Overclock.net banner

[Computerbase] CPU game scaling. 6/8/10 cores better than 4 fast cores?

48K views 657 replies 160 participants last post by  Tobiman 
#1 ·
SOURCE
Quote:
Eight cores in front of ten cores in front of six cores in front of four cores: The performance rating in Full HD on the basis of the fourteen current games is clear and above all different from the old course, on the basis of which the Intel Core i7-7700K in the test still the Leadership. Despite a higher clock speed, the Core i7-7700K in the current course on average can no longer oppose the Broadwell e-processors with more cores. In addition to new games and new drivers has in doubt also the used memory and its bandwidth, how large it is, however, was not separately determined.


good timing AMD.
 
See less See more
1
#2 ·
"i5 is plenty"
 
#3 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLCLimax View Post

SOURCE


good timing AMD.
nice. Should silence certain folks.
 
#6 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by naz2 View Post

7700k was a few FPS behind the supercores. what am i missing here?
People claiming that the Core i7 7700K was the best "Gaming CPU"... that's what you missed. See all RyZen threads across the web.
 
#7 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahigan View Post

People claiming that the Core i7 7700K was the best "Gaming CPU"... that's what you missed. See all RyZen threads across the web.
but it is the best gaming cpu. why would you pay double for 5% more fps?

all im seeing is gains from IPC improvements and ddr4. added cores are marginal
 
#9 ·
6800K was always on pair with 6700K, more or less, for gaming. It was just that it is more expensive:
 
#11 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by naz2 View Post

7700k was a few FPS behind the supercores. what am i missing here?
That a lower clocked 8 core will be very competitive in modern games against something like a 7700K (winning when averaged), and will slaughter a 4 core in everything else. Now, from a value perspective the 6 and 8 cores just aren't worth it if gaming is all someone cared about.. If only a company would find a way to bring an 8 core to the mainstream.
wink.gif

To point out the obvious - Having the opportunity to buy an 8 core for the price of a competitors 4 core should be an easy decision. Introducing Ryzen.
thumb.gif
.
 
#12 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by naz2 View Post

7700k was a few FPS behind the supercores. what am i missing here?
Slightly higher ipc and higher clocks mean considerably higher performance per clock vs HEDT units. Still, they all clearly beat 7700k which is no slouch in MT,as it has 8 threads. Apparently 6 actual cores would probably be enough to match fully the 8 logical threads of kaby in that test and HT gives 6850k the edge.
 
#13 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by naz2 View Post

but it is the best gaming cpu. why would you pay double for 5% more fps?

all im seeing is gains from IPC improvements and ddr4. added cores are marginal
Core i7 7700K is $350... the RyZen 1700X is $399 and RyZen 1700 is $330 (all on NEwegg).

Where's paying double? If RyZen is an IPC match for Broadwell (more or less) then it certainly is a better gaming CPU than the 7700K going forward.
 
#14 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by GorillaSceptre View Post

That a lower clocked 8 core will be very competitive in modern games against something like a 7700K (winning when averaged), and will slaughter a 4 core in everything else. Now, from a value perspective the 6 and 8 cores just aren't worth it if gaming is all someone cared about.. If only a company would find a way to bring an 8 core to the mainstream.
wink.gif

To point out the obvious - Having the opportunity to buy an 8 core for the price of a competitors 4 core should be an easy decision. Introducing Ryzen.
thumb.gif
.
thumb.gif
 
#15 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuivamaa View Post

Slightly higher ipc and higher clocks mean considerably higher performance per clock vs HEDT units. Still, they all clearly beat 7700k which is no slouch in MT,as it has 8 threads. Apparently 6 actual cores would probably be enough to match fully the 8 logical threads of kaby in that test and HT gives 6850k the edge.
The gaming sweet spot will probably be 6C 12T once those RyZen CPUs are released. Something tells me Intel will be lowering prices very soon.
 
