Depends on a game, dude. Some games like CS GO are really CPU bound and will like to see a strong CPU. Same goes for Dota, GTA V, and so on.
What this blunt retard is trying to say is, that, playing casually games at 4k is what this Ryzen CPU is good at, which is TRUE, but that's what I was talking about.
Also, not that with higher resolutions, GPU will be a bottleneck, not the CPU. So if you're gaming at 4k, CPU will be less relevant and GPU will be more important.
So, if you're gaming at 1080p, and you have, for example, Ryzen 1800X, and you wanna play CS.GO at 300+ FPS, with no drops below 200, you will find out quickly that it's not possible, while on the other side, you have Intel i7 7700k, out of the box clocked at 4.2k, easily clockable to 5GHz, and he will kill Ryzen in CS GO in terms of avg frame per sec.
Now on the other hand, people buying CPU for rendering, workstations and what not, might find this CPU very interesting, because, for 500$ it will match speed of i7 6800k, and sometimes even outperform it.
The raw CPU power is here, since in Cinebench R15, CPU outperforms i7 6800k. However, in games, it's pretty much on pair with i7 4790k, and in most cases, even slower.
Wait is processor really that needed in gaming? I thought newer games tend to get juice on the GPU and older games gets juice on the CPU
Exacly. You understood correcly. I suggest you ignore what vertox wrote entirely. He is a retard that spreads half assed knowledge.
Every native DX 10 or 11 & 12 game is GPU heavy, no exception. Meaning CPU is terms of gaming isn't really a bottleneck, unless we talk about really low end. In almost all new titles the graphicscard will never get bottlenecked or the bottlenack is so slight, that it makes no real difference for the player.
That's also the reason why people are gettiing "Cheaper" I5 CPU's in their rig with relatively high graphicscards because the difference in performance would be minor. Even tho the I5 CPU's do have more unstable performance and might dip here and there, most gamers who are on a strict budget opt for this solution the most since the difference isn't something you notice unless you are an eliteist that has MSI afterburner 24/7 on.
Now this is the most important part:
You want your game to have to same FPS as your monitor has HZ, syncing the FPS and HZ makes the game the most "fluid". You will notice that if you have a 60hz monitor, you will feel that the game runs more smooth with 60FPS than lets say 90FPS. Since the highest freqeuncy a monitor (to my knowledge has) is 240hz, means anything beyond 240FPS is meaningless.
This guy is literally contradicting himself to the point it becomes hard to read.
Keep spreading bullshit.. No wonder people tell you you're an ego maniac.
Now I clearly understand that you bought 6k account because you literally can't stand that someone is right/better than you.
"every native dx10/11 game is gpu heavy"..
What a bunch of crap he just said... xD This is just even worse shit than I expected.
Yesterday he said that Wolfadle based Core 2 Quad is a native 45nm LGA775 quad core, then when I showed him he's not right. he had no balls to admit that.. xd
Then he claims Q9550 is stronger CPU for Dota than G3258 at 4.5.. XD
A haswell based CPU with WAY higher IPC... XD
This guy is an example of autism. The very first moment you meet someone telling you you're poor shit, calling you a failure and so on(without even knowing you), is the moment you realise that person has no clue what's he's talking about, and is probably:
1. Buliied at school at very young age
2. Has some sort of mental disorter, probably a passive-agressive type of a person and what not
3. Very unsecure human being unacceptable of accepting what he is
I'm gonna keep pooking this retard, because, for a brief time I thought he's actually a decent guy. What a fool I was.
ok dorknuggets, if you intend on STREAMING DOTA 2 ryzen is actually very good for the money.
If you plan on just playing dota, csgo and others, the 7700k is obviously better for a gamer, and nothing AMD releases later this year will beat it.
If you dont have shitloads of money to spend on your PC, buy a used 4690K setup on craigslist for $200-300
If you live off of ramen noodles like me, buy a used workplace issue PC like dell optiplex with a i5-2400 for $75, a 2400 will get you a solid 150 fps and wont drop under 100.
