Jump to content

iUpgraded to an i7: A 14* Day Journal

Suika

8350 doesn't bottleneck a 780 ..

It does, and I'm not interested in turning my thread into another debate.

 

Fact of the matter is, upgrading an i7 turned my modded Skyrim from unplayable to playable.

if you have to insist you think for yourself, i'm not going to believe you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

It does, and I'm not interested in turning my thread into another debate.

 

Fact of the matter is, upgrading an i7 turned my modded Skyrim from unplayable to playable.

No it doesn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

No it doesn't.

Unless you've had both an i7-4790k and an FX-8350 paired with a GTX 780, you are in absolutely NO position to "correct" me. Unless my eyes have deceived me every time I've turned on my PC, it is plain fact that the FX-8350 is a bottleneck.

 

I have both processors. I had the FX-8350 for a year and the GTX 780 for at least half a year. I had the i7-4790k for a few days and I'm already noticing that my lowest FPS numbers are improved and my averages are higher, Skyrim is not running into any severe CPU bottlenecks that previously rendered the game unplayable, and I'm now seeing that any argument in favor of the FX-8350 for high-end gaming is a poorly thought out one. 

 

Unless you don't understand what a bottleneck actually is, the FX-8350 is indeed a bottleneck for high end gaming. It is fact, it's proven. It's an old CPU on an old architecture, even AMD realizes that it's a bottleneck and uses Intel for their test benches.

if you have to insist you think for yourself, i'm not going to believe you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

No it doesn't.

Then I have a few questions to ask you:

 

1) If the FX-8350 is not a bottleneck, why use intel on their very own test benches?

2) Do you have both CPU's and tested extensively with both of them with a high-end card like Suika has? I see on your profile that you have a Phenom II 955 so the answer to this one is most likely no

3) Do you have a high-end card to test with? Again looking at your profile the answer is no

 

And you dare say that this guy is wrong when he is LITERALLY experiencing it first-hand with harder than hard proof whereas you have nothing to go by personally besides benchmarks with A. Mean not a lot and B. Could be rigged since you personally didn't do them?

 

He sees a massive improvement and possesses glaringly obvious proof that the FX-8350 was a significant bottleneck so no, there is absolutely no reason for Suika to be wrong on this part

RIG: I7-4790k @ 4.5GHz | MSI Z97S SLI Plus | 12GB Geil Dragon RAM 1333MHz | Gigabyte G1 Gaming GTX 970 (1550MHz core/7800MHz memory) @ +18mV(Maxed out at 1650/7800 so far) | Corsair RM750 | Samsung 840 EVO 120GB, 1TB Seagate Barracuda | Fractal Design Arc Midi R2 (Closed) | Sound Blaster Z                                                                                                                        Getting: Noctua NH-D15 | Possible 250GB Samsung 850 Evo                                                                                        Need a console killer that actually shits on every console? Here you go (No MIR/Promo)

This is why you should not get an FX CPU for ANY scenario other than rendering on a budget http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/286142-fx-8350-r9-290-psu-requirements/?p=3892901 http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/266481-an-issue-with-people-bashing-the-fx-cpus/?p=3620861

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Suika

 

I love what you're doing here, and I would like to include it into my spiel against the FX if you don't mind.  I really like this no-numbers, purely experience approach that you have taken, and I think it is valuable to include in with all of the numerical evidence that I also cite.

 

     Going back to Prime95 and the temperatures you experience.  The stock Intel cooler they provide is really borderline unacceptable.  Even for just gaming, the temperatures are really close to being over the 85C threshold.   I wouldn't be surprised if you're in the high 70s, low 80s while playing a game like BF4 on stock heatsink + factory i7-4790k settings.

 

     Prime95 is a tricky beast though, and a lot of people forget the trick to getting it to work properly.  That trick is manual/constant/override/static voltage.  You HAVE to set your voltage to manual(or whatever your specific motherboard calls it) before stress testing.  Its a good idea to do this before any stress test, but especially with P95 because it is so strenuous. Still.. changing from adaptive to manual is not going to magically make your temperatures drop to an acceptable level in P95, but it is possible to get a 5-10C drop in temps. You also don't run the risk of overvolting your chip by changing from adaptive to manual.  Still,  its not a safe application to use with the included Intel heatsink.  Remember, this is a BEAST of a processor that comes in at 4 cores, 8 threads, 4.4Ghz, and 1.2v+ from the factory!

