i5-8400 may retire and some new SKUs come out.

[Princess Luna]

1 minute ago, Jurrunio said:

I only compare i7 non-K and i7 K CPUs because the price difference is usually close. If you pull the unlocked i5 in, I can argue with the i5 being much cheaper and single core performance is better than your i7 non-K.

The i5 being much cheaper? you're wrong the h110 with an i7 6700 and stock cooler was considerable cheaper than a z170 with the i5 6600k and beefy cooling to achieve overclocks while the locked i7 still outperformed it across the board ;]~

 

And now at coffee lake my locked i7 8700 has the single thread of the i7 7700k at stock on around 190~ cb while smashing it on multi-thread... so much for "overclocking is future proofing".

[The Benjamins]

1 minute ago, mynameisjuan said:

And it probably will be. My main point is OC provides so little impact to consider it part of the value. 

Sounds like what I do 

It might not, but it can be fun to do and Intel locks use out versus adding it in. To me it is just something they should be possible. Also I feel the B450 boards will be better then the H370 boards.

[Jurrunio]

6 minutes ago, Princess Cadence said:

The i5 being much cheaper? you're wrong the h110 with an i7 6700 and stock cooler was considerable cheaper than a z170 with the i5 6600k and beefy cooling to achieve overclocks while the locked i7 still outperformed it across the board ;]~

 

And now at coffee lake my locked i7 8700 has the single thread of the i7 7700k at stock on around 190~ cb while smashing it on multi-thread... so much for "overclocking is future proofing".

h110 has cut a lot more corners than just overclocking ability than z170, like SATA ports, USB 3 ports, M.2 sockets and sometimes, audio chips (I dont really care about onboard audio, but someone else do). It's more fair to compare using an H170 motherboard, which costs more and price difference between two builds won't that big.

 

According to PCPP, 6600k bottoms at about $220 while 6700 bottoms at about $290 (when they are both relevant). The cost of an air cooler for overclocking is about $60, the difference between motherboards are $50 (I used PCPP to check past prices of Asus Z170-A and Asrock H170 Pro 4, both common mid range motherboards of that chipset). For that $40 more on the 6600k system, you get an extra 20% single core and quad core performance because 6600k can easily hit 4.5GHz ($60 coolers wont be the best) while the 6700 is stuck at 3.7. The 8 core tests the results goes the other way around, but not all games use hyperthreading anyway

[LienusLateTips]

1 hour ago, gohanmoka said:

Yeah but pc parts (CPU mobo RAM)are a little bit more expensive in Taiwan.

Yeah, 

1. No sales tax
2. RAM is cheaper
3. Not that much of a difference.

 

The cheapest H310 mobo on that list is ~70 USD.

[Mira Yurizaki]

Sooo... Why does the G5600 have 2MB less L3 cache?

 

59 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

It might not, but it can be fun to do and Intel locks use out versus adding it in. To me it is just something they should be possible. Also I feel the B450 boards will be better then the H370 boards.

I dunno. Setting a higher multiplier didn't seem like all that much fun to me. It was about as fun as setting a higher RAM speed

[gohanmoka]

4 minutes ago, JDE said:

Yeah, 

1. No sales tax
2. RAM is cheaper
3. Not that much of a difference.

 

The cheapest H310 mobo on that list is ~70 USD.

Yeah when I built my wife’s computer in Kaohsiung I fig it was about 30-50 dollars more. But it was nice to just drive 10 min and walk down the street and pick up every part.

[Jurrunio]

13 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

Sooo... Why does the G5600 have 2MB less L3 cache?

 

Typo, most likely. Even if they have to nerf the L3 cache, they shouldn't do it to the top Pentium only.

[MyName13]

1 hour ago, mynameisjuan said:

 I mean its kind of hard to argue when a 10% increase OC is amazing yet the next gen Intel increases 10% and people say the performance is the same and whine about it which blows my mind.

Double standards...unbelievable.Those who don't overclock will most likely choose Intel because:

-better reliability

-works well with slow ram too (no infinity fabric crap) so even the cheapest motherboards are good (can A320 even overclock ram?)

-better performance (i5 8400 smashes r5 1600 in gaming)

-easier to install cooler

[thorhammerz]

19 minutes ago, MyName13 said:

Double standards...unbelievable.Those who don't overclock will most likely choose Intel because:

-better reliability

-works well with slow ram too (no infinity fabric crap) so even the cheapest motherboards are good (can A320 even overclock ram?)

-better performance (i5 8400 smashes r5 1600 in gaming)

-easier to install cooler

Shhh.... wouldn't want to make the OC / AMD fanboys bring out pitchforks  .

[MyName13]

1 minute ago, thorhammerz said:

Shhh.... wouldn't want to make the OC / AMD fanboys bring out pitchforks  .

