How long will an i7 8700K (5Ghz OC) be able to play the latest games?

[GamerBlake]

7 hours ago, Mister Woof said:

Yep. I can get 100fps *sometimes* with mostly lower settings at 1080p on my 5700 xt lol. In city areas though? not happening.

Ahhh well then I guess I should be glad I’m getting 90-100 FPS at max settings at 1440p.  
 

But I’m also in the starting area and haven’t been to any big cities like Athens.

[Ebony Falcon]

14 hours ago, ShrimpBrime said:

Ouch. 

You're missing out on some mad performance that low of speeds.

 

 

 

The differance form 3200 tight timings to 3600 loose is basically nothing and even vs tight timings ur talking 5 percent 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Ebony Falcon said:

The differance form 3200 tight timings to 3600 loose is basically nothing and even vs tight timings ur talking 5 percent 

Umm no. 

Intel anything under 4000mhz is slow.

Comparison 3200/3600/4000mhz++.

 

Mines at 4300 cl 16. 

 

[Mick Naughty]

13 minutes ago, ShrimpBrime said:

Umm no. 

Intel anything under 4000mhz is slow.

Comparison 3200/3600/4000mhz++.

 

Mines at 4300 cl 16. 

 

Any graphs showing an FPS comparison in recent games? 

[Pickles von Brine]

This is a post without reading any of the contents of this thread.


Consider I replaced my 3770k recently to a 3600x I would say you have at least 3-5 years before you truely need to replace it. Even then, it may be more of a want than a need. I really didn't HAVE to replace my CPU. I could play games just fine. 

[Ebony Falcon]

1 hour ago, Mick Naughty said:

Any graphs showing an FPS comparison in recent games? 

Init lol

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Mick Naughty said:

Any graphs showing an FPS comparison in recent games? 

Nope. I do competitive benchmarking.

[bomerr]

1 hour ago, ShrimpBrime said:

Umm no. 

Intel anything under 4000mhz is slow.

Comparison 3200/3600/4000mhz++.

 

Mines at 4300 cl 16. 

 

correct..

intel quad channel platforms (x99,x299) are fine with slow ram, even 2133.

intel dual channel platforms benefit from increased ram speed, even 4GHz ram speed.

Ryzen 3rd gen needs 3600 because of infinity fabric speed. 

 

which setup do you like more, 8700k or 2700x? 

[Mick Naughty]

6 minutes ago, ShrimpBrime said:

Nope. I do competitive benchmarking.

Ok so no real world reason to upgrade then. 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, bomerr said:

correct..

intel quad channel platforms (x99,x299) are fine with slow ram, even 2133.

intel dual channel platforms benefit from increased ram speed, even 4GHz ram speed.

Ryzen 3rd gen needs 3600 because of infinity fabric speed. 

 

which setup do you like more, 8700k or 2700x? 

Ah yes great question.

The 2700x is my daily driver.

8700k competitive benching only (3D)

 

Performance 3D benching scores much higher on the 8700k setup, the memory performance is greatly superior.

 

I like the both equally actually. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Mick Naughty said:

Ok so no real world reason to upgrade then. 

To upgrade what? The memory? 

 

3200mhz to 4000+ ?? Thats probably more than 5%.......

 

But then you say gaming.

Some games are cpu intensive and some GPU inttensive.

 

 

[Zando_]

18 hours ago, Mister Woof said:

ACOD sucks on everything. It's the game's fault, not the hardware.

To be fair to the game though, it does keep very stable frametimes, so it was playable even on my OCed X5670 (a CPU from 2011). 
 

18 hours ago, Mister Woof said:

to be honest, i gave up because i got annoyed at the bounty hunters constantly chasing me around.

Unless they're over your level, they're usually easy to beat. Mostly a case of having the right offensive abilities (and always running the healing one), then going ham with swords. I find swords are the best for a 1v1 situation, staffs are good for multiple enemies. Axes and clubs are fun but they're too slow to be all that effective, leaves you open too much due to how long the animations are. Other than the loadout, you mostly just spam parry (there's visual cues for blockable attacks), or dodge if they go red (unblockable). Also if you get a perfect doge it slows time down, letting you get a good few hits in, and gives you a boost to your ability energy. Just backing up and spamming arrows with either of the two special bows that make all arrows fire/poison damage on top of the physical damage, is also a valid tactic. 

The easiest way is to just climb a ver high cliff and rain arrows down on them though, the AI will derp out and they can't figure out to climb that high, and kinda just run around in circles. I got 3 of them in my area after a battle and kept dying, so next restore from save I just climbed up the nearest cliff, took them out easily. 