#16 ·
I think Ryzen's smt may be a bit better than Intel's threading.

It's a good time to be alive.
 
#17 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahigan View Post

Core i7 7700K is $350... the RyZen 1700X is $399 and RyZen 1700 is $330 (all on NEwegg).

Where's paying double? If RyZen is an IPC match for Broadwell (more or less) then it certainly is a better gaming CPU than the 7700K going forward.
ryzen has nothing to do with this test. the conclusion i'm seeing is that while the supercores are better, the difference is almost negligible and not justified the added cost if all you're doing is gaming.

if we then draw a parallel to ryzen, the 4core variants could also be competitive with the 8cores and make the better overall choice
 
#18 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maintenance Bot View Post

I think Ryzen's smt may be a bit better than Intel's threading.

It's a good time to be alive.
That's my thoughts too, it might be that SMT on ryzen helps with games, contrary to intel's implementation
Quote:
Originally Posted by naz2 View Post

ryzen has nothing to do with this test. the conclusion i'm seeing is that while the supercores are better, the difference is almost negligible and not justified the added cost if all you're doing is gaming.

if we then draw a parallel to ryzen, the 4core variants could also be competitive with the 8cores and make the better overall choice
Ryzen costs as much as an i7 7700k, has the performance of an i7 6900k and if you didnt notice those graphs are showing percentages, but missing the base 100%, computerbase's way of telling you where ryzen stands.
 
#20 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by naz2 View Post

ryzen has nothing to do with this test. the conclusion i'm seeing is that while the supercores are better, the difference is almost negligible and not justified the added cost if all you're doing is gaming.

if we then draw a parallel to ryzen, the 4core variants could also be competitive with the 8cores and make the better overall choice
Let me reiterate...

Price wise... RyZen has the 7700K beat.
Performance wise... RyZen has the 7700K beat.
Even if the performance is only a few FPS more... say around 5% more... it is still performing better for less or nearly the same amount of money.

So on what grounds is the 7700K the better buy? What metric are you using?
 
#21 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by naz2 View Post

ryzen has nothing to do with this test. the conclusion i'm seeing is that while the supercores are better, the difference is almost negligible and not justified the added cost if all you're doing is gaming.

if we then draw a parallel to ryzen, the 4core variants could also be competitive with the 8cores and make the better overall choice
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahigan View Post

Let me reiterate...

Price wise... RyZen has the 7700K beat.
Performance wise... RyZen has the 7700K beat.
Even if the performance is only a few FPS more... say around 5% more... it is still performing better for less or nearly the same amount of money.

So on what grounds is the 7700K the better buy? What metric are you using?
There is also a huge upgrade path by going AM4 for at least 3-4 years, intel pushes a new chipset with every generation rebrand these days.
 
#22 ·
Glad to see this posted, tired of having to tell people many games scale beyond 4 threads.

Intel's mainstream platform is finished, Ryzen's has obliterated their products at around the same or lower price points. AMD has changed the game by offering revolutionary levels of performance at this price-point, absolutely amazing!
 
#23 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahigan View Post

Let me reiterate...

Price wise... RyZen has the 7700K beat.
Performance wise... RyZen has the 7700K beat.
Even if the performance is only a few FPS more... say around 5% more... it is still performing better for less or nearly the same amount of money.

So on what grounds is the 7700K the better buy? What metric are you using?
well smart guy, I'll have you know the 7700k comes in a box that's bluer and comes in clocked well over 4ghz! out of said box like the 4970k haswell rebrand was.
biggrin.gif
 
#26 ·
The 7600K overclocked to 4.9+ is best value in gaming cpu's right now and will continue to even after Ryzen releases.

In almost all games at 4k resolution (the only resolution that matters) I'm willing to bet that max air overclocked 7600k vs max air overclocked 1800x that the kaby lake chip will come out on top. Even battlefield 1 with 64 players I'm guessing the 7600k will have higher fps or at least the same as Ryzen.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top