I'm certain that these "fans" are actually AMD's marketing bots, have you ever seen Intel / Nvidia "fans" on the internet (that are as loud and numerous)?Have you seen "fans" of any company that are comparable to these?I haven't.

[ARikozuM]

Thinning the product stack doesn't work if you then add five useless SKU's, Intel. Drop the Pentium without HT and leave it to the Celeron. Having a locked SKU and an unlocked SKU is a better way of getting sales than having to guess if those 0.2GHz is worth the extra change. 

 

Also, why are there so many Pentiums with specs all over the place?

[Jurrunio]

25 minutes ago, MyName13 said:

Double standards...unbelievable.Those who don't overclock will most likely choose Intel because:

-better reliability

-works well with slow ram too (no infinity fabric crap) so even the cheapest motherboards are good (can A320 even overclock ram?)

-better performance (i5 8400 smashes r5 1600 in gaming)

-easier to install cooler

Reliability? how is this valid? In my experience both are just as reliable. Actually, AMD ones could be more reliable even, considering they run hotter most of the time.

 

You can use Ryzen with slow RAM and cheap motherboard, the performance isnt that bad when everything stays at stock speeds.

 

Ryzen 5 1600 smashes 8400 when it comes to doing work, like rendering, editing etc

 

I havent tried installing an AM4 cooler yet, but installing the one on my system is definitely not enjoyable. I have to flip the motherboard over while holding the heatsink with one hand, while the other hand tries to screw the bracket in place. It's horrible, tbh

15 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Thinning the product stack doesn't work if you then add five useless SKU's, Intel. Drop the Pentium without HT and leave it to the Celeron. Having a locked SKU and an unlocked SKU is a better way of getting sales than having to guess if those 0.2GHz is worth the extra change. 

 

Also, why are there so many Pentiums with specs all over the place?

Intel doing what Intel does best: making things complicated. I'm sure some will still want an unlocked Pentium or even Celeron, maybe for practising their overclocking skill idk.

[mynameisjuan]

3 minutes ago, Jurrunio said:

Reliability? how is this valid? In my experience both are just as reliable. Actually, AMD ones could be more reliable even, considering they run hotter most of the time.

Actually AMD has always had issues with stability in bugs and what not. Intel just has security flaws haha.

 

3 minutes ago, Jurrunio said:

You can use Ryzen with slow RAM and cheap motherboard, the performance isnt that bad when everything stays at stock speeds.

Usable, yes, optimal, hell naw

 

4 minutes ago, Jurrunio said:

Ryzen 5 1600 smashes 8400 when it comes to doing work, like rendering, editing etc

Well see when Ryzen was released everyone instantly NEEDED 8 cores because apparently over night everyone started editing and rendering. When in reality a very very small portion of people do. More applications are single/dual core focused and the extra performance per core is much much more important. 

[Princess Luna]

21 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Also, why are there so many Pentiums with specs all over the place?

Simply to squeeze as much profit as possible, instead of drawing the line on few spec for those chips with poor silicon they will pretty much, individually, chip per chip try to squeeze it as much as possible from it.

 

if one managed 100mhz stable higher clock than the other there new chip model, that is why we have g3470 g4400 g4500 g4560 g4600 g4620 i3 7100 i3 7200 i3 7300 i3 7350k, it is all the same chip as we know... but it profits much more money selling at a higher price whenever a tiny little thing is there to differentiate them.

[Jurrunio]

2 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

Actually AMD has always had issues with stability in bugs and what not. Intel just has security flaws haha.

Such as? I'm not informed enough in these things.

 

3 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

Usable, yes, optimal, hell naw

what do you mean by optimal?

 

4 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

Well see when Ryzen was released everyone instantly NEEDED 8 cores because apparently over night everyone started editing and rendering. When in reality a very very small portion of people do. More applications are single/dual core focused and the extra performance per core is much much more important. 

that's the problem for Intel at first. Ryzen is cheap enough, it's competing Intel's mid range CPUs like the 7500 with a Ryzen 5 1600. Sure it needs a B350 mobo to match the single core performance (when using slow DDR4), but multicore performance is a lot better, which will eventually be used by games.

 

8th gen solved that problem for Intel mostly, that's why we now look towards AMD's Ryzen 2000 series.

[The Benjamins]

42 minutes ago, MyName13 said:

I'm certain that these "fans" are actually AMD's marketing bots, have you ever seen Intel / Nvidia "fans" on the internet (that are as loud and numerous)?Have you seen "fans" of any company that are comparable to these?I haven't.

Their are 2 old member that where strong Intel fans, they where so passionate they got them selves banned.

 

Just remember that the first zen leaks where Sandy Bridge Xeons.

