i7 10700k - Ryzen 7 3700x

[ValorantIsBetterThanCsgo]

Basically the title. Im personally for the AMD alternative, much better value, fairly similair performance etc. But after having taken a look at graphs like these... i dunno... 
Id be using it to game primarily, but usually id have a youtube video or spotify or discord or everything at once running on my second and third monitor. 
Goal is to get 144fps or higher in most competetive games like everything from Valorant to Rainbow Six, while also running discord and chrome bla bla bla. 

Is the chart representative of how it really is? If so, do you guys think the few fps are worth it? Do you guys have any negative or positive experience with either? I expect to be bombarded with "GO AMD WE R IN 2020" answers, but id rather ask a dumb question than buy a wrong cpu 

[Moonzy]

If your only purpose is gaming, Intel is fine

 

Personally on the fence between both companies, AMD is better value but I've had so many small quirks that annoys me

[Nena Trinity]

Id buy the 3700x every time unless no non-k sku cheaper.

[LIGISTX]

5 minutes ago, ValorantIsBetterThanCsgo said:

Basically the title. Im personally for the AMD alternative, much better value, fairly similair performance etc. But after having taken a look at graphs like these... i dunno... 
Id be using it to game primarily, but usually id have a youtube video or spotify or discord or everything at once running on my second and third monitor. 
Goal is to get 144fps or higher in most competetive games like everything from Valorant to Rainbow Six, while also running discord and chrome bla bla bla. 

Is the chart representative of how it really is? If so, do you guys think the few fps are worth it? Do you guys have any negative or positive experience with either? I expect to be bombarded with "GO AMD WE R IN 2020" answers, but id rather ask a dumb question than buy a wrong cpu 
 

Yes, the chart is accurate and is why I still am Intel. I mostly game on my PC... well and photo edit a lot. But its hard to say a 9900k or in your case a 10700k @ 5 ghz or higher is not "good at multi tasking and photo editing" etc. I rather the FPS in games, and the slight hit I would maybe get in some of the editing I do. 

Just now, Moonzy said:

If your only purpose is gaming, Intel is fine

 

Personally on the fence between both companies, AMD is better value but I've had so many small quirks that annoys me

This.... Intel platofrms just "work". If gaming was not the focus, I would argue AMD is more "worth the sometimes small headaches". But.... if your use case is where Intel shines.......... 10700k all the way.

[LIGISTX]

1 minute ago, Nena Trinity said:

Id buy the 3700x every time unless no non-k sku cheaper.

I definitely wouldn't. Definitely not for gaming. For general purpose PC or video editing/rendering workstation, yes, AMD 100%.

[Mateyyy]

Well, that particular test is not exactly the best to make your decision by since nobody plays SOTR at 1080p Medium with a 2080Ti. But yes, incidentally Intel is still better for high refresh rate gaming.

 

Honestly, at 144Hz, even a 3700X should do just fine. But, if you literally just use your computer for gaming, I'd suggest going for a 10600K, not the 10700K, since it doesn't offer any more performance than the 10600K does, and that one costs the same as a 3700X.

 

Are you doing a fully new system, or just upgrading to a different platform (so your CPU, motherboard and maybe memory)? What budget are you working with?

 

Oh, also

13 minutes ago, ValorantIsBetterThanCsgo said:

"GO AMD WE R IN 2020"

Edited July 31, 2020 by Mateyyy

[Guest]

Strictly gaming 10700K is where it's at.

 

(Ahem, even my 8700K is better at gaming than amd any.) /edit

 

[Nena Trinity]

2 minutes ago, LIGISTX said:

I definitely wouldn't. Definitely not for gaming. For general purpose PC or video editing/rendering workstation, yes, AMD 100%.

If someone prefer just plug and play no tweaking the non-K sku makes sense.

[LIGISTX]

1 minute ago, Nena Trinity said:

If someone prefer just plug and play no tweaking the non-K sku makes sense.

Oh, yes on that I agree. I am just saying I don't agree with 3700 over 10700 for someone who is gaming.

 

Also.... if you want to talk about plug n play just working, AMD is not the best option lol. They are a lot better now though, which is good. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Nena Trinity said:

If someone prefer just plug and play no tweaking the non-K sku makes sense.

The all core 5ghz makes the K a better deal.

Gaming likes frequency!

[Nena Trinity]

1 minute ago, ShrimpBrime said:

The all core 5ghz makes the K a better deal.

Gaming likes frequency!

ASRock & ASUS has enhancment features to match the multi-core score, but it sacrifice single core...

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Nena Trinity said:

ASRock & ASUS has enhancment features to match the multi-core score, but it sacrifice single core...

Yea, processors these days do all kinds of weird stuff like that. The performance loss would never be more than a couple percent really.