For the average dota player, Ryzen doesn't change up anything.
"ok dorknuggets, if you intend on STREAMING DOTA 2 ryzen is actually very good for the money."
True.
"If you plan on just playing dota, csgo and others, the 7700k is obviously better for a gamer, and nothing AMD releases later this year will beat it."
That is, probably true aswell.
This retard doesn't understand that gaming on 4k is mostly about GPU, not the CPU. Failing to understand that even an old i5 750 is capable of gaming at 4k more or less.
The reasons the REAL benchmarks are done in 1080p is to make CPU RELEVANT. If you're going to game at 4k, you might aswell buy whatever modern CPU and you'll be just F I N E.
However, there are some games that will make a difference, and not everyone games at 4k anyways.
Yeah it does, truth hurts. Again you made a fool out of yourself.
This retard doesn't understand that gaming on 4k is mostly about GPU, not the CPU. Failing to understand that even an old i5 750 is capable of gaming at 4k more or less.
Depends on a game, dude. Some games like CS GO are really CPU bound and will like to see a strong CPU. Same goes for Dota, GTA V, and so on.
Don't even need to point out how retarded you are, you're doing it yourself.
The reasons the REAL benchmarks are done in 1080p is to make CPU RELEVANT. If you're going to game at 4k, you might aswell buy whatever modern CPU and you'll be just F I N E.
Which is why the 4k benchmarks all favor Ryzen. Because it's all GPU right? Ryzen actually hid a little GPU inside their CPU, so the 4k results are better. Conspiracy!
You don't have anything to argue. You are literally destroying yourself ROFL
another relevant ryze n test
yeah, let me buy 500USD CPU so i can play Lost planet on low settings with 640x480 resolution.
Or that i can use a GPU benchmark tool to benchmark my CPU performance on 640x 480 settings. Better buy me that CPU that does better performance in low ass resolutions rather than the other that does better in 4k on my 4k monitor.
(to the guy saying GamersNexus isn't legit, they are actually one of the most technical tech reviewers I have seen, you should check them out)
Honestly, you're bashing on the CPU too much. Like I said, it's supposed to be a workstation CPU more than anything and games these days aren't optimized for 8 cores and 16 threads anyway. Once we start moving towards that line, we might start seeing a better picture. (Mainly, futureproofing)
Also, this comments pretty much sums up a lot of thoughts
"Ryzen has low fps at 1080p because cpu bottlenecks occur at lower resolutions, that's why low end cpus match the performance of high end ones at higher resolutions like 4k. The Ryzen cpus have lower performance in games because the single core performance and frequency isn't as high as something like an i7 7700k or i5. The multi core performance is obviously much higher as it has 16 threads. The Ryzen 7 series shows its advantage in multi threaded tasks, which is why this series shouldn't really be targeted at stand alone gamers, but creators or streamers as they would take advantage of the extra threads. Hopefully the release of Ryzen 5 and 3 will have lower thread count but higher clock speeds to help in game performance."
tldr; too early to say that Ryzen is actually a flop, but for people who do more than gaming, like me. The lower premium on multicore CPUs is a godsend.
Ryzen is great in terms of performance / $
just wait for a couple of weeks to see the in depth benches and stuff
intel forced price drop and it was something that all intel fanboys wanted cause intel is dominating the market atm
totaly respect ryzen although i diss a lot amd cpu's but i guess after 10 years amd managed to make some affordable strong 8core/16t cpu's to the customers and actually unlocked ones ,
yday was the release date so we gotta wait to see more about ryzen,
also who believes that 1080ti has an actual 35% + performance from the 1080?
for like 699$?
hmm..
offtopic, just something that came on my mind in those fps tests in various games
is it possible to put together a desktop with existing components that can run EVERYTHING on 60fps at least, in 4k?
