Gaming CPU Needed

[Premoz1]

So at jimms intel i5-8400 costs 185€ , 6 cores, 6 threads and 2.80ghz (overclock to 4ghz) and AMD Ryzen 5 1600 costs 190€ and has 6 more threads and 3,2 ghz, overclock to 3,8. So which one is better for gaming? I have about 800-900€ budget and I am from Finland. Tell me different advantages and disadvantages of buying i5-8400 AND Amd ryzen 5 1600

[Guest]

R5 has more threads while the 8400 has higher clocks and a slightly higher ipc.

Games like high clocks, so if you only game the i5 should be a better option.

[jiyeon]

i5-8400: A majority of games only ever use a single core, so in this case the higher core clock is favored. Go with this if you're a pure gamer.

 

Ryzen 5 1600: The extra cores can help multi-tasking such as if you were to game and stream simultaneously.

[Premoz1]

If I am going to overclock, does that mean that I would rather buy i5, but if not I buy amd?

[Premoz1]

Okay, what I need cores for? Does that use many cores if I am using lot of programs at same time or what?

[jiyeon]

3 minutes ago, Premoz1 said:

If I am going to overclock, does that mean that I would rather buy i5, but if not I buy amd?

The 8400 can't overclock.

[jiyeon]

2 minutes ago, Premoz1 said:

Okay, what I need cores for? Does that use many cores if I am using lot of programs at same time or what?

A lot of programs at the same time is a good example of using cores, yes.

 

For example, if I had Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, OBS, Google Chrome, MSI Afterburner, and Audacity all open at the same time for game streaming, I'd want the Ryzen 5 1600 because those cores can be allocated to a different program.

[Rosinbole]

10 minutes ago, seoz said:

A lot of programs at the same time is a good example of using cores, yes.

 

For example, if I had Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, OBS, Google Chrome, MSI Afterburner, and Audacity all open at the same time for game streaming, I'd want the Ryzen 5 1600 because those cores can be allocated to a different program.

I'd say that the Ryzen 5 1600 was a better allround processor, but if you're only gaming, the 8400 is probably going to give you higher FPS.

[Godlygamer23]

17 minutes ago, seoz said:

i5-8400: A majority of games only ever use a single core[.]

This is not as true as it used to be.

[jiyeon]

3 minutes ago, Godlygamer23 said:

This is not as true as it used to be.

I did say majority, since I know for sure that Overwatch uses 4 cores. I still have no problem with 6 total cores on my 8600K while playing Overwatch especially since I'm running 4.4GHz.

[Queen Chrysalis]

26 minutes ago, Some Random Member said:

R5 has more threads while the 8400 has higher clocks and a slightly higher ipc.

Games like high clocks, so if you only game the i5 should be a better option.

Not true.  As some one who has owned both, the 8400 never boosted past 3.8, and the 1600 will reach 4.0/4.1.  The 1600 aslo makes better use of fast RAM, and is actually cheaper atm.  Add in hyper-threading and its a no brainer.  For some reason the IPCs on the 8100 and 8400 are weaker than the rest of covfefe lake, no idea why.

[Godlygamer23]

2 minutes ago, Queen Chrysalis said:

For some reason the IPCs on the 8100 and 8400 are weaker than the rest of covfefe lake, no idea why.

Where do you see that?

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Queen Chrysalis said:

Not true.  As some one who has owned both, the 8400 never boosted past 3.8, and the 1600 will reach 4.0/4.1.  The 1600 aslo makes better use of fast RAM, and is actually cheaper atm.  Add in hyper-threading and its a no brainer.  For some reason the IPCs on the 8100 and 8400 are weaker than the rest of covfefe lake, no idea why.

Oh i thought that it should have the same turbo, but it turns out i was wrong. In that case there is no reason to get the 8400, @Premoz1 get the r5 1600 then instead of intel.

[Queen Chrysalis]

12 minutes ago, Godlygamer23 said:

Where do you see that?

Single core benchmarking.

[Godlygamer23]

2 minutes ago, Queen Chrysalis said:

Single core benchmarking.

Can you go into more detail?

[Queen Chrysalis]

2 minutes ago, Godlygamer23 said:

Can you go into more detail?

