Which 8-core CPU...?

[Eighjan]

... is currently:

• Widely available,
• Reasonable affordable, to buy & run (lower TDP, etc),
• Worthy of consideration for, at best, a 'decade old' MMO...?

NOT a factor:

• streaming
• overclocking (except XMP/DOCP)
• mass/bulk storage that requires any level of redundancy.

 

Why...?  Because I want, no; would like, to graduate from 6-core levels of componentry.

[Electronics Wizardy]

What cpu do you have now? If you have a 6 core cpu I wouldn't upgrade normally.

 

But the 5800x and 11700k are the fast options, if you want cheap see if you can get a 10700k/3700x cheap.

[Eighjan]

Just now, Electronics Wizardy said:

What cpu do you have now? If you have a 6 core cpu I wouldn't upgrade normally.

 

But the 5800x and 11700k are the fast options, if you want cheap see if you can get a 10700k/3700x cheap.

In respect of your first point, I wouldn't say it would be worth it for an R5 3600... but I've had i5 & R5 for close on a decade & want to experience 'better' (?).

[Dedayog]

You've got a 3600, what isn't it doing for you outside of the irrational reason you posted.

 

Why do you want an 8-core?  Why not more?

 

Your logic that 8-core is better is flawed. 

[SorryBella]

Just now, Eighjan said:

... is currently:

• Widely available,
• Reasonable affordable, to buy & run (lower TDP, etc),
• Worthy of consideration for, at best, a 'decade old' MMO...?

I would jump to 12 core and get a 5900X, its only 100$ extra of what i would slot in the "reflex recommendation" of 5800X. Reasonably easy to cool (NH D-15 is plenty overkill for this bad boy), is actually going back to the store shelves, and is a big jump in upgrade to whatever 10 year old CPU you got.

 

For intel side itll be 10700k or heavily rebated 10850k. Why not Rocket Lake? Less cores for too much extra heat for the small clock gain which imo not worth while.

[Eighjan]

Just now, Dedayog said:

Why do you want an 8-core?  Why not more?

The jump in expense of 10/12-core or higher is too much to justify; 8-core is still - in some cases - more readily justifiable.

[dean_5234]

1 minute ago, Eighjan said:

The jump in expense of 10/12-core or higher is too much to justify; 8-core is still - in some cases - more readily justifiable.

The absolute minimum I would upgrade to would be a 5800x. Anything worse would be pointless and a waste of money.

[Eighjan]

2 minutes ago, SorryClaire said:

10 year old CPU

10 year old MMO (game) is the heaviest load any CPU I use would have, albeit I play at 1440/144.

[Chris Pratt]

1 minute ago, Eighjan said:

The jump in expense of 10/12-core or higher is too much to justify; 8-core is still - in some cases - more readily justifiable.

But not as an upgrade to a relatively new 6 core chip. Making the jump to an 8 core 5800X for $450 makes no sense, but making the jump to a 12 core 5900X for $550 would probably at least be worth it, assuming you actually make use of the additional power.

[SorryBella]

1 minute ago, Eighjan said:

albeit I play at 1440/144.

Then youll gain so much more from GPU upgrades instead. 1440p is still SUPER GPU bound even to this day.

[Chris Pratt]

16 minutes ago, Eighjan said:

... is currently:

• Widely available,
• Reasonable affordable, to buy & run (lower TDP, etc),
• Worthy of consideration for, at best, a 'decade old' MMO...?

NOT a factor:

• streaming
• overclocking (except XMP/DOCP)
• mass/bulk storage that requires any level of redundancy.

 

Why...?  Because I want, no; would like, to graduate from 6-core levels of componentry.

If all you're doing is playing a "decade old MMO", then stay where you're at. There is absolutely no point to getting more cores. An upgrade to a 5600X (also six core) would get you a fairly significant single core boost, which would potentially make a difference in your game, but even that wouldn't really be worth the $300 cost to upgrade. Long and short, you're fine where you're at.

[Eighjan]

6 minutes ago, SorryClaire said:

Then youll gain so much more from GPU upgrades instead. 1440p is still SUPER GPU bound even to this day.

I'm not sure that the (only) game I play isn't still more reliant on CPU than GPU; as far as I know (for the game in question), the GPU is just used to display the work the CPU does, unlike most other titles these days.