 

     Also, temperatures from the AMD processors are inaccurate. They don't measure the cores, they measure the socket, cores tend to be hotter than the socket by a fair amount, and its an algorithm, not a direct measurement like with Intel. It is against the laws of physics for the FX processor to be less hot than Intel.  It draws more power.  The FX processor is said to heat up the room much more as well.  I know in my friends' house who owns the FX, his room is sweltering after just an hour of gaming.

 

"Concerning your question regarding the temperatures with your processor. The maximum temperature threshold is 62 Celsius which set for the internal die (core) temperature of the chip. The core temperatures have an equational offset to determine temperature which equalizes at about 45 Celsius thus giving you more accurate readings at peak temperatures. The hindrance in this is the sub ambient idle temperature readings you speak of.

 

 The silicon and adhesives used in manufacturing these processors has a peak temperature rating of 97+ Celsius before any form of degradation will take place. The processor also has a thermal shut off safe guard in place that shuts the processor down at 90 Celsius.

The Cpu temperature is read form a sensor embedded within the socket of your motherboard causing about a 7-10 Celsius variance form the actual Cpu temperature, which may be what you are reading about on the net.
 I hope I was able to answer your questions, If you have any more inquiries don't hesitate to contact us.

 You can use an application called AMD overdrive, that will allow you to monitor your temperatures accurately.

 As long as your core temperature has not exceeded the high side of the 60 degree mark for extended periods of time you should be ok. 62 degrees holds a generous safety net to begin with.


 Thank You

 Alex Cromwell
 Senior Technology Director
 Advanced Micro Devices

 Fort Collins, Colorado
 2950 East Harmony Road
 Suite 300
 Fort Collins, CO"

 

Anyways, keep up the diary, I am really enjoying it!

"I genuinely dislike the promulgation of false information, especially to people who are asking for help selecting new parts."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

8350 doesn't bottleneck a 780 ..

it does...i upgraded about 3 months ago for that reason.

| CPU: Core i7-8700K @ 4.89ghz - 1.21v  Motherboard: Asus ROG STRIX Z370-E GAMING  CPU Cooler: Corsair H100i V2 |
| GPU: MSI RTX 3080Ti Ventus 3X OC  RAM: 32GB T-Force Delta RGB 3066mhz |
| Displays: Acer Predator XB270HU 1440p Gsync 144hz IPS Gaming monitor | Oculus Quest 2 VR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a great idea! I've seen a lot of raw numbers out there but this is a whole step up. Keep it up!

4790k @ 4.6 (1.25 adaptive) // 2x GTX 970 stock clocks/voltage // Dominator Platnium 4x4 16G //Maximus Formula VII // WD Black1TB + 128GB 850 PRO // RM1000 // NZXT H440 // Razer Blackwidow Ultimate 2013 (MX Blue) // Corsair M95 + Steelseries QCK // Razer Adaro DJ // AOC I2757FH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Suika this is the first thread I'm subbing to because you deserve it for your honesty about the 8350. Love the idea that you decided to not benchmark and just share your experience, it's just far more interesting than plain numbers. I quite like the motherboard choice you actually made, instead of spending mindlessly 250$ you spent 80$ which does the exact same thing along with the same overclock potential. If you had two 780's and you were massively held back by the CPU, you would have seen a much bigger jump in performance though. Might as well do a return to a 8350 30 days, would be interesting too :P

Hopefully we won't get comments here like that you're completely wrong etc, it's your opinion/experience that only counts here.
 

I'm actually in the same exact boat as you, except I moved from a legacy BD 8c chip to a 4790k and have happily observed that there are never any FPS drops in Skyrim, and even 4k playback while running a lot of concurrent applications is much smoother.

I haven't bothered overclocking yet either, since 4.4Ghz turbo core is more than enough for anything I do. But I suppose I have some room since I'm hitting 70c at 4.4 turbo on unoptimized stock settings.

O hey, that's been a while :P 

Well I need to pump 4.8GHz & 1.45V behind my 3930K to almost get your gaming & general performance (going by CB single thread scores) - a pretty good reason to justify a 4790K purchase lol.
 

