Need help picking a processor to pair with a 4070

[SONYSIKE]

10 minutes ago, Why_Me said:

Those are worthless.

dude, it's his only options

[Linuswasright]

4 minutes ago, SONYSIKE said:

dude, it's his only options

Bottleneck calculators literally are worthless.

like it’s actually useless like you go in knowing more than when you leave like it’ll say a r7 7800x3d bottlenecks a Rx 580 like it’s actually worse than iswrbenchmark cause at least userbenchmark purposefully makes it wrong

[Linuswasright]

7 minutes ago, SONYSIKE said:

I got with bottleneck calculators for my first line of research, then I look at yt vids

Skip that first one. 
It’s a productivity build. Gaming won’t be comparable (and amd will always win
Use toms hardware. Sometimes it’s dumb af, but generally I agree with what it says. I guess that makes it a good reviewer.

[SONYSIKE]

10 minutes ago, Linuswasright said:

Bottleneck calculators literally are worthless.

like it’s actually useless like you go in knowing more than when you leave like it’ll say a r7 7800x3d bottlenecks a Rx 580 like it’s actually worse than iswrbenchmark cause at least userbenchmark purposefully makes it wrong

They aren't completely useless, why do you hate them so much? It's also based on user reviews too, they are literally a good starting point. Please tell me why you hate them so much.

[Linuswasright]

On 3/9/2024 at 5:12 PM, SONYSIKE said:

They aren't completely useless, why do you hate them so much? It's also based on user reviews too, they are literally a good starting point. Please tell me why you hate them so much.

They don’t work; it says a r5 5600 works well with a Rx 570 (rx 570 is way too weak)

user benchmark is a joke. Anyone experienced knows that. Use passmark or tech power up instead
 

Theres a reason intel & and forums have it banned

[Why_Me]

54 minutes ago, SONYSIKE said:

dude, it's his only options

Bottleneck calculators are his only options? 

[brob]

2 hours ago, EMUMSC said:

Intel I5 14600K Rs,110,000 or an Intel I5 14400F Rs.80,000 with a B760 MBD

 

As mentioned in the original thread i5-14600K significantly outperforms 7700X in Adobe content creation packages. https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/14th-gen-intel-core-processors-content-creation-review/

 

[SONYSIKE]

20 minutes ago, Why_Me said:

Bottleneck calculators are his only options? 

no, i meant the cpu options he gave

[SONYSIKE]

49 minutes ago, Linuswasright said:

They don’t work; it says a r5 5600 works well with a Rx 570 (rx 570 is way too weak)

user benchmark is a joke. Anyone experienced knows that. Use passmark or tech power up instead
 

Theres a reason intel & and forums have it banned

i dont use user benchmark, i use the pcbuilds one

 

user benchmark is heavily bias against amd

[Linuswasright]

2 hours ago, SONYSIKE said:

i dont use user benchmark, i use the pcbuilds one

 

user benchmark is heavily bias against amd

Ah u said “it uses user benchmarks” and I got worried. Idk much about them (pcbuilds) but passmark is my go to man (with versus), but I know some people love tech power up

 

But… Bottleneck calculators are stupid. Until we get one that works (which tbh is possible, you just need a ton of data) then steer way clear.
 

Example

this is the dumbest thing I’ve seen since the fall of Constantinople

7800xt+r7 7800x3d doesn’t bottleneck like that is all I can say

 

[SONYSIKE]

44 minutes ago, Linuswasright said:

Ah u said “it uses user benchmarks” and I got worried. Idk much about them (pcbuilds) but passmark is my go to man (with versus), but I know some people love tech power up

 

But… Bottleneck calculators are stupid. Until we get one that works (which tbh is possible, you just need a ton of data) then steer way clear.
 

Example

this is the dumbest thing I’ve seen since the fall of Constantinople

7800xt+r7 7800x3d doesn’t bottleneck like that is all I can say

 

you have general tasks selected. You need to select gpu intensive tasks which is gaming

[Linuswasright]

8 hours ago, SONYSIKE said:

ou have general tasks selected. You need to select gpu intensive tasks which is gaming

1. They’re not gaming

2. 7800x3d doesn’t bottleneck like that on productivity
3.This is even dumber:

 

[Linuswasright]

8 hours ago, SONYSIKE said:

you have general tasks selected. You need to select gpu intensive tasks which is gaming

@Why_Me can u back me up, I’m tired and I want this guy to just listen to someone more experienced

[Why_Me]

8 hours ago, SONYSIKE said:

you have general tasks selected. You need to select gpu intensive tasks which is gaming

The only method you want to use is reviews with benchmarks.  With that said the OP's primary uses for his build is editing meaning the i5 14400 / 14400F would be the obvious choice.

