3700x Gaming Benchmarks

[Wonderhead]

So far it seems the 3900x and 3700x are getting beat in most popular games at 1080p, should we expect a couple of chipset updates that closes the gap? I want to get the 3700x, but I also don't like to see some of these results.

[Qata]

i am not impressed with amd so far for gaming... i even think for pure gaming a 9400+fast ram beats something like the 3600 in price and performance, which is sad.

[Jonathan=PC]

2 minutes ago, Wonderhead said:

So far it seems the 3900x and 3700x are getting beat in most popular games at 1080p, should we expect a couple of chipset updates that closes the gap? I want to get the 3700x, but I also don't like to see some of these results.

I have only seen benchmarks with the 3700x beating the i9 9900k 

What have you been seeing?

[Wonderhead]

Just to name a few, BF1, Fornite, and Tomb Raider had less fps compared to intel, and it seems 3700x has a micro-stuttering issue so maybe it will be fixed in the future.

[ki8aras]

3 minutes ago, Wonderhead said:

So far it seems the 3900x and 3700x are getting beat in most popular games at 1080p, should we expect a couple of chipset updates that closes the gap? I want to get the 3700x, but I also don't like to see some of these results.

the single core of the 3700x is higher than any intel cpu so far to the lower framerates are probably caused by a lack of optimization for amd cpus from the developer's part

[Wonderhead]

Just now, ki8aras said:

the single core of the 3700x is higher than any intel cpu so far to the lower framerates are probably caused by a lack of optimization for amd cpus from the developer's part

Ah okay I thought that is the issue since games usually favor intel, but is there going to be more optimization for amd cpus in the future?

[Jonathan=PC]

2 minutes ago, Wonderhead said:

Just to name a few, BF1, Fornite, and Tomb Raider had less fps compared to intel, and it seems 3700x has a micro-stuttering issue so maybe it will be fixed in the future.

"Micro stuttering"

Yeah that's a big turn off. 

 

I will wait a few weeks for the platform to mature

[ki8aras]

Just now, Wonderhead said:

Ah okay I thought that is the issue since games usually favor intel, but is there going to be more optimization for amd cpus in the future?

since AMD is stomping intel at every pricepoint at the moment,yeah i would expect better optimization to utilize AMD's extra performance

[Wonderhead]

1 minute ago, Jonathan=PC said:

"Micro stuttering"

Yeah that's a big turn off. 

 

I will wait a few weeks for the platform to mature

Once some more bios updates come in for the x570 mobos, I think amd cpus will be superior to intel's

[Jonathan=PC]

1 minute ago, Wonderhead said:

Once some more bios updates come in for the x570 mobos, I think amd cpus will be superior to intel's

Yeah I am certainly gonna buy the 3700x, but with these prices of the motherboards i will wait another month. Hope it get's cheaper. 

 

Really need it for productivity as i currently have a i7 4790k, but prices man..

[Wonderhead]

Just now, Jonathan=PC said:

Yeah I am certainly gonna buy the 3700x, but with these prices of the motherboards i will wait another month. Hope it get's cheaper. 

 

Really need it for productivity as i currently have a i7 4790k, but prices man..

Yea I think if we wait a month everything will be sorted out with driver, updates, and such. I'm waiting for the 2080 super anyways so it's not like I'm going to start my build anytime soon.

[MeatFeastMan]

39 minutes ago, Qata said:

i am not impressed with amd so far for gaming... i even think for pure gaming a 9400+fast ram beats something like the 3600 in price and performance, which is sad.

The 9400 has 6 threads. Futureproofing is also important. Just look at Battlefield V for example, you will get horrendous lows if you're not using 6 cores 12 threads. Just look at this video below for example. 9 fps for one of the lows, that is awful and it's 100% due to a lack of threads. Meanwhile the 2600x may be slightly behind overall, but I'm sure it'll offer a better experience with much better lows. Especially in the future.

 

AND you're not factoring in the cooler. 9400 does NOT include a cooler, and that is added price on top of the 140+ dollars you're paying. And what about running stuff in the background? Discord, streaming, other websites? 6 threads ain't gonna do you any good. In multithreaded situations, the 2600 decimates the 9400f, so I'm not even going to think of what the 3600 will look like against it.

