Does anyone remember these?

[79wjd]

3 hours ago, LUUD18 said:

Only it didn't... i5 7600 is faster then Ryzen 5 1600 and the same price.

 

i5 7600 has 15% faster single-core speed and 20% faster quad-core speed.

R5 1600 has more cores and it better at multitasking but those tasks are very specific.

 

Except once you overclock the 1600 it pulls ahead -- the single threaded performance ends up ahead of a 7600 and the multithreaded performance ends up WAY ahead. This all translates into similar averages in gaming but much better minimum framerates on the 1600.

 

Kaby Lake's IPC is about 7% faster than Ryzen and a 7600 boosts to 3.9ghz on all four cores (a 7500 boosts to 3.6ghz on all four cores) . So, a 7600 is equivalent to a 1600 at 4.2ghz and a 7500 is equivalent to a 1600 at 3.85ghz. 

1 hour ago, LUUD18 said:

 

Most games the i5 is still better.

Only on a few games the 1600x has few more fps(GTA V, Civ 6).

Those benchmarks also don't fall in line with the rest of the benchmarks out there. It also looks like they used 2400mhz ram and Ryzen benefits a lot from faster ram, and ran the CPU at stock speeds. Did they also run on an up-to-date bios? Did they run in high-performance mode? And again, no minimums. 

 

 

[LUUD18]

18 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Except once you overclock the 1600 it pulls ahead -- the single threaded performance ends up ahead of a 7600 and the multithreaded performance ends up WAY ahead. This all translates into similar averages in gaming but much better minimum framerates on the 1600.

 

Kaby Lake's IPC is about 7% faster than Ryzen and a 7600 boosts to 3.9ghz on all four cores (a 7500 boosts to 3.6ghz on all four cores) . So, a 7600 is equivalent to a 1600 at 4.2ghz and a 7500 is equivalent to a 1600 at 3.85ghz. 

Those benchmarks also don't fall in line with the rest of the benchmarks out there. It also looks like they used 2400mhz ram and Ryzen benefits a lot from faster ram, and ran the CPU at stock speeds. Did they also run on an up-to-date bios? Did they run in high-performance mode? And again, no minimums. 

 

 

In these benchmarks the i5 still wins?

Also you say when you overclock the 1600x. Do you mean overclock the 1600x and leave the i5 stock? That would be a bit unfair wont it?

[79wjd]

11 minutes ago, LUUD18 said:

In these benchmarks the i5 still wins?

The 7600k, which costs more, wins in average fps but the minimums are worse or similar, and minimums are what make a game look stuttery. 

Quote

Also you say when you overclock the 1600x. Do you mean overclock the 1600x and leave the i5 stock? That would be a bit unfair wont it?

Not really when you consider pricing. A 7600k+Z270 board costs $340, a 7500+B250 board costs $220~, A 1400+B350 board costs $230~, and a 1600+B350 board costs $300~.

[AshleyAshes]

...If you need to invest a significant effort to defend that your joke is even a joke at all... You may have done an awful, awful job at telling a joke.

[LUUD18]

3 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

The 7600k, which costs more, wins in average fps but the minimums are worse, and minimums are what make a game look stuttery. 

Not really when you consider pricing. A 7600k+Z270 board costs $340, a 7500+B250 board costs $220~, A 1400+B350 board costs $230~, and a 1600+B350 board costs $300~.

I don't know where you are looking but in that graph the minimums are also still better? 

The i5 7600k with mobo will cost a bit more but is also better. It's not like the OP said: 'Made the i5 redundant'. They are quite equal. Also you didn't include the cost of RAM in here. The better speed ram will also cost more then default ram for i5.

[79wjd]

2 minutes ago, LUUD18 said:

I don't know where you are looking but in that graph the minimums are also still better? 

The i5 7600k with mobo will cost a bit more but is also better. It's not like the OP said: 'Made the i5 redundant'. They are quite equal. Also you didn't include the cost of RAM in here. The better speed ram will also cost more then default ram for i5.

The overclocked 7600k performs similarly, costs more, and has far less performance going forward. 

 

You can get cheaper ram and just overclock it, but even going with more expensive ram, that's a $30 difference. A 1400 based system is about $100 cheaper than a 7600k based system, and the 7600k requires a more expensive cooler.

[tom_w141]

15 minutes ago, AshleyAshes said:

...If you need to invest a significant effort to defend that your joke is even a joke at all... You may have done an awful, awful job at telling a joke.

Yeah when you forget there are non Europeans around + People who genuinely think an i5 > R5. Yeah my bad xD Like Marty says in back to the future 1 "you guys just weren't ready for that yet"

[tom_w141]

11 minutes ago, LUUD18 said:

I don't know where you are looking but in that graph the minimums are also still better? 

The i5 7600k with mobo will cost a bit more but is also better. It's not like the OP said: 'Made the i5 redundant'. They are quite equal. Also you didn't include the cost of RAM in here. The better speed ram will also cost more then default ram for i5.

You didn't watch that video I mentioned did you?  Sorry I am at work so do have to do my job also so I haven't written the lengthiest replies. However @djdwosk97 is explaining it pretty well. The point to understand is this: The 7600k costs more and might be slightly ahead now but its cores are saturated already, therefore it has no headroom and no future hence the whole "remember this" semi joke thread, the i5 in its current form is dead. Intel need to either slash the 7600k to the $150 mark (more in line with its value) and/or future i5s are todays i7s (4 core/8 thread).

[NumLock21]

The old school pentium stickers was made out of metal.

 

[AshleyAshes]

22 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

Yeah when you forget there are non Europeans around + People who genuinely think an i5 > R5. Yeah my bad xD Like Marty says in back to the future 1 "you guys just weren't ready for that yet"

You're still doing it.

[Guest]

35 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

Yeah when you forget there are non Europeans around + People who genuinely think an i5 > R5. Yeah my bad xD Like Marty says in back to the future 1 "you guys just weren't ready for that yet"

No... You can't just put a sticker up, say ayyyy, and assume we will make "quantum leaps" (as someone else put it) and assume you meant the r5 is better. I agree with you it is just that the joke was horrible. Please admit it.

[tom_w141]

14 minutes ago, Abyss Gaming said:

No... You can't just put a sticker up, say ayyyy, and assume we will make "quantum leaps" (as someone else put it) and assume you meant the r5 is better. I agree with you it is just that the joke was horrible. Please admit it.

Yeah true  Sorry I thought the correlation was obvious enough my bad.

[LUUD18]

Intel will release the 8th gen pretty soon I think. 

[Automobili3XF]

On 2017-5-8 at 10:05 AM, tom_w141 said:

 

Ayyyyyyyyy

Of course i remember the i5! I have one on my router, a 3470!

[Timbs]

On 5/8/2017 at 6:28 AM, Princess Cadence said:

My brother got angry at me for throwing away my Kaby Lake i7 sticker... no bragging right sticker on my case

But then again I like the case dead clean.

Jokes on you, I have a Sandy Bridge i5. Still have the Sandy Bridge i3 sticker on there. Full on sleeper PC tbh.