The only really bullshit things to fight I've come across were the boars you hunt for the Daughters of Artemis questline (and mostly the 1st one that summons a bunch of tiny boars), but I made it through those. Only one that stopped me was the Medusa, which is a bullshit fight with utter bullshit mechanics and no way to do any satisfying damage to the boss, or a way to reasonably remain alive due to the abilities it has and the ads it summons. I ended up installing WeMod and using cheats for a 100x damage multiplier specifically to curbstomp that boss, then went back to normal combat afterwards. 
 

18 hours ago, GamerBlake said:

The game itself is good. Gameplay wise.

 

It just seems like the optimization is shit.

 

Ive played games with graphics just as good and gotten 120-125 FPS.

Game itself is actually not bad, like I said it keeps very stable frametimes on anything with 6 cores or so, which in my eyes is the mark of a well built game. The low fps is probably due to the sheer mind boggling size of the game (that map is insanely massive), and the anti-piracy software. IIRC some madlad Russians rebuilt a whole copy of AC Origins without Denuvo (they had to remove and then fix thousands and thousands of files and dependencies IIRC), and it resulted in a decent fps boost, and a massive uptick in 1% lows on anything with a lower core count. 

Basically the game is actually fine, it's the stupid anti-piracy thing that doesn't work anyways that hurts it. That said, if you're getting 80fps or so it should be fine, this isn't really a game that needs over 100 to feel smooth. Similar to the Tomb Raider games, so long as you get a smooth framerate above 60 it's gonna be like butter. 

Odyssey specifically I used to play at about 35-45fps with my X5670 and a 1080 Ti (quite the imbalance at 1080p, lol), but again the frametimes were rock fucking solid so it was smooth and totally playable. Same reason 30fps in well built console titles will be playable, they're extremely consistent and so feel properly smooth. 

Also to answer the actual question.... a damn long time lol. My 5820K and 5960X are still kicking names and taking ass and they're from 2014, 6 years old at this point. X79 CPUs from 2011-2013 will still stomp and they're 7-9 years old. Only X58 has fallen behind a good bit when OCed, and that's a platform from 11 years ago. These new CPUs are much much faster, but games haven't been getting that much harder to run (so long as you have 6c/12t or more, modern games really only hurt quad cores), so I assume the need to upgrade the CPU will get lower and lower over time. 

With stuff like RTX, GPU upgrades may be more needed, but then games haven't gotten exponentially harder to run for the GPU in most cases though, other than an exception or two like RDR2. 

[Mick Naughty]

1 minute ago, ShrimpBrime said:

To upgrade what? The memory? 

 

3200mhz to 4000+ ?? Thats probably more than 5%.......

 

But then you say gaming.

Some games are cpu intensive and some GPU inttensive.

 

 

Well the one game I play is both. Doubt my current stuff will oc well as well as having such a low end board. 

[xg32]

18 hours ago, Mister Woof said:

ACOD sucks on everything. It's the game's fault, not the hardware.

tbf ACOD and RDR2 looks great even with less intensive/optimized settings, but if some1 insists to run everything on max. GL lol. 

 

With the rate chrome's going we'd need 16 cores and 32gb ram minimum to run it...soon.

[Zando_]

7 minutes ago, xg32 said:

tbf ACOD and RDR2 looks great even with less intensive/optimized settings, but if some1 insists to run everything on max. GL lol.

Also true, and a lot of people forget to turn fog to med/low and volumetric clouds to medium. No visual difference in-game (may be noticeable if you're taking high res screenshots then comparing side to side lol), but pretty good performance gain. Those two options hurt fps the most out of all of them. 

[Mister Woof]

4 minutes ago, Zando Bob said:

Also true, and a lot of people forget to turn fog to med/low and volumetric clouds to medium. No visual difference in-game (may be noticeable if you're taking high res screenshots then comparing side to side lol), but pretty good performance gain. Those two options hurt fps the most out of all of them. 

I play on the medium preset.

 

100ish fps on my own and around 70-80 in towns and cities.

[Zando_]

Just now, Mister Woof said:

I play on the medium preset.

 

100ish fps on my own and around 70-80 in towns and cities.

I haven't actually had an fps counter up when I've been playing lately, but when I slap F1 for the built in stats thing every now and then, it's usually high 60s-80s depending on where I am. Running a 5960X at 4.7Ghz, so single core is going to be a bit behind. My RVII is at stock, so it's really not that much faster than a 5700XT, certainly not an influencing factor at 1080p. I do have everything but fog/clouds maxed though. 