(or does one need some ridiculous setup with 3 gpus or some other gimmick like that - and who knows how does sli work atm since even nvidia is pulling away from the idea of having multiple cards)
i thought that 1080 can handle anything and then i saw like 35 fps or so
seems like im underestimating how demanding the 4k games and streaming are
i was a little salty that im dropping frames with my i5 6600k on 60 and even on 30 fps in 720p while streaming dota (but i dont recall dropping frames on 30fps before i tried 60 fps so im not sure whats going on there?) but it's a bit.. weirdly soothing feeling that even the latest gear has its limits
also wtf i didnt even know that 240hz screens exist
Yo, just chill man. AMD managed to make a cpu that competes with intel in the largest market (professional use). That's fuckin awesome for us because competition is on again. You're trying to make ryzen sound like a fiasco while it was something great to the gaming community.
You should praise amd right now because they are still wayy behind.
I do agree that 7700k is still the go-to for anyone that wants to upgrade/build from scratch a pc gaming.
yep idk man if i am getting a pc with ryzen i surely wont be gaming on 1080p lol
and i dont think getting more than 200 fps more in csgo justifies the difference between both xD
-
edit: i just saw your post that an i5 530 can game 4k LOL nvm
Just before you start yelling, I said, CHECK the 4k benchmarks, not the 1080p or 1440p.. even tho even 1080p ain't that bad, coinsidering that CPU is literally a decade old and is still an amazing performer.
yep idk man if i am getting a pc with ryzen i surely wont be gaming on 1080p lol
and i dont think getting more than 200 fps more in csgo justifies the difference between both xD
-
edit: i just saw your post that an i5 530 can game 4k LOL nvm
Exacly. If u're spending 500Dollars on a CPU you will have a 4K Rig. Meaning all you care about is 4k, and even tho 4k is mainly the GPU it still consisently beats the Intel Processor in 4k reslution, which is the only factor people should care about.
basicially looking at 1080p or less is insanely retarded to begin with, which is my point from the get go. Once Dx 12 is the new standard and if it is indeed taking even more stress from the CPU and putting it to the GPU, then talking about CPU's for gaming is literally autsitic to begin with.
Talking about how a CPU is better for gaming is autistic to begin with, unless we talk about REALLY old or REALLY low end, but since we got vertox here who thinks GTA 5 is CPU intensive, we will apparently still have to roll with the existence of "Gaming CPU's" until those apes finally accept the fact that "Gaming CPU's" aren't really a thing anymore.
I'd like to add that even if Ryzen beats at 4k Intel in some games, it's really small difference and probably comes down to core count.
In CPU intensive games like CS GO, Dota, Overwatch, BF1, GTA V - it's clear, that, at least for now - despite the big improvment of IPC, AMD can't keep up with Kaby Lake i7.
It's not a surprise that Ryzen will have more raw power to operate with, since it's 8/16 core/threaded CPU
And as I showed in the video, even i5 750 is capable of gaming at 4k, without even bottnenecking much the GTX1080
It's simple, because, in order for bottneneck to happen, either minimal framerates need to go WAY below expected(case of a very weak CPU), or a GPU needs to be faster than the CPU, so it'll just wait for the CPU in that case, which, OBVIOUSLY, ain't the case with 4k.
Wow this thread is still ongoing hahaha, but I think it's still too early too judge Ryzen since it just recently released so there still future software updates for it.
Question tho is Intel I3 processor and AMD R7 something okay for ulrta settings for DOTES Vulkan included?
I will always buy the best available CPU I can get, so I don't need to upgrade for many years lets say 5-6, just look at something like i7 2600K or even a 3770k when overclocked and u pair it with something like a GTX 1070 it's still doing pretty fine that extra ~100 euros over i5 is so worth it imo if you want ur whole platform to last u longer, so u only need to upgrade your graphics card every 2 - 3 years pretty much.
Pretty much what aFeect said. The Pentium works for gaming because lucky for you games aren't CPU intense anymore, but once you want to encode something or similair. May the lord have mercy on ur ass.