 

Unless you are a really low budget buyer, anything less than 6 cores 12 threads should be avoided. And if you're a budget gamer, that's what the new 3400g and 3200g are there for.

 

The 3600 is $200, but if we consider that the cooler is worth about $30...that puts it at $170 vs $140 for the 9400. You're gonna need a cooler for the 9400, which will likely make it cost $170 total. So they are on par AND the 3600 matches it in gaming, but absolutely destroys it in everything else. That gap will only get bigger as time goes on. That's how you need to look at it.

 

 

 

 

[Wonderhead]

4 minutes ago, MeatFeastMan said:

The 9400 has 6 threads. Futureproofing is also important. Just look at Battlefield V for example, you will get horrendous lows if you're not using 6 cores 12 threads. Just look at this video below for example. 9 fps for one of the lows, that is awful and it's 100% due to a lack of threads. Meanwhile the 2600x may be slightly behind overall, but I'm sure it'll offer a better experience with much better lows. Especially in the future.

 

AND you're not factoring in the cooler. 9400 does NOT include a cooler, and that is added price on top of the 140+ dollars you're paying. And what about running stuff in the background? Discord, streaming, other websites? 6 threads ain't gonna do you any good. In multithreaded situations, the 2600 decimates the 9400f, so I'm not even going to think of what the 3600 will look like against it.

 

Unless you are a really low budget buyer, anything less than 6 cores 12 threads should be avoided. And if you're a budget gamer, that's what the new 3400g and 3200g are there for.

 

The 3600 is $200, but if we consider that the cooler is worth about $30...that puts it at $170 vs $140 for the 9400. You're gonna need a cooler for the 9400, which will likely make it cost $170 total. So they are on par AND the 3600 matches it in gaming, but absolutely destroys it in everything else. That gap will only get bigger as time goes on. That's how you need to look at it.

 

 

 

 

Yea I understand the price and thread situation, but why can't amd outperform intel in fps as well? I was expecting amd to beat intel in most games since their single core speed was very good.

[Hemanse]

43 minutes ago, Wonderhead said:

Just to name a few, BF1, Fornite, and Tomb Raider had less fps compared to intel, and it seems 3700x has a micro-stuttering issue so maybe it will be fixed in the future.

I have not seen microstutter mentioned in reviews? Could you link to where you saw that. Im probably going for the 3600 or 3700x in a little bit when the RTX 2070 super starts releasing and microstutter is a big nono. Altho as mentioned could just be down to everything being so new.

[MeatFeastMan]

5 minutes ago, Wonderhead said:

Yea I understand the price and thread situation, but why can't amd outperform intel in fps as well? I was expecting amd to beat intel in most games since their single core speed was very good.

Cause obviously a loss of a MASSIVE 2 fps in pretty much every game matters so so much. GAMECHANGING. It'll be stuttering like mad on the AMD stuff I can imagine. That 2 fps is so damaging for AMD that they may as well not sell these processors.

 

Who cares about 5% performance difference? It doesn't beat Intel, but it doesn't have to. If you're an esports gamer, it'll do 240hz. If you're a AAA gamer, you'll get very similar performance and won't be able to tell the difference.

 

Say the Intel cpu does 180fps in one game and the AMD CPU does 170 fps in that game. Are you really telling me that the extra 10 fps is noticeable? I'm telling you now, it ain't.

 

 

 

 

[Wonderhead]

25 minutes ago, Hemanse said:

I have not seen microstutter mentioned in reviews? Could you link to where you saw that. Im probably going for the 3600 or 3700x in a little bit when the RTX 2070 super starts releasing and microstutter is a big nono. Altho as mentioned could just be down to everything being so new.

 

Could be an issue on his part, but PUBG was showing the micro stuttering. I don't play PUBG, but it's never a good sign when there is micro stuttering.

[Wonderhead]

38 minutes ago, Hemanse said:

I have not seen microstutter mentioned in reviews? Could you link to where you saw that. Im probably going for the 3600 or 3700x in a little bit when the RTX 2070 super starts releasing and microstutter is a big nono. Altho as mentioned could just be down to everything being so new.

Tbh PUBG has always had this issue though, so it's not a deal breaker for me.