cpu advice AMD ZEN - Should I wait?

[Captive]

To put things brisk and brief, should I wait for AMD's Zen line of processors before making a choice on which CPU to buy for my next PC build?

 

 

I am patient and don't mind waiting until December 2017, but obviously sooner is ideal. I hear different things, some people claim they'll be great for gaming and others say they're just competing with Intel's server-tier chips.

 

 

My main use will be streaming games, which puts a lot of strain on the CPU if I choose lower compression rates which are ideal. These lower rates drag a little on my current Intel i7-4770K, so obviously I'd like something that won't hurt it so much - if it hurts the chip, it hurts me.

 

 

I know 'more instructions' doesn't always mean more performance for gaming, but when going a mile further and streaming, is it a good choice? I know that back in 2012 many people recommended AMD's Bulldozer series over Intel's Haswell for streaming, but for someone who isn't worried about money or budgets, will Zen be a good choice?

 

This thread isn't so much about crystal  balls or predictions, or even to start an Intel vs AMD debate; I, and likely many others, would love some advice from more experienced members.

 

#cpuisbae

[Godlygamer23]

You state that this thread isn't so much about "crystal balls or predictions," but then you ask "will Zen be a good choice?" Therefore negating the aforementioned claim. 

[Guest]

You'd be putting a huge risk in waiting for Zen. We don't know enough out of performance to make a decision. It could be $500 for all we know and could barely compete with an i5. 

We don't know how AMD will price these CPU's so its better to stick with what we know and not gamble on the performance of Zen. 

[Captive]

1 minute ago, Godlygamer23 said:

 

Well, people advised against buying top tier NVIDIA GPUs since Q1, and to wait for Pascal.

 

All I'm asking is if I should wait.

[Godlygamer23]

1 minute ago, Captive said:

Well, people advised against buying top tier NVIDIA GPUs since Q1, and to wait for Pascal.

 

All I'm asking is if I should wait.

If you don't need to do a build now and you're willing to wait, then most definitely wait. But you can't go wrong with Skylake either.

[Guest]

I think you should wait for Zen. I have heard good things and why not?

[Godlygamer23]

2 minutes ago, Bobby_Joe_90 said:

I think you should wait for Zen. I have heard good things and why not?

You will hear good things on just about everything. But the question is, are they true? 

[Humbug]

If you personally wish to support AMD then do so.

 

Otherwise no.

[Captive]

19 minutes ago, Humbug said:

If you personally wish to support AMD then do so.

 

Otherwise no.

I'm really not about taking sides or supporting anyone. There are mixed views on streaming and whether separate core CPU performance matters more than core count, which is usually where AMD has done well in previously.

[Humbug]

18 minutes ago, Captive said:

I'm really not about taking sides or supporting anyone. There are mixed views on streaming and whether separate core CPU performance matters more than core count, which is usually where AMD has done well in previously.

basically Zen is expected to perform well and be a good architecture.

 

However it's not expected to destroy Intel competition so if you urgently need a better CPU today then you may as well buy Intel. If you are ok with your 4770k then fine wait for zen.

[aisle9]

It's not going to lead to an eight-core CPU with Haswell-level IPC that wipes the floor with a 6700K and costs $250, or anything miraculous/snake oily you've surely read. Whether or not you wait for it is entirely up to you. I'd personally just buy Skylake and not look back if I were thinking about upgrading, but if you're not in any rush, no harm in waiting for Zen benchmarks to show up.

[BrightCandle]

AMD themselves basically gave a performance estimate that put it in the Haswell performance range, ie similar to your current CPU. Admittedly they are talking about some more cores but you could go out right now and buy a faster CPU than that with 6-8 cores and have it for the next 6 months and then some. We really don't know what the final performance characteristics will be, but AMD has of late underperformed their estimates and really is haswell like performance at the end of 2016 beginning 2017 compelling? It might be a cheaper version of what you can get today but its sounding like anything new, it'll be 3 generations of CPUs behind at that point.

[N3rot0xin]

You can wait but you wont gain much more then what you have now. AMD doesn't exactly have a track record of making leaps and bounds in terms of CPU architecture in recent years. Granted, for the price you cant beat them so there is that to consider. If budget is an obstacle, then id would say wait for Zen and see how it compares. If budget is not, then go for Intel. 6700k is a great choice for any well rounded workload(gaming/video and /or 3d rendering and editing). Again, the choice is ultimately yours to make with what you read here.