It's pretty cool how much of an impact ram speed can make. Stock i7 7700K with 3000mhz ram is performing better than OC'ed to ~5GHz with 2400mhz ram or 2666mhz ram and it's all without any additional heat or power consumption. It's the same thing with pretty much all CPU's, so if you want it to perform better and last a bit longer you might wanna pair it with faster ram. Just choose a stick that's not overpriced I think 3000 - 3200mhz is a sweet spot now, depends where u live too I guess, prices are different. Even if you're buying a non K intel cpu getting cheapest Z series mobo and faster ram makes sense. It might even perform better than buying a little bit better cpu with slower ram. Depending on a game, here you can see anywhere from a little bit and up to ~20fps increase just from a faster ram.
AMD Ryzen will be a good cheap mid/high range option.
By within your budget, buy what suits your needs, buy what you personally feel comfortable with.
I haven't played a game in the last 8 years that has struggled on my PC and I have never weighed in the 2-3 FPS difference between lines.
"Oh look guys x outperforms y in CS:GO" is the not a good enough reason for me to spend my cash on something because it performed with unnoticeable difference in a 10 year old game.
The Ryzen is good, and is a cost effective alternative for people who don't have top dollar to spend on the best but like I said most games won't care and will perform adequately.
From what I remember AMDs performance always dominated the mid/low range and was really good value for money. The top line was predominantly NVIDIA/INTEL.
If you're not looking to get a new PC then why bother arguing over the statistics of which is better. If you're looking to get new parts, or buy a new PC altogether refer to my first sentence.
Eight cores and 16 threads at half the price of Intel
Excellent performance in workstation applications
AM4 is a modern, full-featured platform
While only a small performance boost, XFR is zero-effort and works well
The bad
Gaming performance is weak compared to Intel, particularly in modern titles
Specialised AVX applications will perform better under Intel
The ugly
A higher-clocked quad-core chip like the Intel i7-7700K or 7600K is still the best choice of processor for no-compromise gamers
Like I said above, buy to suit. AMDs are workhorses and have always been good at that, I use one for work, and would probably use one for streaming if I did that.
....and again like I said above stop comparing games that don't stress components. CSGO, GTA, and OverWatch aren't the best benchmarks to be running against.
All I can add to the earlier discussion about current CPU's and their affect on GPU's is that I ran 3dmark11 on my new build (very proud of btw) and got about a 18600. After Overclocking the processor to about 4.2 the 3dmark11 gave me a 21xxx rating and I now hold the single card performance benchmark for the 1070 GTX. :D
Games will utilize the graphics card in a similar way to 3dmark, using both the GPU and processor.
^
Depends on a game, dude. Some games like CS GO are really CPU bound and will like to see a strong CPU. Same goes for Dota, GTA V, and so on.
What this blunt retard is trying to say is, that, playing casually games at 4k is what this Ryzen CPU is good at, which is TRUE, but that's what I was talking about.
Also, not that with higher resolutions, GPU will be a bottleneck, not the CPU. So if you're gaming at 4k, CPU will be less relevant and GPU will be more important.
So, if you're gaming at 1080p, and you have, for example, Ryzen 1800X, and you wanna play CS.GO at 300+ FPS, with no drops below 200, you will find out quickly that it's not possible, while on the other side, you have Intel i7 7700k, out of the box clocked at 4.2k, easily clockable to 5GHz, and he will kill Ryzen in CS GO in terms of avg frame per sec.
Now on the other hand, people buying CPU for rendering, workstations and what not, might find this CPU very interesting, because, for 500$ it will match speed of i7 6800k, and sometimes even outperform it.
The raw CPU power is here, since in Cinebench R15, CPU outperforms i7 6800k. However, in games, it's pretty much on pair with i7 4790k, and in most cases, even slower.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sciuiEcrnzg
an amazing review
Ohhhh so that's how it works on gaming I think I understand it.
Halp mei .. I m lossing mai ayy q ay ges ! Sou much informeshan i dont no
Exacly. You understood correcly. I suggest you ignore what vertox wrote entirely. He is a retard that spreads half assed knowledge.
