2600k being replaced. 1600X or 8400?

[Squazzer]

I know there are quite a bunch of these posts around. Sorry!

But I havn't found enough about the comparisons of these two yet

 

My AsRock Exteeme7 Gen 3 mottherboard just died on me, and I now have a 2600K I cannot do anything with.

In my process of finding out what to do, I'm looking into buying the newest gen processers and making myself a new computer.

 

I have found that if I end up doing this, I might either buy the 1600X or te i5 8400.

The basics: http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-840h0-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-1600X/3939vs3920

 

The 8400 has a 65W TDP where the 1600X has a 95W TDP. Easy, right?

Not quite... Many of the benchmarks I see, the 8400 is using double the percentage of its CPU as the 1600X. Would this mean that the 1600X would actually use less power when running a game? I haven't been able to find any benchmarks of this.

 

I have seen that almost all bencharks say that the i5 8400 genereates more FPS than the 1600X in games. But I have also seen that the GPU seems to run at a lower frequency on the Ryzen CPU's. Is this something to be worried about? Is the 1600X kneecapping the GPU?

 

Considering motherboards, it seems that all I can get for the 8400 is a Z-series 300 chipset. They're kinda expensive considering I wont be OC'ing the 8400.

Do we know anything about upcoming motherboards for Coffee Lake that are cheaper than the Z-series?

 

If you know of a benchmark or some resource online that could help me answer these questions I would love to hear about it

[seon123]

Why would you care about the TDP of the CPUs?

The 8400 generally performs better than Ryzen in games, but at the cost of a shorter upgrade path. 

Budget Coffee chipsets are coming out in Q1. 

https://www.techspot.com/review/1514-core-i5-8400-vs-overclocked-ryzen-5-1600/

[DeadlyTitan]

if you are looking to enter high refresh rate gaming then intel is the way to go. There are some differences to note here and it purely depends on what you value more

 

i5 8400 gives you higher FPS, but the r5 1600 will give you better minimum's which means lesser shuttering.This can be cause of r5 1600 being able to do more stuff simultaneously, Handling windows background tasks and gaming at the same time.  just google ryzen cpu's better minimums and you can see it yourself. But if you want pure raw perfomance then go for i7 8700(i know i know i am just throwing it along) 

[Squazzer]

1 minute ago, seon123 said:

Why would you care about the TDP of the CPUs?

I have to pay for my own electricity.

I have had my 2600K since 2011. When calculating on power used over 6 years, 65W vs. 95W could end up making the 8400 pay for itself in the long run

[Defunct Lizard]

just got a 2500

 

[dizmo]

Is power consumption really that much of an issue for you? Unless you're paying a very healthy amount for energy, it's likely maybe $20 more a year if you get a higher consuming system.

 

Personally I'd go with Intel, just because of all the headaches that go along with getting a first gen set up. Granted most of these are apparently gone now, but it's left a sour taste in my mind, and I wouldn't really consider AMD until Zen 2 unless you're getting a very sweet deal.

 

Z series motherboards will still benefit you. You can turbo lock the i5. Easy overclocking.

 

If you do more than just game, or do multiple things at the same time, then I'd consider Ryzen. More threads.

 

2 minutes ago, Squazzer said:

I have to pay for my own electricity.

I have had my 2600K since 2011. When calculating on power used over 6 years, 65W vs. 95W could end up making the 8400 pay for itself in the long run

I highly doubt that.

[Starelementpoke]

3 minutes ago, Squazzer said:

I have to pay for my own electricity.

I have had my 2600K since 2011. When calculating on power used over 6 years, 65W vs. 95W could end up making the 8400 pay for itself in the long run

30 W is quite literally a lightbulb. 

[Brooksie359]

8 minutes ago, Squazzer said:

I have to pay for my own electricity.

I have had my 2600K since 2011. When calculating on power used over 6 years, 65W vs. 95W could end up making the 8400 pay for itself in the long run

That is tdp and not power consumption. Look at power draw benchmarks to see what the difference is.