 

 https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/236777/intel-core-i5-processor-14400f-20m-cache-up-to-4-70-ghz/specifications.html

 

[LogicalDrm]

*** Threads merged ***

 

Please keep this in one thread. Additionally, when replying to multiple different posts at once, please use Multiquote-function (two arrows with plus). This will collect all those posts in single reply and make the forums much nicer to read.

[SONYSIKE]

15 hours ago, Linuswasright said:

@Why_Me can u back me up, I’m tired and I want this guy to just listen to someone more experienced

why are you triggered? im just trying to teach you how to use a bottleneck calculator

[TatamiMatt]

5 hours ago, SONYSIKE said:

why are you triggered? im just trying to teach you how to use a bottleneck calculator

Its still not great, im running a 7800X3D and 7800XT at 1440p, it says theres no bottle neck, except, my GPU is usually running at 100% on almost every game i play while my CPU runs at a max of 60%, almost half of what it can do, the GPU is a major bottleneck in this scenario (the scenario being every game i play), where the calculator says it 100% isnt

[SONYSIKE]

5 minutes ago, TatamiMatt said:

Its still not great, im running a 7800X3D and 7800XT at 1440p, it says theres no bottle neck, except, my GPU is usually running at 100% on almost every game i play while my CPU runs at a max of 60%, almost half of what it can do, the GPU is a major bottleneck in this scenario (the scenario being every game i play), where the calculator says it 100% isnt

some games use only cpu or gpu as their main graphics/calculator. idk how to put it to words, i guess some games only rely on the cpu or gpu as their main resource. best way i could put it.

[TatamiMatt]

3 hours ago, SONYSIKE said:

some games use only cpu or gpu as their main graphics/calculator. idk how to put it to words, i guess some games only rely on the cpu or gpu as their main resource. best way i could put it.

I mean yeah but ive played a variety of both cpu and gpu heavy games, still the outcome ive stated above, calculator is still not correct regardless of the scenario. For example itll put the 13900K above the 7800X3D due to the higher clock speed and extra cores, but this isnt indicative of real life results

[Linuswasright]

11 hours ago, SONYSIKE said:

some games use only cpu or gpu as their main graphics/calculator. idk how to put it to words, i guess some games only rely on the cpu or gpu as their main resource. best way i could put it.

… lets just say it’s either you’re right and everyone’s wrong or everybody else is right and you’re wrong. 

 

I run a build which should be at 10% processor bottleneck. It runs ~5-10% gpu bottlenecked on cpu intense games. (I did it on purpose, it’s a mt coding build rather than gaming or anything)

 

Also, you’re saying some things are more intense on certain things, but “graphics calculator”? Do you mean rendering process?

… do you know how gpus and CPUs etc work? The cpu is barely used in drawing up graphics (besides blitting for some reason on some ancient intel CPUs). The last time a cpu was heavily used for mainly rendering was 2000 (not counting igpus) (addendum; directing (I forgor the name) and accumulating isn’t real get out of my head). It’s because of how CPUs are better at more complex equations and gpus are better at a lot of simpler ones. That’s why some games are heavier on the cpu, not because they’re drawing smthn crazy (that’s more reliant on the gpu), but because it’s trying to calculate the next move for the ai or whatever.

Real world examples: I’m making a 3D chess game. (Ignoring that writing an ai for gpu is faster, we’re thinking normal games rn). Since the ai is so complex, it’ll be heavier on the cpu. If I decided to put the chess board inside of a nice little area & I wanted it to be ray traced, and also decided to make it multiplayer instead of having ai, then it would be gpu heavier.

 

In conclusion: what you said was incorrect and shows a clear misunderstanding in how pcs work.

Also, bottleneck calculators are in general very wrong. Ignoring outside factors, ignoring the ram, ignoring everything, it’s very very hard to predict bottlenecks reliably with equations. While ai could figure it out, it would require so much data that we just don’t have access to at this time (besides amd, Nvidia and intel I guess). Like previously mentioned, the irl examples show this point.

