx 1650 will produce 225 lbs of co2

I checked the cost per year and found that you’d be saving just 20$ by using the gtx 1650, then again the rx 570 is 100$ sooo....

 

[hahahanoobs]

Wouldn't, "Most disappointing..." have been a better title?

 

[JimboJoneson]

So as an “eco warrior” myself (I just reuse old stuff and give it a new purpose or I just sell it) I plan on using my old pc as a minecraft server, and since the pc just consumes 90 watts (maybe even less because it’s a single core pc with integrated ati graphics) it might produce around 1,078 lbs of co2 (which can be reduced with solar panels or windmills)
The rx 570 itself will produce around 450 lbs of co2 while the gtx 1650 will produce 225 lbs of co2
...

Breathing puts out about 1000lbs of CO2 per year ... Just sayin'

... and in Canada (where I live), the vast majority of our electricity comes from water - there's no CO2 from electricity produced by hydro ... So your numbers don't apply to Canadians

 

[wizardB]

Breathing puts out about 1000lbs of CO2 per year ... Just sayin'

... and in Canada (where I live), the vast majority of our electricity comes from water - there's no CO2 from electricity produced by hydro ... So your numbers don't apply to Canadians

So that means if we can get the Chinese and Indians to drop their populations down to a reasonable 300 million each we can save 300,000,000,000,000 tons of CO2 per year and I don't have to listen to the echo warrior garbage anymore. I think it's time the climate cult focuses on their real enemy. China and India populations, and then they can leave us to our comps and cars.