[seon123]

Just now, Brooksie359 said:

That is tdp and not power consumption. Look at power draw benchmarks to see what the difference is.

So where does the electricity's work go to, if not heat? Energy can not be destroyed, and the CPU has no moving parts. 

Unless you're referring to the way TDP is calculated

[Squazzer]

3 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

That is tdp and not power consumption. Look at power draw benchmarks to see what the difference is.

As for what I have been able to find the Ryzen ones seem to have a lower power draw?

[Squazzer]

9 minutes ago, Starelementpoke said:

30 W is quite literally a lightbulb. 

Thats one hefty lightbulb All of mine are 5W LEDs

[DildorTheDecent]

16 minutes ago, Squazzer said:

The 8400 has a 65W TDP where the 1600X has a 95W TDP. Easy, right?

Not quite... Many of the benchmarks I see, the 8400 is using double the percentage of its CPU as the 1600X. Would this mean that the 1600X would actually use less power when running a game? I haven't been able to find any benchmarks of this.

Well that's because TDP is a measure of heat and not power. My 5820K is rated for 140W TDP. Yet under a full load it'll pull up to 250W of power from the socket.

16 minutes ago, Squazzer said:

I have seen that almost all bencharks say that the i5 8400 genereates more FPS than the 1600X in games. But I have also seen that the GPU seems to run at a lower frequency on the Ryzen CPU's. Is this something to be worried about? Is the 1600X kneecapping the GPU?

That's likely due to the superior single thread performance of the 8400. Either that or those benchmarks just aren't "optimized for Ryzen"

 

Depending on what GPU was used during the test (lets say a 1080 Ti) then it could be driver trickery to hinder the AMD processors. Ryzen isn't going to be any worse for actual gaming. Not significantly anyway.

[Squazzer]

2 minutes ago, DildorTheDecent said:

Well that's because TDP is a measure of heat and not power. My 5820K is rated for 140W TDP. Yet under a full load it'll pull up to 250W of power from the socket.

That's likely due to the superior single thread performance of the 8400. Either that or those benchmarks just aren't "optimized for Ryzen"

 

Depending on what GPU was used during the test (lets say a 1080 Ti) then it could be driver trickery to hinder the AMD processors. Ryzen isn't going to be any worse for actual gaming. Not significantly anyway.

So you are saying it could be a deliberate kneecap from the driver when running on Ryzen systems? Or did I get this wrong in the tinfoil hat direction?

[seon123]

2 minutes ago, DildorTheDecent said:

Well that's because TDP is a measure of heat and not power. My 5820K is rated for 140W TDP. Yet under a full load it'll pull up to 250W of power from the socket.

Where would those 110W go to? 

[Squazzer]

19 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

That is tdp and not power consumption. Look at power draw benchmarks to see what the difference is.

Ok, now I found other tests showing that the 8th gen from Intel uses less power than Ryzen...
Guess its about the same then

[DildorTheDecent]

35 minutes ago, Squazzer said:

So you are saying it could be a deliberate kneecap from the driver when running on Ryzen systems? Or did I get this wrong in the tinfoil hat direction?

I've done a bit more searching. Some users are reporting that even on the Intel 6+ core systems the nvidia driver doesn't seem to play ball as well as 4 core systems.

Links in spoiler for further reading:

Spoiler

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzens-poor-performance-with-nvidia-gpus-foul-play-did-nvidia-know.2503650/

https://imgur.com/VCgbptD

 

 

The real life performance is probably negligible and the drops are probably only noticeable in certain games.

[Squazzer]

1 hour ago, DildorTheDecent said:

I've done a bit more searching. Some users are reporting that even on the Intel 6+ core systems the nvidia driver doesn't seem to play ball as well as 4 core systems.

Links in spoiler for further reading:

  Hide contents

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzens-poor-performance-with-nvidia-gpus-foul-play-did-nvidia-know.2503650/

https://imgur.com/VCgbptD

 

 

The real life performance is probably negligible and the drops are probably only noticeable in certain games.

Thanks for that bro!