[Nena Trinity]

4 minutes ago, ShrimpBrime said:

Yea, processors these days do all kinds of weird stuff like that. The performance loss would never be more than a couple percent really.

You gain like 200cb+ in Cinebech multi-core but lose like 30cb in single, not a bad trade really...

[Guest]

Just now, Nena Trinity said:

You gain like 100cb+ in Cinebech multi-core but lose like 30cb in single, not a bad trade really...

That's not bad. I'd settle with that if it saves a few bucks.

[Nena Trinity]

7 minutes ago, ShrimpBrime said:

That's not bad. I'd settle with that if it saves a few bucks.

200 actually, but the single core score was about 490 to 500 but with this enabled it drops down to 470 or so... I think with it enabled my R5 3600 gets same single core but still is a 100cb behind in MC... :I

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Nena Trinity said:

200 actually, but the single core score was about 490 to 500 but with this enabled it drops down to 470 or so... I think with it enabled by 10600 gets same single core but still is a 100cb behind in MC... :I

These small point fluctuations dont mean a great deal when testing with a single benchmark.

 

How does WPrime 1.55 look? 

Any of this make a difference with superpi mod 32m (good for testing memory configs too)

Have you done any 3D benching also?

 

(What I'm saying is CB isnt going to be the tell all )

 

[ValorantIsBetterThanCsgo]

7 hours ago, Mateyyy said:

 

Are you doing a fully new system, or just upgrading to a different platform (so your CPU, motherboard and maybe memory)? What budget are you working with?

I am in fact upgrading. Going for a motherboard, cpu, and a cpu fan obviously. My budget is alright, id rather not spend over 550 euro vor all three, and since ive kinda got my heart set on the Noctua NHU12S, that would mean i have some 490-500 euros for the cpu and motherboard combined

 

[ValorantIsBetterThanCsgo]

I really appreciate all the replies guys, didnt expect this.

 

I see a lot of people going yeah intel is better for gaming and has less quirks, but will it be better in gaming + some 3-5 other background tasks running almost constantly? This may be a really dumb question i dunno, just wanted to clarify yeah ill "only" be using the pc for gaming but for me thats not just running games, but running games with like 4 other applications up and running

 

Ty a lot for your help guys!

 

[Mateyyy]

3 hours ago, ValorantIsBetterThanCsgo said:

I am in fact upgrading. Going for a motherboard, cpu, and a cpu fan obviously. My budget is alright, id rather not spend over 550 euro vor all three, and since ive kinda got my heart set on the Noctua NHU12S, that would mean i have some 490-500 euros for the cpu and motherboard combined

2 hours ago, ValorantIsBetterThanCsgo said:

I really appreciate all the replies guys, didnt expect this.

 

I see a lot of people going yeah intel is better for gaming and has less quirks, but will it be better in gaming + some 3-5 other background tasks running almost constantly? This may be a really dumb question i dunno, just wanted to clarify yeah ill "only" be using the pc for gaming but for me thats not just running games, but running games with like 4 other applications up and running

 

Ty a lot for your help guys!

12 threads should handle a game, Discord, Chrome, Spotify and other junk in the background just fine. I wouldn't really worry about it.

 

Prices vary a fair bit depending on the country, but going by Germany pricing on PCPP here's what I'd recommend considering your budget:

PCPartPicker Part List

Type	Item	Price
CPU	Intel Core i5-10600K 4.1 GHz 6-Core Processor	€273.79 @ Mindfactory
CPU Cooler	Noctua NH-U12S chromax.black 55 CFM CPU Cooler	€69.90 @ Amazon Deutschland
Motherboard	MSI MAG Z490 TOMAHAWK ATX LGA1200 Motherboard	€215.47 @ Alza
	Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts
	Total	€559.16
	Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-08-01 11:10 CEST+0200

I'd also look for a Z490 Gaming Edge WIFI (ATX, not the mATX variant), since it has a slightly better VRM than the Tomahawk.

There's also the Z490 Vision G, which is ever so slightly behind the Tomahawk in terms of VRM, but it's got tons of rear IO connectivity and a white aesthetic if you're into that.

 

If you end up changing your mind and favouring the extra threads, for around the same price as the Z490 Tomahawk I'd look for either of these boards for a 3700X and plenty of future upgradability: X570 Tomahawk, B550 Aorus Pro, B550 Gaming Edge WIFI/Tomahawk (on B550, the Tomahawk and GE WIFI have identical VRMs as opposed to Z490), Strix B550-F.

[Nena Trinity]

Yeah 10600k is the best and only logical unlocked Intel chip, id go with it or a locked i5 / i7 if not AMD all the way. 3600 & 3700X IMHO better overall unless gaming at 1080p with a 2080Ti... OwO 

 

Edit: Games mostly relies on integer performance which is the only thing Comet Lake is about same and win thanks to clock speeds only, if a game on the other hand is FPU intensive Ryzen will do better...

