Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

alatron978

Member
  • Content Count

    785
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Awards

This user doesn't have any awards

About alatron978

  • Title
    Member

Contact Methods

  • Discord
    alatron978#0322

Profile Information

  • Location
    Australia
  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. €145 for a 10400F which beats the 3600. A 3600 system is not the way to go at all.
  2. Yeah, if all you want is 60FPS a 10400F is all you need. It will provide you with the same great experience that any higher end chip would give you There is no reason to be concerned about paring CPU's and GPU's, it just isn't a good idea. You should be paring your CPU and GPU to use load, which for 60fps in triple A games a 10400F is all you need. CPU + GPU parings is a concept that really should die, it is extremely useless with the varied gaming loads that people put their systems under.
  3. What is your FPS target and what games do you play? You could likely get away with a 10400F or a 10100F and see no noticeable performance impact.
  4. Knowing performance per a specific game isn't useful unless you only play one game. Back to the civ 6 example, zen 3 is 60% faster then CML, but, CML is faster on average in gaming then zen 3.
  5. It certainly matters when you have games having 4 times the impact as other games.
  6. Neither, you play at 4K, you don't need that much CPU power.
  7. My beats anything AMD offers is based off of averages, because what is the point of looking at a single bench. Sure I could pull up a civ 6 bench where zen 3 is 60% faster then CML, but it doesn't average out to that. I'm not biased towards intel, the 10400F is simply cheaper and faster. And what is wrong with putting the 10900K on to a b460 board for gaming? Under gaming workloads the chip doesn't pull the 300W+ like it does in something such as prime95. The 5950X can pull a crap load of current as well can't it.
  8. Intel benefits more from dual rank mem then amd systems, since intels mem arch is quite significantly less efficient then amd's.
  9. That is why I made that comment. With 3600 mem on the 5800x you'd most likely beat the 10900K if it is using 2933, assuming both are running mem that isn't tuned.
  10. I'm just stating facts, I don't care if AMD or Intel is on top, but I do care about knowing which is currently on top. I'd prefer AMD to be on top though since Intel is still using skylake which is just ancient at this point.
  11. If you have the same mem settings on the ryzen 5000 system it would.
  12. Yeah that is fine, 1.59V is nothing for a 9900K.
  13. CPU's use like 1.2V~1.5V, or as in this post, 1.59V~1.32V RMS.
  14. The 10900K does beat the 5000 series AMD chips. Note that the TPU messed up the mem oc on the 10900K, so ignore the 3800 cl16 mem results.
  15. If they don't buy a cooler with the 10400F it would be cheaper. And the 10400F doesn't need a cooler, the stock one is not good but adequate.
×