[MyName13]

38 minutes ago, Jurrunio said:

Reliability? how is this valid? In my experience both are just as reliable. Actually, AMD ones could be more reliable even, considering they run hotter most of the time.

 

You can use Ryzen with slow RAM and cheap motherboard, the performance isnt that bad when everything stays at stock speeds.

 

Ryzen 5 1600 smashes 8400 when it comes to doing work, like rendering, editing etc

 

I havent tried installing an AM4 cooler yet, but installing the one on my system is definitely not enjoyable. I have to flip the motherboard over while holding the heatsink with one hand, while the other hand tries to screw the bracket in place. It's horrible, tbh

Intel doing what Intel does best: making things complicated. I'm sure some will still want an unlocked Pentium or even Celeron, maybe for practising their overclocking skill idk.

1)Intel has been refining their architecture for almost a decade, Zen is a completely new architecture

2)You can do whatever you want, you can also have crazy stuttering in an 11 years old game (witcher 1) because of AMD's architecture

3)~10% is now considered smashing (not to mention i5's 2.8 GHz base clock)?

4)I did, I also have to hold a metal part that isn't even glued to the back of the motherboard.

 

14 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

Their are 2 old member that where strong Intel fans, they where so passionate they got them selves banned.

 

Just remember that the first zen leaks where Sandy Bridge Xeons.

Wat

[JoostinOnline]

53 minutes ago, MyName13 said:

I'm certain that these "fans" are actually AMD's marketing bots, have you ever seen Intel / Nvidia "fans" on the internet (that are as loud and numerous)?Have you seen "fans" of any company that are comparable to these?I haven't.

Lol give them a break. Zen was the first architecture line they've had to be truly proud of in years. And it is great. It was also great for Intel users like myself, because Intel finally had a reason to up their game. 

 

For a brand new architecture (as opposed to Intel's slight modifications of the same one), Ryzen is pretty damn amazing. It's got some kinks to work out (primarily the lower clock speeds), but no matter what team you're on, real competition is good. 

[MyName13]

2 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

Lol give them a break. Zen was the first architecture line they've had to be truly proud of in years. And it is great. It was also great for Intel users like myself, because Intel finally had a reason to up their game. 

 

For a brand new architecture (as opposed to Intel's slight modifications of the same one), Ryzen is pretty damn amazing. It's got some kinks to work out (primarily the lower clock speeds), but no matter what team you're on, real competition is good. 

How is that related to my post?

[The Benjamins]

7 minutes ago, MyName13 said:

 

Wat

Patrick and zMeul

[JoostinOnline]

Just now, MyName13 said:

How is that related to my post?

Apologies, I quoted the wrong one.  I meant to respond to this:

1 hour ago, thorhammerz said:

Shhh.... wouldn't want to make the OC / AMD fanboys bring out pitchforks  .

 

[MyName13]

2 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

Patrick and zMuel

Not users, your grammar

[leadeater]

26 minutes ago, MyName13 said:

1)Intel has been refining their architecture for almost a decade, Zen is a completely new architecture

That's not really reliability though, that's stability. As far as electronics go cheap crap fails at the same rates no matter who makes it, and CPU failures are among the more rare.

 

Edit:

Unless you mean performance reliability then it basically wouldn't matter what AMD put out, everything is optimized for Intel architecture so unless it was a literally carbon copy that was always going to be a thing (even without CCX and IF).

[DildorTheDecent]

3 hours ago, leadeater said:

I brought an Asus Rampage IV Black Edition, put an EK full cover block on it, 3 480mm RADs and run the CPU basically at stock (stock for the motherboard settings) lol.

>RIVBE

>stock

[Jurrunio]

37 minutes ago, MyName13 said:

1)Intel has been refining their architecture for almost a decade, Zen is a completely new architecture

Refined for a decade = shrink the same design once in a while. Spectre and Meltdown exists for so long and need software fix that hurts performance, while Zen doesnt need a performance hurting patch?

 

37 minutes ago, MyName13 said:

2)You can do whatever you want, you can also have crazy stuttering in an 11 years old game (witcher 1) because of AMD's architecture

With Ryzen? Or are you starting to lose your calm?

 

37 minutes ago, MyName13 said:

3)~10% is now considered smashing (not to mention i5's 2.8 GHz base clock)?

https://www.techspot.com/review/1502-intel-core-i5-8400/

Ryzen 5 1600 at stock scores just over 1100cb in Cinebench R15, while i5-8400 scores below 900cb. That's 22%, in workstation use. If that's not 'smashing', then your claim that 8400 smashes 1600 doesnt make sense either since at games, 8400 is at most 20% faster than 1600. Not to mention most of the time it's only 10-15% faster.

 

37 minutes ago, MyName13 said:

4)I did, I also have to hold a metal part that isn't even glued to the back of the motherboard.

Then they are both bad in terms of mounting coolers.