[Captive]

10 minutes ago, N3rot0xin said:

 

 

1 hour ago, BrightCandle said:

 

 

1 hour ago, aisle9 said:

 

 

1 hour ago, Humbug said:

 

On that note, I'll purchase from 'Team Blue'. What does that mean for me in terms of CPU choice as I don't care how much I spend on it.

 

Is the i7-5960X too far? How about the i7-5930K? And finally, the i7-6700K? I'm going to need a CPU that can cope with less stream compression, and if a 6700K isn't much better than my 4770K, it won't be worth the upgrade.

 

For streaming, two cores are usually recommended for the game and four for OBS. What do you folk suggest?

[aisle9]

1 minute ago, Captive said:

 

 

 

On that note, I'll purchase from 'Team Blue'. What does that mean for me in terms of CPU choice as I don't care how much I spend on it.

 

Is the i7-5960X too far? How about the i7-5930K? And finally, the i7-6700K? I'm going to need a CPU that can cope with less stream compression, and if a 6700K isn't much better than my 4770K, it won't be worth the upgrade.

 

For streaming, two cores are usually recommended for the game and four for OBS. What do you folk suggest?

5960X and 5930K are overkill. If you're streaming, I'd do either a 6700K or a 5820K. Probably lean towards the 5820K if it were my system.

[Captive]

1 minute ago, aisle9 said:

 

What makes those chips overkill in comparison to the 5820K? Surely the 5930K would prove better for overclocking which would benefit streaming?

 

Sorry, not as experienced as you guys so I can't really make my mind up.

[aisle9]

Just now, Captive said:

What makes those chips overkill in comparison to the 5820K? Surely the 5930K would prove better for overclocking which would benefit streaming?

 

Sorry, not as experienced as you guys so I can't really make my mind up.

The 5930K is $500 and the 5820K is $360-380 or so. That's the biggest distinction for me. A 5820K is perfectly capable of that workload, so why blow all the extra cash?

[Lurick]

If you're going for an x99 processor I would suggest waiting for the end of May when Broadwell-E comes out, current leaks show a nice improvement over the current generation.

[aisle9]

2 minutes ago, Lurick said:

If you're going for an x99 processor I would suggest waiting for the end of May when Broadwell-E comes out, current leaks show a nice improvement over the current generation.

And there's that. Have we seen actual pricing for Broadwell-E yet? I seem to recall speculation that they'd come in 50% higher than Haswell-E, but haven't really kept track since.

[Lurick]

Just now, aisle9 said:

And there's that. Have we seen actual pricing for Broadwell-E yet? I seem to recall speculation that they'd come in 50% higher than Haswell-E, but haven't really kept track since.

Sadly just speculation at this point although if the recent leaks to ebay are anything to go by they should be about on par with what original guesses were. I think the 6900K sold on ebay for around $900 and the 6950 for around $1600.

[Clanscorpia]

8 minutes ago, Captive said:

What makes those chips overkill in comparison to the 5820K? Surely the 5930K would prove better for overclocking which would benefit streaming?

 

Sorry, not as experienced as you guys so I can't really make my mind up.

Only difference from 5820K to 5930K is PCIe lanes. The 5930K has 40 while the 5820K has 28 making the 5930K the CPU from 3-4 way SLI

[ybriK]

5930K and 5960X are so OVERPRICED you have to be someone who blows money who wants bragging rights to get those or the most performance for hopefully the right reasons...

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1320?vs=1317

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-5960X-vs-Intel-Core-i7-5820K/2580vs2579

[Captive]

22 minutes ago, aisle9 said:

 

Fair enough, I could put some of that extra money on a nice Hue+ lighting kit.

22 minutes ago, Lurick said:

 

Now that's a really attractive prospect.

 

20 minutes ago, ybriK said:

 

Yeah, even in those artificial benchmarks, the 5820K is only slightly behind the 5930K. So definitely not worth the huge price!

 

21 minutes ago, Clanscorpia said:

 

Well, I plan on running a single graphics card so that will be zero use!

 

To anyone who wants to kindly answer: does the Intel i7-5820K provide satisfactory overclocking with cooling like the NZXT Kraken X61?

 

Sorry for the headache, guys. Scrublife chose me.

 

[aisle9]

3 minutes ago, Captive said:

To anyone who wants to kindly answer: does the Intel i7-5820K provide satisfactory overclocking with cooling like the NZXT Kraken X61?

Silicon lottery and all, but 5820K's are known to be good overclockers.

[Captive]

3 minutes ago, aisle9 said:

Silicon lottery and all, but 5820K's are known to be good overclockers.

Seems like the most attractive option then, thanks.