[ZoLKoRn] R7 vs i7 - core for core - clock for clock - Page 15 - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

[ZoLKoRn] R7 vs i7 - core for core - clock for clock

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #141 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 04:59 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
cskippy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 105
Rep: 7 (Unique: 7)
I'm still rocking a 2600k @4.4GHz. I'll still see better performance gains upgrading my 980 Ti to a 1080 Ti than upgrading my CPU/Mobo/RAM.

When developers can make full use of DX12 and multiple cores then we'll see the improvement you speak of.
cskippy is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #142 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 05:40 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Malinkadink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,029
Rep: 108 (Unique: 84)
Quote:
Originally Posted by cskippy View Post

I'm still rocking a 2600k @4.4GHz. I'll still see better performance gains upgrading my 980 Ti to a 1080 Ti than upgrading my CPU/Mobo/RAM.

When developers can make full use of DX12 and multiple cores then we'll see the improvement you speak of.

If you're gpu bottlenecked then yes a 1080Ti will indeed get you more performance, but if you're playing something at 1080p on lower settings to squeeze as much fps as possible and the gpu isn't at 99% usage but the CPU is then you'd see gains with a CPU upgrade.

Anyone shooting for high fps and i mean consistently holding 200+ @1080p then the only option is intel, its as simple as that. If you dont need anymore more than 150 fps and are content in the 100-150 region then Ryzen is well equipped to handle that at 1080p/1440p/2160p. When applications start using 8 cores like 4 cores are being utilized today then we'll see big gains on those systems running 16 threads. By the time that happens assuming AMD stays competitive we should expect Intel to be offering similar value levels that AMD is doing right now with the R7 chips.

clock for clock Ryzen is a mere 5-10% behind intel in single threaded tasks vs sky/kaby, the only issue is Ryzen doesn't OC to 5ghz which gives Intel a much bigger lead when you compare 4ghz Zen and 5ghz kaby single threaded tasks. If Zen+ can deliver on IPC improvements and OC easily between 4.5-5ghz then AMD will do just fine.

Malinkadink is offline  
post #143 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 07:01 PM
MegaTechPC
 
Majin SSJ Eric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Saint Simons Island, GA
Posts: 19,208
Rep: 1092 (Unique: 517)
Yes, as I've stated countless times, gaming is really a poor indicator of CPU performance and is not really the main reason you should be considering a new CPU in the first place (edge case scenarios like 144+Hz monitors etc notwithstanding). Since I'm slowly rebuilding my main sig rig I've been gaming exclusively on my old system with a 2600K and 1600MHz DDR3 and my gaming experience is just fine even though the platform is 6 years old. Basically, any high end Intel CPU since SB is adequate for 99% of gaming needs and the real determining factor for your experience will be the GPU. My 2600K rig, for instance, is running a 270X so I can't push 1440p maxed like I can with my OG Titans, but at 1080p its fine. The R7's are much stronger gamers than my 2600K and are within parity of Haswell-E while allowing for similar OCing. And for only $329 the 1700 rivals the experience of a 5960X in basically any task with better SMT functionality in productivity work loads. I personally can't grasp how getting a 5960X for $329 is in any way, shape, or form a fail but there are some seemingly strange opinions going around here (and in the tech media) concerning Ryzen it would seem. Change the name from AMD Ryzen to intel i7 and the media would be doing backflips that they were giving us 8C / 16T workstation powerhouses for $329 but because its AMD every scenario were it comes up short to Intel is magnified and overblown with hyperbolic statements like it "sucks" for gaming or it "struggles" at 1080p etc.


3DMark11 - P25138
3DMark Firestrike - P20998

Intel Core i7 4930K @ 4.7GHz | Asus Rampage IV Extreme | 2 x EVGA GTX Titan SC (1254MHz) | 16GB Patriot Viper Extreme DDR3 2133MHz (4 x 4GB) | Corsair AX1200 | Silverstone Temjin TJ11 | Corsair Force 3 240GB (System) | 2 x Intel 320 160GB SSD (Dedicated Gaming Drives) | Hitachi Deskstar 1TB (Data) | MS Windows 10 Pro | EK Supreme HF/FC-Titan/Rampage IV Extreme blocks | Hardware Labs GTX 560/240 rads | Alphacool VPP-655 D5 pump | Bitspower mod kit/pump top/fittings/120mm res


Majin SSJ Eric is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #144 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 07:07 PM
 
budgetgamer120's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 4,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majin SSJ Eric View Post

Yes, as I've stated countless times, gaming is really a poor indicator of CPU performance and is not really the main reason you should be considering a new CPU in the first place (edge case scenarios like 144+Hz monitors etc notwithstanding). Since I'm slowly rebuilding my main sig rig I've been gaming exclusively on my old system with a 2600K and 1600MHz DDR3 and my gaming experience is just fine even though the platform is 6 years old. Basically, any high end Intel CPU since SB is adequate for 99% of gaming needs and the real determining factor for your experience will be the GPU. My 2600K rig, for instance, is running a 270X so I can't push 1440p maxed like I can with my OG Titans, but at 1080p its fine. The R7's are much stronger gamers than my 2600K and are within parity of Haswell-E while allowing for similar OCing. And for only $329 the 1700 rivals the experience of a 5960X in basically any task with better SMT functionality in productivity work loads. I personally can't grasp how getting a 5960X for $329 is in any way, shape, or form a fail but there are some seemingly strange opinions going around here (and in the tech media) concerning Ryzen it would seem. Change the name from AMD Ryzen to intel i7 and the media would be doing backflips that they were giving us 8C / 16T workstation powerhouses for $329 but because its AMD every scenario were it comes up short to Intel is magnified and overblown with hyperbolic statements like it "sucks" for gaming or it "struggles" at 1080p etc.

