Cpu confusion

[KarathKasun]

Here, comparison for gaming and streaming with overclocks to 4.2 on the 2600x and 5.0 on the 8600k.

 

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3288-amd-r5-2600-2600x-review-stream-benchmarks-gaming-blender

[lmeneses]

24 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

2600X/2700X can boost to 4.3.

i'm talking talking about the 2600 non x variant 

[KarathKasun]

1 minute ago, lmeneses said:

i'm talking talking about the 2600 non x variant 

At $80 cheaper, it comes down to where you want your performance.  But that is off topic in a build with a budget of ~$2000.

 

Realistically, at that price point you are looking at 2700X vs 8700K.  In which case, the 8700k wins.  Streaming is much closer after accounting for a ~5ghz OC on the 8700k and in game average FPS is, again, considerably higher.  There is no if A choose Ryzen and if B choose Core like there is with the i5/R5.

[lmeneses]

45 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

Here, comparison for gaming and streaming with overclocks to 4.2 on the 2600x and 5.0 on the 8600k.

 

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3288-amd-r5-2600-2600x-review-stream-benchmarks-gaming-blender

you proved my point lmao

 

13 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

At $80 cheaper, it comes down to where you want your performance.  But that is off topic in a build with a budget of ~$2000.

 

Realistically, at that price point you are looking at 2700X vs 8700K.  In which case, the 8700k wins.  Streaming is much closer after accounting for a ~5ghz OC on the 8700k and in game average FPS is, again, considerably higher.  There is no if A choose Ryzen and if B choose Core like there is with the i5/R5.

and yea there kinda still is. running intensive programs (like i have to for engineering) calls for more threads to run smoother and faster. get outta here intel fanboy, not everythings about video games 

[KarathKasun]

1 hour ago, lmeneses said:

you proved my point lmao

 

and yea there kinda still is. running intensive programs (like i have to for engineering) calls for more threads to run smoother and faster. get outta here intel fanboy, not everythings about video games 

Quit shilling for AMD.

 

i7-8700k largely matches the performance of the R7 2700X because of higher clocks.  Some engineering software favors Intel and some favors AMD, and the performance delta is usually not more than 10% in either direction.

 

If gaming is the primary use for the PC, Intel is ahead by a significant amount (10%-25%) if you are chasing 120+ FPS.

 

If you are after a workstation for CAD/CFD/Animation/Video, its mostly a wash with AMD ever so slightly taking the lead in the mainstream segment. However, you would be better served by the Thread Ripper platform.

[lmeneses]

54 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

Quit shilling for AMD.

 

i7-8700k largely matches the performance of the R7 2700X because of higher clocks.  Some engineering software favors Intel and some favors AMD, and the performance delta is usually not more than 10% in either direction.

 

If gaming is the primary use for the PC, Intel is ahead by a significant amount (10%-25%) if you are chasing 120+ FPS.

 

If you are after a workstation for CAD/CFD/Animation/Video, its mostly a wash with AMD ever so slightly taking the lead in the mainstream segment. However, you would be better served by the Thread Ripper platform.

But what I'm saying is the person who started this thread wants something he can stream with too, and the Ryzen chip is the better option. Sure its only 10 fps behind at around 120 fps, but that does not even matter cause you can't tell the difference. However, in streaming, there is a big difference between ryzen and intel. Plus, the intel chips overheart easier when overclocking too. I am not telling to go for Ryzen blah blah; I'm telling him, for what he wants to do with it, Ryzen is better. Your'e the one bending over backwards trying to defend intel, when I don't really care, which one he chooses, I'm just trying to give him advice on what cpu is better for what

[KarathKasun]

37 minutes ago, lmeneses said:

But what I'm saying is the person who started this thread wants something he can stream with too, and the Ryzen chip is the better option. Sure its only 10 fps behind at around 120 fps, but that does not even matter cause you can't tell the difference. However, in streaming, there is a big difference between ryzen and intel. Plus, the intel chips overheart easier when overclocking too. I am not telling to go for Ryzen blah blah; I'm telling him, for what he wants to do with it, Ryzen is better. Your'e the one bending over backwards trying to defend intel, when I don't really care, which one he chooses, I'm just trying to give him advice on what cpu is better for what

8700k streams similarly to 2700X in most boards (they force turbo on all cores, so 4,7ghz OC).  In some games Ryzen is 20-30 FPS behind at ~120 FPS,  and in a few it is behind by ~50.