Doesn't the 4790k beat the 5960X in terms of single-core performance? I could be completely wrong about this, but I seem to recall reading a comparison somewhere.

4GHz vs 3GHz is a 33% jump in clock speed so theoretically you could get up to 33% more frames. In SC2 we have that difference (36-28/28 x 100 = 30%) http://www.pcgameshardware.de/screenshots/original/2014/08/Haswell-Extreme_Test_i7-5960X_i7-5820K_Starcraft_2_HotS-pcgh.png

For a gaming system Z97 is pretty much the way to go, sure that 5820K and up might just be 10% better in like 4 games but anyways on X99 the more money you spent the worst gaming performance you get. 
 

 

Even for just gaming, the temperatures are really close to being over the 85C threshold.   I wouldn't be surprised if you're in the high 70s, low 80s while playing a game like BF4 on stock heatsink + factory i7-4790k settings.

Imo that's good, weird to say but at least we get a response from Intel saying which temperatures are fine considering that the stock cooler isn't supposed to kill your CPU. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Suika

 

I love what you're doing here, and I would like to include it into my spiel against the FX if you don't mind.  I really like this no-numbers, purely experience approach that you have taken, and I think it is valuable to include in with all of the numerical evidence that I also cite.

Yea, I'd be more than happy if you used my work. It's the one thing I never see in benchmarks, personal experience and a consumer level comparison lol. 

 

As for the Prime95 stuff, I never really use it asides from seeing if I can reach a 100% temp. I don't know a lot about it but I always assumed that, much like FurMark, the highest temp isn't representative of your actual high temps considering how unrealistic an intense load that is. I might be wrong, but even then, 80-90C is still an uncomfortable level for me, I usually try to keep my CPU at the 60C level.

 

 

@Suika this is the first thread I'm subbing to because you deserve it for your honesty about the 8350. Love the idea that you decided to not benchmark and just share your experience, it's just far more interesting than plain numbers. I quite like the motherboard choice you actually made, instead of spending mindlessly 250$ you spent 80$ which does the exact same thing along with the same overclock potential. If you had two 780's and you were massively held back by the CPU, you would have seen a much bigger jump in performance though. Might as well do a return to a 8350 30 days, would be interesting too :P

Like I mentioned before I don't want to add more benchmarks to the already existing hundreds, a few more isn't going to prove anything. Personal experience might.

 

I actually do regret my motherboard choice, though. It's not SLI compatible. It can crossfire, but not SLI. I'm considering that, once the R9 390X is released, I can upgrade to that and then crossfire if I need to.

 

Dunno if I'm going to want to do a return, but I might do an "iDowngraded," which I'd see if I could disable HT and downclock to the level of an i5-4460 and see if that's significantly better than the FX series too. That's if the downclock scales to the appropriate level, I'm not 100% sure.

 

---

 

So days 06 and 07, I didn't really touch my computer. I worked at inconvenient times and just decided not to use my PC. I might skip these days for the sake of having a full journal.

if you have to insist you think for yourself, i'm not going to believe you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dunno if I'm going to want to do a return, but I might do an "iDowngraded," which I'd see if I could disable HT and downclock to the level of an i5-4460 and see if that's significantly better than the FX series too. That's if the downclock scales to the appropriate level, I'm not 100% sure.

Ofc, it's just the 2MB L3 cache difference which makes no difference at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Real Day 06:

 

I had done nothing over the weekend so I'm just going to move days over if I don't fill them with something.

 

I mostly went around installing games to check out what's up. Bioshock: Infinite was a very similar experience to the FX-8350, it's just not CPU dependent. I did however notice that my lows were never as bad, but you have to pay closer attention to notice considering Bioshock was just a smooth experience all around.

if you have to insist you think for yourself, i'm not going to believe you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey everyone!

 

Sorry for the late updates, I've just been busy with work and family the past days and I don't want to keep empty posts as part of the journal. While I don't want to fill an entire day I can give a summary of what I've experienced.