 

EDIT:

I'm reluctant to name the game, as I feel (maybe with lack of grounding) that games that old aren't the epitome of a hardware 'test'.

Edited May 18, 2021 by Eighjan

[Dedayog]

1 minute ago, Eighjan said:

I'm not sure that the (only) game I play isn't still more reliant on CPU than GPU; as far as I know (for the game in question), the GPU is just used to display the work the CPU does, unlike most other titles these days.

You could tell us the game and we can help you figure that out.  10 years isn't all that old for CPU/GPU usage divisions, and games like Rift, WoW, EQ, Eve Online, etc all handle the balance a little different.

 

[Eighjan]

3 minutes ago, Dedayog said:

WoW

That one.

 

EDIT:

I don't feel that, in the era of even SotTR or Doom Eternal, it warrants parity of consideration.

[Chris Pratt]

2 minutes ago, Eighjan said:

I'm not sure that the (only) game I play isn't still more reliant on CPU than GPU; as far as I know (for the game in question), the GPU is just used to display the work the CPU does, unlike most other titles these days.

It may be more CPU bound, but throwing more cores at it doesn't mean anything if it's not optimized to actually use that. A decade ago, games were barely using dual core. It might be capable of using quad core, but you're probably already throwing more cores than it needs at with 6.

 

What matters the most still in gaming, and definitely for older games is clockspeed and IPC, i.e. single core perf. Once you have "enough" cores, it's doesn't do anything to add more.

[Chris Pratt]

4 minutes ago, Eighjan said:

That one.

 

EDIT:

I don't feel that, in the era of even SotTR or Doom Eternal, it warrants parity of consideration.

WoW is still heavily single core dependent. They've started to make use of multicore, and it scales pretty well to at least 6, but there's diminishing returns for each bump in core count. You might see an improvement with 8, but I doubt it will be significant enough to warrant the cost of an upgrade. It would cost you about 2 1/2 years of game time to upgrade for comparison sake.

[Eighjan]

2 minutes ago, Chris Pratt said:

WoW is still heavily single core dependent. They've started to make use of multicore, and it scales pretty well to at least 6, but there's diminishing returns for each bump in core count. You might see an improvement with 8, but I doubt it will be significant enough to warrant the cost of an upgrade. It would cost you about 2 1/2 years of game time to upgrade for comparison sake.

I've got 13+ yrs in WoW & have upgraded from i5-750 through i5-4690K to Ryzen 5 3600; just thought it'd be nice to go up a level (5 to 7).

 

Maybe one day, then... but probably not this year.

[Eighjan]

35 minutes ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

10700k

That had been looking like a favourable candidate.

[Dedayog]

3 minutes ago, Eighjan said:

I've got 13+ yrs in WoW & have upgraded from i5-750 through i5-4690K to Ryzen 5 3600; just thought it'd be nice to go up a level (5 to 7).

 

Maybe one day, then... but probably not this year.

It sounds like you want to buy something just to buy something.  That's a perfectly fine thing, nothing wrong with retail therapy.

 

There isn't much that is going to be really worth it, so grab whatever "feels good" to you.

[Electronics Wizardy]

2 minutes ago, Eighjan said:

That had been looking like a favourable candidate.

Seems like a waste of money if you have a 3600. There will be no noticeable difference in almost all programs. If you want a noticeable jump in multithreaded programs, id go upto a 12 core or above. And for single threaded tasks there is still almost no difference that you will notice.

[Mister Woof]

Take a look at this video. He's one of the few people who actually test specifically for WoW.

 

 

 

 

 

[Mister Woof]

14 minutes ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

Seems like a waste of money if you have a 3600. There will be no noticeable difference in almost all programs. If you want a noticeable jump in multithreaded programs, id go upto a 12 core or above. And for single threaded tasks there is still almost no difference that you will notice.

There will be a significant improvement in FPS lows in MMOs. Generally, this is where it matters most. High average FPS when you're out doing quests and stuff don't really matter too much. It's when you're doing raid mechanics or big PVP battles that the bigger CPU oomph will come in handy.

The 3600 already trails behind 8th gen Intel in these scenarios; jumping up from the 3600 to a 5600x/5800x would be pretty significant where it matters - raids and mass pvp.

 

You could even recover most of your 5600x/5800x cost by selling the 3600; they are overvalued at present.