[xg32]

3 hours ago, ValorantIsBetterThanCsgo said:

I really appreciate all the replies guys, didnt expect this.

 

I see a lot of people going yeah intel is better for gaming and has less quirks, but will it be better in gaming + some 3-5 other background tasks running almost constantly? This may be a really dumb question i dunno, just wanted to clarify yeah ill "only" be using the pc for gaming but for me thats not just running games, but running games with like 4 other applications up and running

 

Ty a lot for your help guys!

 

the 10600k actually dumpsters the 3700x for pure gaming, but if you multitask then the 3700x does have more cores and the 10700k cost more.

 

I just cannot recommend a 3700x with zen 3 around the corner, i'd get a 3600 or a 10600k with a better gpu or just wait for zen 3.

 

anything 2070S and below can be paired with a 3600, 2080S/2080ti with a 10600k or 10700k depending on budget. if you REALLY need more cores, a 3900x is a steal at 375usd. 3700x is in a weird spot, outdated soon, and not exactly cheap like the 3600.

 

I'm just looking at pure performance, amd falls just short for high refresh gaming, if you ask me about laptops, im not getting anything other than a 4900hs atm and that's amd, intel...sigh

[Mateyyy]

6 minutes ago, Nena Trinity said:

Yeah 10600k is the best and only logical unlocked Intel chip, id go with it or a locked i5 / i7 if not AMD all the way. 3600 & 3700X IMHO better overall unless gaming at 1080p with a 2080Ti... OwO 

Buying a locked Intel chip today makes little to no sense, the whole point is getting the most clock speed out of it.

Also in productivity the 10600K and 3600 generally trade blows, and an overclock on the 10600K makes it take the lead in most cases. That's excluding the Adobe suite, where the i5 will almost always come out ahead because of current optimisations, and even more so in programs like Premiere with QSV.

[Nena Trinity]

2 minutes ago, Mateyyy said:

Buying a locked Intel chip today makes little to no sense, the whole point is getting the most clock speed out of it.

Also in productivity the 10600K and 3600 generally trade blows, and an overclock on the 10600K makes it take the lead in most cases. That's excluding the Adobe suite, where the i5 will almost always come out ahead because of current optimisations, and even more so in programs like Premiere with QSV.

Locked is fine for plug and play consumers also 10400/10400F is often on par with 3600 depends on game ofc, also if it's a tech savvy user the Ryzen is often their go to also look at the edit about integer & FPU. Sure it may not matter much for games now, but I think the first victims when games want more FPU will be the quad cores CPUs Intel been pushing since 2nd Gen all the way up to 7th as i5/i7 and now i3 will be the first ones to suffer!  

[Haro]

3 minutes ago, Nena Trinity said:

10400/10400F

That's a generally bad cpu. Bad value and usually goes for more than a 3600. Which is just not worth it. Also considering that Intel benifits a fair bit from overclocking, getting a locked chip just doesn't make sense. 

 

3 minutes ago, Nena Trinity said:

Sure it may not matter much for games now, but I think the first victims when games want more FPU will be the quad cores CPUs Intel been pushing since 2nd Gen all the way up to 7th as i5/i7 and now i3 will be the first ones to suffer!  

I don't necessarily understand lol. 

What do you exactly mean by that? Unless I'm being dumb right now. 

[Nena Trinity]

22 minutes ago, TofuHaroto said:

That's a generally bad cpu. Bad value and usually goes for more than a 3600. Which is just not worth it. Also considering that Intel benifits a fair bit from overclocking, getting a locked chip just doesn't make sense. 

 

I don't necessarily understand lol. 

What do you exactly mean by that? Unless I'm being dumb right now. 

Actually many tests I have seen shows the 10400f and non f match or beat 3600, now this was gaming and so the argument for strictly gaming especially in regions where 10400 and f even more so can be found "cheaper" than the 3600 and will run nice on even crap tier boards one can argue they are better for gamers if he or she has no intention of overclocking the chip. 

 

Also FPU bottlenecks can happen in games, saw it happen in a few lesser known games where my FX-8370 was stuck at around 60-70% usage and no core went to a 100% yet FPS was sub 60 and the only feasible explanation is a FPU bottle neck which was Piledriver and all other Buldozer based architectures weakness yet this rarely the biggest bottleneck in games more often single core was. 

 

FPU bottlenecks seems to be mostly common in open world games while single core issue was more in old games such as War Thunder and World of tanks, yet even those ran at 60+ mostly, my argument against the Skylake and its relatives is the INFERIOR FPU compared to Zen2 will probably be a issue later in such titles! Also as I stated first ones to struggle will probably be the quads.