 

Essentially, boot up is still blazing fast, faster than it was with the FX-8350. I've given it enough time for the Windows install to get a little bogged down and it really hasn't slowed, I'm ready to sign in almost as fast as I turn on my computer monitor. That's one of those smaller things where it doesn't matter as much, but hey, it's nice. I'm going to try and play with Sony Vegas and some TF2 clips I've kept saved, I don't think it'll be significantly better if SV is multithreaded but hey, who knows?

if you have to insist you think for yourself, i'm not going to believe you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Try overclocking the processor. The K-series chips (starting with the Sandy Bridge generation) love and are asking to be overclocked. I noticed a pretty significant increase in FPS (up to 10 fps) and in benchmarking (on Performancetest it goes up from 8700 to 9400) between my 2700K at stock and overclocked to 4.3 ghz on a GTX 970 (motherboard won't let me play with voltages, bummer). 

 

If your motherboard has voltage controls, you should get up to 4.6 ghz no problem with the 4790k.

I got 4.6 on my 2700k

CSGO FOR KNIFE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Suika what mods do you recommend for skyrim which will test my pc ie graphics gameplay etc

CSGO FOR KNIFE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Suika what mods do you recommend for skyrim which will test my pc ie graphics gameplay etc

Oi, there's just too many to recommend!

 

RealVision ENB first as always first and essential, but your ENB is dependent on your taste. The author has a few good mods listed on the page, too, and I used a lot of those. I did not use Realistic Water Textures and went back with W.A.T.E.R., HD Ivy is essential to every citizen of Skyrim. Ruins Clutter Improved, Skyrim Flora Overhaul, Beauty of Skyrim, Sounds of Skyrim, and Climates of Tamriel are all essential imo. I have Realistic Lighting Overhaul which is OK, I haven't tried the other lighting mod. Wearable Lanterns goes real well with Lighting overhaul if you don't like having to wear a torch in place of a shield, magic, weapon, or bow. I have all the necessary unofficial patches for the sake of having them. I have the Populated Forts, Towers, Places, and various other things mods which takes a hit on the CPU more than graphics processing. Static Mesh Improvement is another big essential, too. It fixes flat ropes and stuff and everything looks really pretty. Immersive weapons and armors are both pretty cool but are subjective, I like 'em. I have Cinematic Fire Effects but I don't like it, go with the other fire effects thing. 

 

These ones take a HUGE hit on the CPU, so be cautious. Expanded Towns and Cities, and ImpeREAL Empire - Unique Cities - Falkreath. Both of them, as the names kind of imply, improve cities and make them way bigger and cooler. The issue is that these mods in particular will just drop FPS, it completely tanked on my 8350 and made a noticeable drop on my i7.

 

I have a lot of NPC facial mods and improvements, as well as general clothing and hair improvements. If you like kawaii girls in Skyrim these are pretty alright. I never get excessive, though, as I like keeping as lore friendly as possible.

if you have to insist you think for yourself, i'm not going to believe you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oi, there's just too many to recommend!

 

RealVision ENB first as always first and essential, but your ENB is dependent on your taste. The author has a few good mods listed on the page, too, and I used a lot of those. I did not use Realistic Water Textures and went back with W.A.T.E.R., HD Ivy is essential to every citizen of Skyrim. Ruins Clutter Improved, Skyrim Flora Overhaul, Beauty of Skyrim, Sounds of Skyrim, and Climates of Tamriel are all essential imo. I have Realistic Lighting Overhaul which is OK, I haven't tried the other lighting mod. Wearable Lanterns goes real well with Lighting overhaul if you don't like having to wear a torch in place of a shield, magic, weapon, or bow. I have all the necessary unofficial patches for the sake of having them. I have the Populated Forts, Towers, Places, and various other things mods which takes a hit on the CPU more than graphics processing. Static Mesh Improvement is another big essential, too. It fixes flat ropes and stuff and everything looks really pretty. Immersive weapons and armors are both pretty cool but are subjective, I like 'em. I have Cinematic Fire Effects but I don't like it, go with the other fire effects thing. 

 

These ones take a HUGE hit on the CPU, so be cautious. Expanded Towns and Cities, and ImpeREAL Empire - Unique Cities - Falkreath. Both of them, as the names kind of imply, improve cities and make them way bigger and cooler. The issue is that these mods in particular will just drop FPS, it completely tanked on my 8350 and made a noticeable drop on my i7.