[Mister Woof]

4 minutes ago, Zando Bob said:

I haven't actually had an fps counter up when I've been playing lately, but when I slap F1 for the built in stats thing every now and then, it's usually high 60s-80s depending on where I am. Running a 5960X at 4.7Ghz, so single core is going to be a bit behind. My RVII is at stock, so it's really not that much faster than a 5700XT, certainly not an influencing factor at 1080p. I do have everything but fog/clouds maxed though. 

On my system, seems when fps is low GPU is under 70% utilization... probably CPU issues

[Zando_]

Just now, Mister Woof said:

Seems when fps is low GPU is under 70% utilization... probably CPU issues

Towns will hit the CPU damn hard due to the sheer number of NPCs I assume. And then yeah, any further oofing of the CPU is on good 'ole denuvo. They should just remove it from the game, but someone at Ubi HQ apparently thinks it'll actually stop piracy (in this specific case it encourages it since games run noticeably better without it) so RIP. Outside of that it's a solid game though. If they'd add co-op that'd be pretty cool though, I find it's an enjoyable sandbox to just abuse abilities in, and it'd be fun to bring friends along. 

[bomerr]

17 minutes ago, Zando Bob said:

Running a 5960X at 4.7Ghz

Am so jelly. My 5820K could hit 4.7GHz. My 1660v3 only hits 4.2GHz @ 1.28V.  I got screwed in the lottery.  

[Zando_]

1 minute ago, bomerr said:

Am so jelly. My 5820K could hit 4.7GHz. My 1660v3 only hits 4.2GHz @ 1.28V.  I got screwed in the lottery.  

This was a j-bin lol, so I actually sorta lost the lottery on it. Some could do 5Ghz dailyable, mine caps out at 4.8 all core, 4.9 with HT off, and that requires max safe voltages. It does do 4.5 at the same voltage my 5820K does 4.2 at though lol, so below its cap it's a nice chip. 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Mick Naughty said:

Well the one game I play is both. Doubt my current stuff will oc well as well as having such a low end board. 

There's always that fine line between benchmarking and gaming. 

If you are stuck running say 3200-3600mhz memory frequency, you'd want CL 12-12-12 or tighter. This will help latency for sure. 

 

Board does matter, but more so for high end. Dual top cards, top cooling, top clocks

I aim for top clocks. Benchmarking for scores and points matters to myself, I don't game much. So stability for me is less important. In fact always pushing hardware to the edge barely finishing benchmarks sometimes lol. 

 

So in your case, I really only have specs of your system over what you really run the system at, what you've tried, what works or don't works. 

 

There's always performance to be found in a rig somewhere. 

Gaining 5% is a gain. Doesn't matter how little it seems, it's still a gain.

 

Some people say oh this isn't worth it or that isn't worth it. That's more of a matter of opinion if they haven't been able to experience it. Know what I mean?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Ebony Falcon]

18 hours ago, ShrimpBrime said:

There's always that fine line between benchmarking and gaming. 

If you are stuck running say 3200-3600mhz memory frequency, you'd want CL 12-12-12 or tighter. This will help latency for sure. 

 

Board does matter, but more so for high end. Dual top cards, top cooling, top clocks

I aim for top clocks. Benchmarking for scores and points matters to myself, I don't game much. So stability for me is less important. In fact always pushing hardware to the edge barely finishing benchmarks sometimes lol. 

 

So in your case, I really only have specs of your system over what you really run the system at, what you've tried, what works or don't works. 

 

There's always performance to be found in a rig somewhere. 

Gaining 5% is a gain. Doesn't matter how little it seems, it's still a gain.

 

Some people say oh this isn't worth it or that isn't worth it. That's more of a matter of opinion if they haven't been able to experience it. Know what I mean?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes but spending 600 on 4ghz ram to gain 5 percent is stupid when you can buy 3200mhz ram for day 150 and spend the extra money on the next card tier up 

[Mister Woof]

34 minutes ago, Ebony Falcon said:

Yes but spending 600 on 4ghz ram to gain 5 percent is stupid when you can buy 3200mhz ram for day 150 and spend the extra money on the next card tier up 

It probably matters more for people already at the max.

 

If you have a 2080 ti (or two) and money to throw away there's not much else to do

[Mick Naughty]

My cpu wont handle a 2080ti. Also not spending that kinda cash for so little use. 5% is 10 frames if I can get that but thinking a 1080ti is the best bet. Should be more than 10 frames and 3 times the cost of fancy ram.