Both are locked coffee lake, but the 8700 has faster single and quad core speeds.

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-8700-vs-Intel-Core-i5-8400/3940vs3939

[Godlygamer23]

6 minutes ago, Queen Chrysalis said:

Both are locked coffee lake, but the 8700 has faster single and quad core speeds.

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-8700-vs-Intel-Core-i5-8400/3940vs3939

Are you actually talking about IPC or clock frequency though? 

[Queen Chrysalis]

1 minute ago, Godlygamer23 said:

Are you actually talking about IPC or clock frequency though? 

Not totally sure, but wouldn't a lower score a single-core benchmark be an indication of lower real-world IPC?  Note that I am not comparing the 8400 to Ryzen, rather, I am comparing it to the rest of coffee lake.

[Godlygamer23]

1 minute ago, Queen Chrysalis said:

Not totally sure, but wouldn't a lower score a single-core benchmark be an indication of lower real-world IPC?  Note that I am not comparing the 8400 to Ryzen, rather, I am comparing it to the rest of coffee lake.

If they're the same architecture, it would point towards something else. Lower memory speeds, lower clock speeds, etc. But if they're both the same architecture, they should otherwise achieve the same actual instructions per clock or within manufacturing error.

[manikyath]

1 hour ago, seoz said:

 A majority of games only ever use a single core

not necessarily still true, but most games where it actually matters still only come up to 4 cores at best, so the core count still doesnt play a role.

 

that said.. with the current "game market" OP's choice is essentially a zero impact either way, because the difference in performance will either be in an FPS range where you're increasing GPU-intensive settings anyways to get more eyecandy, or in games that are so CPU-bound that both processors will struggle either way. (honorable mention to cities:skylines here)

 

in the end, i'd say it comes down to other features the different platforms offer which you may care about.

for example, motherboard pricing, the type and amount of ports you can come to expect, cooler support, and so on.

[Queen Chrysalis]

5 minutes ago, manikyath said:

that said.. with the current "game market" OP's choice is essentially a zero impact either way, because the difference in performance will either be in an FPS range where you're increasing GPU-intensive settings anyways to get more eyecandy, or in games that are so CPU-bound that both processors will struggle either way. (honorable mention to cities:skylines here)

I agree, except for the part about them struggling.  Literally any processor made in 2017 or later will excel, save for the i3 or ryzen 3, which still do fine.  People are still getting by on sandy bridge and FX for Christ's sake.

[manikyath]

2 minutes ago, Queen Chrysalis said:

I agree, except for the part about them struggling.  Literally any processor made in 2017 or later will excel, save for the i3 or ryzen 3, which still do fine.  People are still getting by on sandy bridge and FX for Christ's sake.

there's some games (primarily sandbox games) where once you get towards endgame.. if you like to "live a bit excess", no matter what's under your cpu cooler, it *is* gonna struggle.

[Premoz1]

So I am going to play csgo, pubg, rust, rocket league and fortnite. I usually have browser, steam, discord, spotify and the game I play at that time. So should I get amd ryzen? It has 12 threads, while i5-8400 has 6, and higher clock speed. And its only 5€ more, so I guess I get that amd 5 1600?

[manikyath]

1 minute ago, Premoz1 said:

So I am going to play csgo, pubg, rust, rocket league and fortnite. I usually have browser, steam, discord, spotify and the game I play at that time. So should I get amd ryzen? It has 12 threads, while i5-8400 has 6, and higher clock speed. And its only 5€ more, so I guess I get that amd 5 1600?

my 4790k doesnt even struggle with that..

[Queen Chrysalis]

1 minute ago, Premoz1 said:

So I am going to play csgo, pubg, rust, rocket league and fortnite. I usually have browser, steam, discord, spotify and the game I play at that time. So should I get amd ryzen? It has 12 threads, while i5-8400 has 6, and higher clock speed. And its only 5€ more, so I guess I get that amd 5 1600?

The 8400 has a higher turbo clock when the 1600 is at base, but the 1600 can be OC'd to be faster.  Either way, none of those games are gonna come even close to pushing either of those processors.  I would get a 2200g or an 8100 tbh pham.

 

EDIT:  I missed the PUBG part, get the 1600.