Every native DX 10 or 11 & 12 game is GPU heavy, no exception. Meaning CPU is terms of gaming isn't really a bottleneck, unless we talk about really low end. In almost all new titles the graphicscard will never get bottlenecked or the bottlenack is so slight, that it makes no real difference for the player.
That's also the reason why people are gettiing "Cheaper" I5 CPU's in their rig with relatively high graphicscards because the difference in performance would be minor. Even tho the I5 CPU's do have more unstable performance and might dip here and there, most gamers who are on a strict budget opt for this solution the most since the difference isn't something you notice unless you are an eliteist that has MSI afterburner 24/7 on.
Now this is the most important part:
You want your game to have to same FPS as your monitor has HZ, syncing the FPS and HZ makes the game the most "fluid". You will notice that if you have a 60hz monitor, you will feel that the game runs more smooth with 60FPS than lets say 90FPS. Since the highest freqeuncy a monitor (to my knowledge has) is 240hz, means anything beyond 240FPS is meaningless.
This guy is literally contradicting himself to the point it becomes hard to read.
Keep spreading bullshit.. No wonder people tell you you're an ego maniac.
Now I clearly understand that you bought 6k account because you literally can't stand that someone is right/better than you.
"every native dx10/11 game is gpu heavy"..
What a bunch of crap he just said... xD This is just even worse shit than I expected.
Yesterday he said that Wolfadle based Core 2 Quad is a native 45nm LGA775 quad core, then when I showed him he's not right. he had no balls to admit that.. xd
Then he claims Q9550 is stronger CPU for Dota than G3258 at 4.5.. XD
A haswell based CPU with WAY higher IPC... XD
This guy is an example of autism. The very first moment you meet someone telling you you're poor shit, calling you a failure and so on(without even knowing you), is the moment you realise that person has no clue what's he's talking about, and is probably:
1. Buliied at school at very young age
2. Has some sort of mental disorter, probably a passive-agressive type of a person and what not
3. Very unsecure human being unacceptable of accepting what he is
I'm gonna keep pooking this retard, because, for a brief time I thought he's actually a decent guy. What a fool I was.
ok dorknuggets, if you intend on STREAMING DOTA 2 ryzen is actually very good for the money.
If you plan on just playing dota, csgo and others, the 7700k is obviously better for a gamer, and nothing AMD releases later this year will beat it.
If you dont have shitloads of money to spend on your PC, buy a used 4690K setup on craigslist for $200-300
If you live off of ramen noodles like me, buy a used workplace issue PC like dell optiplex with a i5-2400 for $75, a 2400 will get you a solid 150 fps and wont drop under 100.
For the average dota player, Ryzen doesn't change up anything.
LoL Vertox HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
The difference between you and me:
You, claim shit left and right.
Me:
Stating facts.
You said, GTA 5 CPU heavy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25k7AwL72Fg
i3 vs i7, same performance.
Again, you're full of shit.
Noone cares about your insecurity, go cry in a corner.
"ok dorknuggets, if you intend on STREAMING DOTA 2 ryzen is actually very good for the money."
True.
"If you plan on just playing dota, csgo and others, the 7700k is obviously better for a gamer, and nothing AMD releases later this year will beat it."
That is, probably true aswell.
This retard doesn't understand that gaming on 4k is mostly about GPU, not the CPU. Failing to understand that even an old i5 750 is capable of gaming at 4k more or less.
The reasons the REAL benchmarks are done in 1080p is to make CPU RELEVANT. If you're going to game at 4k, you might aswell buy whatever modern CPU and you'll be just F I N E.
However, there are some games that will make a difference, and not everyone games at 4k anyways.
As you said mate, truth hurts.. :p
Yeah it does, truth hurts. Again you made a fool out of yourself.
Don't even need to point out how retarded you are, you're doing it yourself.