I leave you with one question, the same as the start. If a group of some of the most dedicated tech enthusiasts say you’re wrong, along with most casual pc builders, why are you right? Are you smarter than everyone else? Or is it much more likely that people who know better and are more experienced … know better than you.

 

Also; I’ve tried to build a bottleneck calculator. It’s really really hard, bc there’s so little data. Do you think that random website cracked the code? Do you think they’ve spawned in and found some unfindable data?

[SONYSIKE]

14 hours ago, Linuswasright said:

… lets just say it’s either you’re right and everyone’s wrong or everybody else is right and you’re wrong. 

 

I run a build which should be at 10% processor bottleneck. It runs ~5-10% gpu bottlenecked on cpu intense games. (I did it on purpose, it’s a mt coding build rather than gaming or anything)

 

Also, you’re saying some things are more intense on certain things, but “graphics calculator”? Do you mean rendering process?

… do you know how gpus and CPUs etc work? The cpu is barely used in drawing up graphics (besides blitting for some reason on some ancient intel CPUs). The last time a cpu was heavily used for mainly rendering was 2000 (not counting igpus) (addendum; directing (I forgor the name) and accumulating isn’t real get out of my head). It’s because of how CPUs are better at more complex equations and gpus are better at a lot of simpler ones. That’s why some games are heavier on the cpu, not because they’re drawing smthn crazy (that’s more reliant on the gpu), but because it’s trying to calculate the next move for the ai or whatever.

Real world examples: I’m making a 3D chess game. (Ignoring that writing an ai for gpu is faster, we’re thinking normal games rn). Since the ai is so complex, it’ll be heavier on the cpu. If I decided to put the chess board inside of a nice little area & I wanted it to be ray traced, and also decided to make it multiplayer instead of having ai, then it would be gpu heavier.

 

In conclusion: what you said was incorrect and shows a clear misunderstanding in how pcs work.

Also, bottleneck calculators are in general very wrong. Ignoring outside factors, ignoring the ram, ignoring everything, it’s very very hard to predict bottlenecks reliably with equations. While ai could figure it out, it would require so much data that we just don’t have access to at this time (besides amd, Nvidia and intel I guess). Like previously mentioned, the irl examples show this point.

I leave you with one question, the same as the start. If a group of some of the most dedicated tech enthusiasts say you’re wrong, along with most casual pc builders, why are you right? Are you smarter than everyone else? Or is it much more likely that people who know better and are more experienced … know better than you.

 

Also; I’ve tried to build a bottleneck calculator. It’s really really hard, bc there’s so little data. Do you think that random website cracked the code? Do you think they’ve spawned in and found some unfindable data?

What I think is that pcbuilds had gotten their data from user input. You too can enter your CPU and GPU combo stats

[SONYSIKE]

18 hours ago, TatamiMatt said:

I mean yeah but ive played a variety of both cpu and gpu heavy games, still the outcome ive stated above, calculator is still not correct regardless of the scenario. For example itll put the 13900K above the 7800X3D due to the higher clock speed and extra cores, but this isnt indicative of real life results

Yeah, all calculators will never be 100% correct, that's why I would use it as a guideline for my research or maybe even find something better.

[Linuswasright]

8 hours ago, SONYSIKE said:

What I think is that pcbuilds had gotten their data from user input. You too can enter your CPU and GPU combo stats

I know. But it’s different from like passmark because of how much data you need. To find an average of benchmarks, you only need a couple scores. To attempt to predict things, for each cpu, with the million outside factors, is very difficult. Again; have you tried to make a pc bottleneck ai?

[Linuswasright]

8 hours ago, SONYSIKE said:

Yeah, all calculators will never be 100% correct, that's why I would use it as a guideline for my research or maybe even find something better.

They are actively misleading. They have a margin of +or- about 10% which is crazy. That’s the difference between a 7700xt and a 7900xtx.

[Linuswasright]

8 hours ago, SONYSIKE said:

Yeah, all calculators will never be 100% correct, that's why I would use it as a guideline for my research or maybe even find something better.

One last time: are you right? And everyone else is wrong? Or are you wrong, and everybody else is right. Occam’s razor my bro. And if u really want to disprove it, give accurate evidence. Like if every comparing service had a 20% margin of error, would people still use them?