 

I have a lot of NPC facial mods and improvements, as well as general clothing and hair improvements. If you like kawaii girls in Skyrim these are pretty alright. I never get excessive, though, as I like keeping as lore friendly as possible.

Thanks

CSGO FOR KNIFE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Day 07

 

So I didn't do real video editing, at least no what you'd think I did. This is along the lines of what I did.

 

 

Except mine was with TF2 as the source. Because you know. That's just what I do. Cuz I'm Suika. *cough*

 

I didn't get as many tracks in as I wanted to, like coron 3 did with the video. I can fix that either today or tomorrow, but I suck at pitch shifting in comparison, plus these videos take a long time to make (especially when you're tone deaf and suck at shifting). 

 

The point being that the preview was pretty smooth the entire time, no noticeable struggle with lag. Even with my 8350 it would give an occasional sign of struggle with small projects but nothing particularly like, "oh yea, my 8350 can't even handle this wtf." Obv it was a smoother experience with my i7, as like everything else, but I don't have enough tracks in yet to make a noticeable difference (I read somewhere that the i5 performs just as well if you don't use a lot of tracks).

 

Also this motherboard is annoying. The network drivers are like the last thing to finish loading, so I turn on my PC, login, open Chrome, and can't do jack for a minute because I'm not connected to the internet yet. Kinda dumb. My ASUS M5A99FX either did better, or my 8350 rig loaded slow enough that it didn't matter lmao.

if you have to insist you think for yourself, i'm not going to believe you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

if it actually bottlenecks a 780 then I REALLY need to get a better cpu .-. xeon 1231v3 here i come lol

// irenebb-pc v5 // [] Intel i5-9400F [] Radeon VII Lisa Su Edition [] 24GB Crucial Ballistix [] Acer ED323QUR (1440p/144hz) []

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

if it actually bottlenecks a 780 then I REALLY need to get a better cpu .-. xeon 1231v3 here i come lol

You game at 4k right? I don't think it bottlenecks at 4k as CPU doesn't really matter at all.

RIP in pepperonis m8s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

You game at 4k right? I don't think it bottlenecks at 4k as CPU doesn't really matter at all.

true... I don't even render or anything but game tbh

// irenebb-pc v5 // [] Intel i5-9400F [] Radeon VII Lisa Su Edition [] 24GB Crucial Ballistix [] Acer ED323QUR (1440p/144hz) []

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

You game at 4k right? I don't think it bottlenecks at 4k as CPU doesn't really matter at all.

I just got a 3440x1440 monitor and I still see some slight CPU bottlenecking though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just got a 3440x1440 monitor and I still see some slight CPU bottlenecking though

4k is still nearly twice the pixels, but yea in the benchmarks I could find the minimums were a little bit lower in some games (where the minimums were already very low for all platforms) but the averages were generally within margin of error/very close. http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/58/core-i7-4770k-vs-amd-fx-8350-with-gtx-980-vs-gtx-780-sli-at-4k/index.html

I wish there were more benchmarks but I can't find any.

RIP in pepperonis m8s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4k is still nearly twice the pixels, but yea in the benchmarks I could find the minimums were a little bit lower in some games (where the minimums were already very low for all platforms) but the averages were generally within margin of error/very close. http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/58/core-i7-4770k-vs-amd-fx-8350-with-gtx-980-vs-gtx-780-sli-at-4k/index.html

I wish there were more benchmarks but I can't find any.

3440x1440 would be 5M pixels and 3820x1960 we it was would make 7.4M pixels, that's just 20-25% more pixels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

3440x1440 would be 5M pixels and 3820x1960 we it was would make 7.4M pixels, that's just 20-25% more pixels.

3840x2160 is 8.3m pixels, or ~34% more. Twice was an overstatement on my part.

RIP in pepperonis m8s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Day 08

So I was playing Far Cry 3, and while it was playing, it looked awesome. This is sort of because of DSR, but awesome nonetheless. While I was playing, though, the game would freeze up at some points, which concerned me because that's unusual behavior. A few minutes of playing, and... My PC shut down due to heat. The stock cooler is absolutely unacceptable and should never, for any reason, be recommended. I'll be installing the 212 EVO and overclocking (if possible) tomorrow.

if you have to insist you think for yourself, i'm not going to believe you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×