Can you justify upgrading from a 2600k for gaming?

[MyName13]

14 minutes ago, Strike105X said:

Game engines aside, there's only 4 games i know that properly take advantage of more then 4 cores/threads: crysis 3, Witcher 3, battlefield 3, battlefield 1. There's other games as well that can use more then 4 threads, but not to a degree that matters, which is why i emphasized "properly" with those 4.

Assassin's Creed syndicate used all 12 threads on my r5 1600 (40-50% utilization), even in areas where nothing was happening.

[ARikozuM]

9 minutes ago, MyName13 said:

Assassin's Creed syndicate used all 12 threads on my r5 1600 (40-50% utilization), even in areas where nothing was happening.

Same can be seen with Rise of the Tomb Raider, but these are not normal cases. Something is being unused or held up by latency while the scheduler takes care of the job (likely microcode or AMD driver as that overhead should enable them to get more out of the CPU). 

[atavax]

4 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

 

If you're interested in 144Hz gaming then upgrading to an 8700K is a no brainer.

 

show me the benchmarks that prove this

[AlTech]

Just now, atavax said:

 

show me the benchmarks that prove this

a 7700K is also a no brainer for 144Hz.

Literally any benchmark video using a powerful enough GPU + a 7700K/8700K will achieve 144Hz at 1080p or 1440p (depending on GPU).

 

Many reviewers such as "Tech Deals", "Hardware Unboxed" and others have shown off how easily the 7700K can get 144Hz in games with a suitable GPU.

 

CPUs are what is required to process what the GPU renders and draw on the screen.

 

Higher FPS requires a better CPU. Better graphics settings and resolution requires a better GPU. Again, "Tech Deals" explains this in his videos.

[atavax]

1 minute ago, AluminiumTech said:

Literally any benchmark video using a powerful enough GPU + a 7700K/8700K will achieve 144Hz at 1080p or 1440p (depending on GPU).

i don't doubt that. I doubt that a 2600k overclocked to 4.8Ghz, like I have, is not powerful enough.

[AlTech]

4 minutes ago, atavax said:

i don't doubt that. I doubt that a 2600k overclocked to 4.8Ghz, like I have, is not powerful enough.

Here:

 

 

 

 

 

Source: GamersNexus - https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2867-intel-i7-2600k-2017-benchmark-vs-7700k-1700-more/page-3#!/ccomment-page=2

[Jon Jon]

48 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

Here:

 

 

 

 

 

Source: GamersNexus - https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2867-intel-i7-2600k-2017-benchmark-vs-7700k-1700-more/page-3#!/ccomment-page=2

I had to do digging to see what video card they used for the test.

 

So they are using an EVGA GTX 1080 FTW for these tests.

 

So if you are going for a 1070+ video card, then it looks to be worth it to upgrade the i7, but if you are not gaming at 144hz, I would argue against it.

[Coaxialgamer]

What gpu are you using? That's what it boils down to. 

[atavax]

On 10/23/2017 at 11:21 AM, Coaxialgamer said:

What gpu are you using? That's what it boils down to. 

1080ti

[TahoeDust]

I had a 2700k and a 1080ti until a few months ago.  I do not regret upgrading.