Which is why the 4k benchmarks all favor Ryzen. Because it's all GPU right? Ryzen actually hid a little GPU inside their CPU, so the 4k results are better. Conspiracy!
http://i.imgur.com/pRu72su.jpg
Blunt, is it you? :D
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
KEEP GOING PLS
NOT GONNA EVEN ARGUE WITH YOU
YOU'RE A FUCKING LEGEND DUDE :D
FUCK SYMETRICALL, you're the new hotshit atm
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/03/02/amd_ryzen_1700x_cpu_review/4
another relevant ryze n test
You don't have anything to argue. You are literally destroying yourself ROFL
yeah, let me buy 500USD CPU so i can play Lost planet on low settings with 640x480 resolution.
Or that i can use a GPU benchmark tool to benchmark my CPU performance on 640x 480 settings. Better buy me that CPU that does better performance in low ass resolutions rather than the other that does better in 4k on my 4k monitor.
q9550 is better for doto than g3258
enough said xd
easy dude its just fucking processor ! not your life
x4 750k
hd 7750
8gb ram
enough for dota
alright chill folks, it's just some hardware
well, I say that, but I'm hyped af. I'd buy it if I didn't just upgrade :<
(to the guy saying GamersNexus isn't legit, they are actually one of the most technical tech reviewers I have seen, you should check them out)
Honestly, you're bashing on the CPU too much. Like I said, it's supposed to be a workstation CPU more than anything and games these days aren't optimized for 8 cores and 16 threads anyway. Once we start moving towards that line, we might start seeing a better picture. (Mainly, futureproofing)
Also, this comments pretty much sums up a lot of thoughts
"Ryzen has low fps at 1080p because cpu bottlenecks occur at lower resolutions, that's why low end cpus match the performance of high end ones at higher resolutions like 4k. The Ryzen cpus have lower performance in games because the single core performance and frequency isn't as high as something like an i7 7700k or i5. The multi core performance is obviously much higher as it has 16 threads. The Ryzen 7 series shows its advantage in multi threaded tasks, which is why this series shouldn't really be targeted at stand alone gamers, but creators or streamers as they would take advantage of the extra threads. Hopefully the release of Ryzen 5 and 3 will have lower thread count but higher clock speeds to help in game performance."
tldr; too early to say that Ryzen is actually a flop, but for people who do more than gaming, like me. The lower premium on multicore CPUs is a godsend.
Ryzen is great in terms of performance / $
just wait for a couple of weeks to see the in depth benches and stuff
intel forced price drop and it was something that all intel fanboys wanted cause intel is dominating the market atm
totaly respect ryzen although i diss a lot amd cpu's but i guess after 10 years amd managed to make some affordable strong 8core/16t cpu's to the customers and actually unlocked ones ,
yday was the release date so we gotta wait to see more about ryzen,
also who believes that 1080ti has an actual 35% + performance from the 1080?
for like 699$?
hmm..
how much more last hits?
Gotta agree that I did bashed out CPU a bit way too much, but only because I was a bit disapointed.
Coinsidering how much IPC has improved compared to Piledriver, this is a great CPU.
offtopic, just something that came on my mind in those fps tests in various games
is it possible to put together a desktop with existing components that can run EVERYTHING on 60fps at least, in 4k?
(or does one need some ridiculous setup with 3 gpus or some other gimmick like that - and who knows how does sli work atm since even nvidia is pulling away from the idea of having multiple cards)
i thought that 1080 can handle anything and then i saw like 35 fps or so
^
A two 1080ti would be probably close to what you asked for, tho since I never had any of those I can't say for sure.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7UBHjtCXhU
seems like im underestimating how demanding the 4k games and streaming are
i was a little salty that im dropping frames with my i5 6600k on 60 and even on 30 fps in 720p while streaming dota (but i dont recall dropping frames on 30fps before i tried 60 fps so im not sure whats going on there?) but it's a bit.. weirdly soothing feeling that even the latest gear has its limits
also wtf i didnt even know that 240hz screens exist
Yo, just chill man. AMD managed to make a cpu that competes with intel in the largest market (professional use). That's fuckin awesome for us because competition is on again. You're trying to make ryzen sound like a fiasco while it was something great to the gaming community.