 

Intel chips overheat easier is pretty much bunk, they OC MUCH further than Ryzen without modification (~4.8ghz).  The thermal measurements between chips are also not directly comparable because of how they work.

 

I do not particularly like Intel as a company, but I am not the one ignoring the reality that Intel CPUs are significantly faster at the high end of gaming setups.  Are there games where going AMD only costs you ~10 FPS?  Sure, AC:O shows ~15fps difference.  Though there are also games where going AMD also costs you ~50 FPS.  PCars shows a ~40 FPS difference, nearly a 30% lead for Intel.

[lmeneses]

5 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

8700k streams similarly to 2700X in most boards (they force turbo on all cores, so 4,7ghz OC).  In some games Ryzen is 20-30 FPS behind at ~120 FPS,  and in a few it is behind by ~50.

 

Intel chips overheat easier is pretty much bunk, they OC MUCH further than Ryzen without modification (~4.8ghz).  The thermal measurements between chips are also not directly comparable because of how they work.

 

I do not particularly like Intel as a company, but I am not the one ignoring the reality that Intel CPUs are significantly faster at the high end of gaming setups.  Are there games where going AMD only costs you ~10 FPS, sure (AC:O shows ~15fps difference).  Though there are also games where going AMD also costs you ~50 FPS (PCars shows a ~40 FPS difference, nearly a 30% lead for Intel) .

Yes, i agree with you!!!!! I never said that I didn't, but what I'm saying is he's trying to build a high end set up that can stream, as well, and intel just can't stream that good without overclocking. The ryzen chips can easily stream high quality without overclocking, and they can game perfectly, as well, at a much lesser cost. Rn, amd is the all around better chip because it can do about everything amazingly, unlike intel. BUT, if you want pure gaming performance, then intel is the move. 

[KarathKasun]

8 minutes ago, lmeneses said:

Yes, i agree with you!!!!! I never said that I didn't, but what I'm saying is he's trying to build a high end set up that can stream, as well, and intel just can't stream that good without overclocking. The ryzen chips can easily stream high quality without overclocking, and they can game perfectly, as well, at a much lesser cost. Rn, amd is the all around better chip because it can do about everything amazingly, unlike intel. BUT, if you want pure gaming performance, then intel is the move. 

If you look at the OPs list of things the system will be used for, game streaming is not the first on the list, gaming is.  Most of the time when people make lists, its in order of importance, even if they are not consciously trying to create the list in that order.

[lmeneses]

3 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

If you look at the OPs list of things the system will be used for, game streaming is not the first on the list, gaming is.  Most of the time when people make lists, its in order of importance, even if they are not consciously trying to create the list in that order.

That's true, I agree, but I was just given options. You are right, happy? 

[KarathKasun]

Just now, lmeneses said:

That's true, I agree, but I was just given options. You are right, happy? 

I wish I wasn't.  AMD has not really had a no caveats platform for way too long.

[lmeneses]

1 minute ago, KarathKasun said:

I wish I wasn't.  AMD has not really had a no caveats platform for way too long.

Yea, i hope their new cpu lineup will be great. Hopefully it'll keep forcing intel to improve their cpus too. 

[KarathKasun]

2 minutes ago, lmeneses said:

Yea, i hope their new cpu lineup will be great. Hopefully it'll keep forcing intel to improve their cpus too. 

Fingers crossed.  Intel finally has a real core for core response to the R7, taking away the "most threads" position AMD held for the last two years.  I hope AMD can exploit Intel's process disadvantage to get their clocks up and keep parity (or even close the gap) between the two brands.

[lmeneses]

Just now, KarathKasun said:

Fingers crossed.  Intel finally has a real core for core response to the R7, taking away the "most threads" position AMD held for the last two years.  I hope AMD can exploit Intel's process disadvantage to get their clocks up and keep parity (or even close the gap) between the two brands.

Let's hope