gaming build

[Sanctorum]

Just now, Manu Saraswat said:

that review came out on exactly the day ryzen 5 released April 11, like I said the gaming performance has really increased like you can see in all those videos

You are aware those obscure videos you posted were uploaded on the 12th of April, right?

[Manu Saraswat]

11 minutes ago, Sanctorum said:

You are aware those obscure videos you posted were uploaded on the 12th of April, right?

yeah that was after the day 1 patch which was huge bonus

[Sanctorum]

Just now, Manu Saraswat said:

yeah that was after the day 1 patch which was huge bonus

Or they're just really obscure videos that are incorrect, as evidenced by Ryzen 5 reviews from any reputable reviewer.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_5_1600/12.html

[Manu Saraswat]

14 minutes ago, Sanctorum said:

Or they're just really obscure videos that are incorrect, as evidenced by Ryzen 5 reviews from any reputable reviewer.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_5_1600/12.html

u quote someone i quote someone..

https://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2017/05/11/amd-ryzen-5-1600-review/5

here ryzen 1600 is shown beating i5 7600k..plus there's always that ryzen can be overclocked, something that 7600 can never do, plus better performance per dollar

[Sanctorum]

1 minute ago, Manu Saraswat said:

here ryzen 1600 is shown beating i5 7600k

Um, no it isn't lmfao. In Ashes, a benchmark that favours AMD, at stock speeds the 7600k is lower by 1FPS, which is margin of error.

In Deus Ex, the stock clocked 7600k is almost 10% faster than overclocked 1600x.

Fallout 4, the i5 is conveniently not there, but stock i7-7700k and i3-7350k perform on par with overclocked 1600(x), so you can assume an i5 is going to be right around the same performance.

5 minutes ago, Manu Saraswat said:

plus there's always that ryzen can be overclocked

Again, yup, that's not the point though. Also, as you can see from the article YOU linked, overclocking didn't make a great deal of difference, if any.

[Manu Saraswat]

20 minutes ago, Sanctorum said:

Um, no it isn't lmfao. In Ashes, a benchmark that favours AMD, at stock speeds the 7600k is lower by 1FPS, which is margin of error.

In Deus Ex, the stock clocked 7600k is almost 10% faster than overclocked 1600x.

Fallout 4, the i5 is conveniently not there, but stock i7-7700k and i3-7350k perform on par with overclocked 1600(x), so you can assume an i5 is going to be right around the same performance.

Again, yup, that's not the point though. Also, as you can see from the article YOU linked, overclocking didn't make a great deal of difference, if any.

those cpu were made to be overclocked..just like the intel k processors , nd the 7600 will not outperform an oc'd 1600

I'm not saying that there are no problems with ryzen , but the games that are available rn were all built for intel platform

the latest patches of the games however have fixed these problems

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/ryzen-game-perf-increases-with-new-rise-of-the-tomb-raider-patch.html

 

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/04/game-patches-boost-performance-on-ryzen-showing-just-what-can-and-cant-be-done/

 

also another point that i want to make is if you are considering going the intel route buying a 7600k is the way to go here not 7600

[Sanctorum]

23 minutes ago, Manu Saraswat said:

those cpu were made to be overclocked..just like the intel k processors

They weren't "made to be overclocked". Just because they're unlocked, doesn't mean they were "made to be overclocked". I also don't understand why you keep trying to hit this point home, I've already stated several times that I'm well aware Ryzen CPUs are unlocked.

23 minutes ago, Manu Saraswat said:

nd the 7600 will not outperform an oc'd 1600

Well that's just not true, as we've seen from all the benchmarks from reputable sources, including the bit-tech article you linked yourself.

23 minutes ago, Manu Saraswat said:

but the games that are available rn were all built for intel platform

Again, you seem to be completely missing the point. This is entirely irrelevant. The FACT of the matter is that Kaby Lake IPC is better than Ryzen, and again, as I stated, for the most part, an i5 will perform slightly better than R5 in games, whether the R5 is the better value/option or not.