You should praise amd right now because they are still wayy behind.
I do agree that 7700k is still the go-to for anyone that wants to upgrade/build from scratch a pc gaming.
you kids are interesting.
i just love how you're arguing like you're selling the product, not buying it
^
Dude you don't even have 20 if I'm not mistaken, stop acting like you're a matture man.
yep idk man if i am getting a pc with ryzen i surely wont be gaming on 1080p lol
and i dont think getting more than 200 fps more in csgo justifies the difference between both xD
-
edit: i just saw your post that an i5 530 can game 4k LOL nvm
Not an i5 530, but an i5 760/i5 750
and yes, it can game.. obviously not an ideal CPU to have for 4k gaming, but it'll do better than you think.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TScpVAGNdcI check the 4k benchmarks.. with i5 750 at @ 3.7 which was against i7 Haswell at @ 4.5
Just before you start yelling, I said, CHECK the 4k benchmarks, not the 1080p or 1440p.. even tho even 1080p ain't that bad, coinsidering that CPU is literally a decade old and is still an amazing performer.
Exacly. If u're spending 500Dollars on a CPU you will have a 4K Rig. Meaning all you care about is 4k, and even tho 4k is mainly the GPU it still consisently beats the Intel Processor in 4k reslution, which is the only factor people should care about.
basicially looking at 1080p or less is insanely retarded to begin with, which is my point from the get go. Once Dx 12 is the new standard and if it is indeed taking even more stress from the CPU and putting it to the GPU, then talking about CPU's for gaming is literally autsitic to begin with.
As you can see here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25k7AwL72Fg
Talking about how a CPU is better for gaming is autistic to begin with, unless we talk about REALLY old or REALLY low end, but since we got vertox here who thinks GTA 5 is CPU intensive, we will apparently still have to roll with the existence of "Gaming CPU's" until those apes finally accept the fact that "Gaming CPU's" aren't really a thing anymore.
GTA V is CPU intensive, here's the evidence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDquxBK-biU
Skylake i5 vs i3 in the video above. Also, talking about 4k, we finally concluded that at the end of the day, it is mainly GPU.
1080p isn't retarded, a good amount of gamers still play on 1080p. Even those with screen supporting 4k plays at 1080p for most of the time.
If you think otherwise, I;d appriciate showing the evidence.
Even in your video it's clear as fuck that i3 shows less FPS compared to an i7, it's just that GTX750 is weak card.
Pair i3 with GTX1080 and do the benchmarks vs i7 with GTA V, and you will quickly realise it's actually CPU intensive game.
I'd like to add that even if Ryzen beats at 4k Intel in some games, it's really small difference and probably comes down to core count.
In CPU intensive games like CS GO, Dota, Overwatch, BF1, GTA V - it's clear, that, at least for now - despite the big improvment of IPC, AMD can't keep up with Kaby Lake i7.
It's not a surprise that Ryzen will have more raw power to operate with, since it's 8/16 core/threaded CPU
And as I showed in the video, even i5 750 is capable of gaming at 4k, without even bottnenecking much the GTX1080
It's simple, because, in order for bottneneck to happen, either minimal framerates need to go WAY below expected(case of a very weak CPU), or a GPU needs to be faster than the CPU, so it'll just wait for the CPU in that case, which, OBVIOUSLY, ain't the case with 4k.
Wow this thread is still ongoing hahaha, but I think it's still too early too judge Ryzen since it just recently released so there still future software updates for it.
Question tho is Intel I3 processor and AMD R7 something okay for ulrta settings for DOTES Vulkan included?
AMD R7 is more than enough for Dota, i3 is also enough.
It's good CPU, I just expected better results, since all the hype.
But, coinsidering how much it costs and what it gives overall, yeah, AMD is kinda back.
We still need to get 150-200$ Ryzens to see how they game..
