1600x + 1070ti

[TenpairsDush]

I recently built a PC with 1600x and 1070ti, I went for the ti cause for some reason it was on sale and was cheaper than the 1070 . 

My buddy and I benchmarked my PC after building.  My buddy wanted to compare his PC to my newly built PC . He has an i5 4690k and a 1070 . 

We ran cinebench (CPU) . Obviously my 1600x outperforms the i5. 

But other than that . His computer outperformed mine in every other way.  Games, 3d mark. Etc . Why is that? 

[TenpairsDush]

Just now, TenpairsDush said:

I recently built a PC with 1600x and 1070ti, I went for the ti cause for some reason it was on sale and was cheaper than the 1070 . 

My buddy and I benchmarked my PC after building.  My buddy wanted to compare his PC to my newly built PC . He has an i5 4690k and a 1070 . 

We ran cinebench (CPU) . Obviously my 1600x outperforms the i5. 

But other than that . His computer outperformed mine in every other way.  Games, 3d mark. Etc . Why is that? 

We think there's definitely something wrong with my system . CPU and GPU during cinebench benchmarks , they were eonly using 40-50% load.  

[johnukguy]

You don't say whether it was a clean OS install, if the latest chipset drivers from the AMD website are installed, whether the CPU/GPU and RAM are overclocked, if you have things like Gear Down Mode and HPET disabled in the BIOS. All of these things make a difference. A Ryzen 1600x, when properly set up, should easily equal or beat an I5 4690K in many scenarios, including in quite a few games. A 1600/x will easily overclock to 3.8 Ghz, with quite a few going to 4 Ghz. Also, Cinebench is only a rough guide to whether a CPU overclock is nominally stable. It is not a reliable benchmark of anything and results can and do change constantly based on a whole host of variables.

As for how much the Ryzen is utilized during any task, lower does not mean worse. It usually means better in many instances as the CPU has headroom that the older I5 just doesn't. So, while the I5 is pushed to the max during some tasks, the Ryzen 5 1600x still has plenty of headroom to spare. That's a good thing. Set the CPU up properly, overclock it and then run programs like RealBench, PCMark, 3D Mark, to test the performance, and you should see it pull ahead of the 4690K quite comfortably at times.
 

 

[Coaxialgamer]

Drivers? 

[TenpairsDush]

12 hours ago, johnukguy said:

You don't say whether it was a clean OS install, if the latest chipset drivers from the AMD website are installed, whether the CPU/GPU and RAM are overclocked, if you have things like Gear Down Mode and HPET disabled in the BIOS. All of these things make a difference. A Ryzen 1600x, when properly set up, should easily equal or beat an I5 4690K in many scenarios, including in quite a few games. A 1600/x will easily overclock to 3.8 Ghz, with quite a few going to 4 Ghz. Also, Cinebench is only a rough guide to whether a CPU overclock is nominally stable. It is not a reliable benchmark of anything and results can and do change constantly based on a whole host of variables.

As for how much the Ryzen is utilized during any task, lower does not mean worse. It usually means better in many instances as the CPU has headroom that the older I5 just doesn't. So, while the I5 is pushed to the max during some tasks, the Ryzen 5 1600x still has plenty of headroom to spare. That's a good thing. Set the CPU up properly, overclock it and then run programs like RealBench, PCMark, 3D Mark, to test the performance, and you should see it pull ahead of the 4690K quite comfortably at times.
 

 

My buddy I think fixed it, but I am going over at his place to check the drivers and do what you said to do.  Before his PC beat my PC in 3d mark by about 2k points.  But somehow he did something and now my PC is 3k ahead of his PC 

[TenpairsDush]

12 hours ago, Coaxialgamer said:

Drivers? 

I'll check today.  I'll keep you guys updated