23 minutes ago, Manu Saraswat said:

the latest patches of the games however have fixed these problems

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/ryzen-game-perf-increases-with-new-rise-of-the-tomb-raider-patch.html

Less than a 10% improvement with the R5 1600 isn't exactly a huge deal. Also, no i5 to compare this to, so an i5 is still likely better. In fact, if you look at the RotTR benchmark in the TPU article I linked, you'll see the R5 1600 gets 111FPS, better than pre patch performance in the Guru3D article. Let's be nice and say post patch is +10%, going by the TPU performance, that puts R5 1600 at 122FPS in RotTR, which is still behind the i5-7500's 126.5FPS.

24 minutes ago, Manu Saraswat said:

also another point that i want to make is if you are considering going the intel route buying a 7600k is the way to go here not 7600

Uh, debatable. 

[Manu Saraswat]

28 minutes ago, Sanctorum said:

They weren't "made to be overclocked". Just because they're unlocked, doesn't mean they were "made to be overclocked". I also don't understand why you keep trying to hit this point home, I've already stated several times that I'm well aware Ryzen CPUs are unlocked.

Well that's just not true, as we've seen from all the benchmarks from reputable sources, including the bit-tech article you linked yourself.

Again, you seem to be completely missing the point. This is entirely irrelevant. The FACT of the matter is that Kaby Lake IPC is better than Ryzen, and again, as I stated, for the most part, an i5 will perform slightly better than R5 in games, whether the R5 is the better value/option or not.

Less than a 10% improvement with the R5 1600 isn't exactly a huge deal. Also, no i5 to compare this to, so an i5 is still likely better. In fact, if you look at the RotTR benchmark in the TPU article I linked, you'll see the R5 1600 gets 111FPS, better than pre patch performance in the Guru3D article. Let's be nice and say post patch is +10%, going by the TPU performance, that puts R5 1600 at 122FPS in RotTR, which is still behind the i5-7500's 126.5FPS.

Uh, debatable. 

There is no point of this whole debate if u don't want to OC, the whole point that 1600 is more bang for the buck is that it can be easily oc'd to a ryzen 1600x level.. But i don't see any reason why u shouldn't, these "unlocked" processors were made unlocked for a reason.. Also most games rn don't utilize the 6 cores and 12 threads efficiently since no mainstream gaming cpu have ever had these many cores or threads.. So of course it'll take a little while for optimizing games for these.. But sure if u want to build a PC nd change the processor every year.. Be my guest 

[Sanctorum]

11 minutes ago, Manu Saraswat said:

There is no point of this whole debate if u don't want to OC, the whole point that 1600 is more bang for the buck is that it can be easily oc'd to a ryzen 1600x level.. But i don't see any reason why u shouldn't, these "unlocked" processors were made unlocked for a reason.. 

No, they weren't "made unlocked for a reason", they just weren't locked. You go out of your way to lock a CPU, not vice versa. Also, you're the one assuming OP is going to overclock. He might not. Considering he was looking at a locked i5, it's safer to assume he has no interest in overclocking. 

12 minutes ago, Manu Saraswat said:

Also most games rn don't utilize the 6 cores and 12 threads efficiently since no mainstream gaming cpu have ever had these many cores or threads.. So of course it'll take a little while for optimizing games for these

Okay, again, completely irrelevant.

13 minutes ago, Manu Saraswat said:

But sure if u want to build a PC nd change the processor every year.. Be my guest 

Sorry, are you seriously trying to claim that if you purchase an i5, you'll have to upgrade your CPU every year? Why don't you tell that to the people still running 2500k's.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Manu Saraswat said:

that review came out on exactly the day ryzen 5 released April 11, like I said the gaming performance has really increased like you can see in all those videos

if this devolves into AMD vs Intel i will delete this thread. I asked for builds not flame wars

[Manu Saraswat]

4 hours ago, NovaMan01 said:

if this devolves into AMD vs Intel i will delete this thread. I asked for builds not flame wars

OK.. But I'm just gonna leave you with this nd let you decide for yourself.. 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-1600x-cpu-review,5014-5.html

Just remember that a ryzen 1600 can be tuned to same performance as a 1600x..nd as you can see in that review a 1600x beats 7600...rest is ur choice no more posts from me..