So we got a retard talking about numbers and we got a video that literally shows side by side the FPS in each situation. which one should we believe?
Since you're the retard you obv. opted for the random dude.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClCPxsCVRbk
another side by side, nah, fuck it, we take random talking dude.
that's how u bench cpu's
^ I will buy that Pentium G4560, best bang for the buck right now! :)
Currently on G3258 @ 4500Mhz but I need that HT so much..
I will always buy the best available CPU I can get, so I don't need to upgrade for many years lets say 5-6, just look at something like i7 2600K or even a 3770k when overclocked and u pair it with something like a GTX 1070 it's still doing pretty fine that extra ~100 euros over i5 is so worth it imo if you want ur whole platform to last u longer, so u only need to upgrade your graphics card every 2 - 3 years pretty much.
Pretty much what aFeect said. The Pentium works for gaming because lucky for you games aren't CPU intense anymore, but once you want to encode something or similair. May the lord have mercy on ur ass.
It's pretty cool how much of an impact ram speed can make. Stock i7 7700K with 3000mhz ram is performing better than OC'ed to ~5GHz with 2400mhz ram or 2666mhz ram and it's all without any additional heat or power consumption. It's the same thing with pretty much all CPU's, so if you want it to perform better and last a bit longer you might wanna pair it with faster ram. Just choose a stick that's not overpriced I think 3000 - 3200mhz is a sweet spot now, depends where u live too I guess, prices are different. Even if you're buying a non K intel cpu getting cheapest Z series mobo and faster ram makes sense. It might even perform better than buying a little bit better cpu with slower ram. Depending on a game, here you can see anywhere from a little bit and up to ~20fps increase just from a faster ram.
Dota is very CPU intense, thats why you need good IPC and high clock procesor for more higher and stable FPS in it.
For most other games yeah, pretty well said. I dont encode anything so not relevant to me.
aFeect lucky you, if I had the money I would buy all that but I am poor, so I stick to budget gaming solutions, you got me now! :)
AMD Ryzen will be a good cheap mid/high range option.
By within your budget, buy what suits your needs, buy what you personally feel comfortable with.
I haven't played a game in the last 8 years that has struggled on my PC and I have never weighed in the 2-3 FPS difference between lines.
"Oh look guys x outperforms y in CS:GO" is the not a good enough reason for me to spend my cash on something because it performed with unnoticeable difference in a 10 year old game.
The Ryzen is good, and is a cost effective alternative for people who don't have top dollar to spend on the best but like I said most games won't care and will perform adequately.
From what I remember AMDs performance always dominated the mid/low range and was really good value for money. The top line was predominantly NVIDIA/INTEL.
If you're not looking to get a new PC then why bother arguing over the statistics of which is better. If you're looking to get new parts, or buy a new PC altogether refer to my first sentence.
Good Summary from ARS Technica
The good
Eight cores and 16 threads at half the price of Intel
Excellent performance in workstation applications
AM4 is a modern, full-featured platform
While only a small performance boost, XFR is zero-effort and works well
The bad
Gaming performance is weak compared to Intel, particularly in modern titles
Specialised AVX applications will perform better under Intel
The ugly
A higher-clocked quad-core chip like the Intel i7-7700K or 7600K is still the best choice of processor for no-compromise gamers
Like I said above, buy to suit. AMDs are workhorses and have always been good at that, I use one for work, and would probably use one for streaming if I did that.
....and again like I said above stop comparing games that don't stress components. CSGO, GTA, and OverWatch aren't the best benchmarks to be running against.
Havoc nailed it. :)
All I can add to the earlier discussion about current CPU's and their affect on GPU's is that I ran 3dmark11 on my new build (very proud of btw) and got about a 18600. After Overclocking the processor to about 4.2 the 3dmark11 gave me a 21xxx rating and I now hold the single card performance benchmark for the 1070 GTX. :D
Games will utilize the graphics card in a similar way to 3dmark, using both the GPU and processor.