For only gaming purposes I have consoles.

For different task I have a PC and if I was building a strictly gaming PC the bulk of my money would go in GPU.
budgetgamer120 is offline  
post #145 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 07:23 PM
PC Evangelist
 
ZealotKi11er's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Toronto, CA
Posts: 45,761
Rep: 1794 (Unique: 1173)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majin SSJ Eric View Post

Yes, as I've stated countless times, gaming is really a poor indicator of CPU performance and is not really the main reason you should be considering a new CPU in the first place (edge case scenarios like 144+Hz monitors etc notwithstanding). Since I'm slowly rebuilding my main sig rig I've been gaming exclusively on my old system with a 2600K and 1600MHz DDR3 and my gaming experience is just fine even though the platform is 6 years old. Basically, any high end Intel CPU since SB is adequate for 99% of gaming needs and the real determining factor for your experience will be the GPU. My 2600K rig, for instance, is running a 270X so I can't push 1440p maxed like I can with my OG Titans, but at 1080p its fine. The R7's are much stronger gamers than my 2600K and are within parity of Haswell-E while allowing for similar OCing. And for only $329 the 1700 rivals the experience of a 5960X in basically any task with better SMT functionality in productivity work loads. I personally can't grasp how getting a 5960X for $329 is in any way, shape, or form a fail but there are some seemingly strange opinions going around here (and in the tech media) concerning Ryzen it would seem. Change the name from AMD Ryzen to intel i7 and the media would be doing backflips that they were giving us 8C / 16T workstation powerhouses for $329 but because its AMD every scenario were it comes up short to Intel is magnified and overblown with hyperbolic statements like it "sucks" for gaming or it "struggles" at 1080p etc.

Problem with Zen right now is that it needs a good 6 months to iron out problems. Much better to wait for Zen+ if you want to get AMD.

Yamato
(10 items)
Ishimura
(13 items)
CPU
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X
Motherboard
ASUS TUF Gaming X570-Plus (Wi-Fi)
GPU
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti FE
RAM
G.SKILL Trident Z RGB (2x8GB) DDR4 3200MHz CL14
Hard Drive
Samsung SM961 512GB
Hard Drive
HGST DeskStar NAS 6TB
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNOVA 750 P2
Cooling
Gamdias Chione M1A-280R
Case
Fractal Design Meshify C TG
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
CPU
Intel Core i7-3770K @ 4.8GHz
Motherboard
ASRock Z77E-ITX
GPU
AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition
RAM
AVEXIR Blitz 1.1 16GB DDR3-2400MHz CL10
Hard Drive
SanDisk Ultra II 960GB
Hard Drive
Toshiba X300 5TB
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNOVA 750 G3
Cooling
Corsair H100i GTX
Case
Fractal Design Define Nano S
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
Monitor
LG OLED55C7P
Keyboard
Cooler Master MasterKeys MK750
Mouse
Finalmouse Air58 Ninja
▲ hide details ▲


ZealotKi11er is offline  
post #146 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 07:23 PM
MegaTechPC
 
Majin SSJ Eric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Saint Simons Island, GA
Posts: 19,208
Rep: 1092 (Unique: 517)
I absolutely agree. I've said time and time again that the 7700K is an amazing processor (I've always loved Core i7's) but for me there is no question that I will be going with a 1700X to replace my 4930K because since going to X79 back in 2012 with my original 3960X I simply can't commit to anything less than a hexacore. Since I'm poor now the idea of getting basically a 5960X (with slightly worse OC headroom) for $329 is just too good a deal to pass up in favor of a quad core, even if it is the fastest quad core ever made.

I know I keep coming off as an AMD fanboy but the opposite has actually been true for as long as I've built PC's. If I were rich like I used to be before my child support days I'd have a 6950X and a pair of Titan XP's, no question. If AMD were still on the FX platform I would just stick with my 4930K and focus on getting a couple of faster GPU's but since Ryzen is as strong as it is I can finally move up to a powerful octocore without having to spend over $1000 on just the CPU alone.

And I'm now rambling. Might have had a couple drinks...


3DMark11 - P25138
3DMark Firestrike - P20998

Intel Core i7 4930K @ 4.7GHz | Asus Rampage IV Extreme | 2 x EVGA GTX Titan SC (1254MHz) | 16GB Patriot Viper Extreme DDR3 2133MHz (4 x 4GB) | Corsair AX1200 | Silverstone Temjin TJ11 | Corsair Force 3 240GB (System) | 2 x Intel 320 160GB SSD (Dedicated Gaming Drives) | Hitachi Deskstar 1TB (Data) | MS Windows 10 Pro | EK Supreme HF/FC-Titan/Rampage IV Extreme blocks | Hardware Labs GTX 560/240 rads | Alphacool VPP-655 D5 pump | Bitspower mod kit/pump top/fittings/120mm res


Majin SSJ Eric is offline  
post #147 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 07:25 PM
MegaTechPC
 
Majin SSJ Eric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Saint Simons Island, GA
Posts: 19,208
Rep: 1092 (Unique: 517)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZealotKi11er View Post

Problem with Zen right now is that it needs a good 6 months to iron out problems. Much better to wait for Zen+ if you want to get AMD.

I'm not planning to get my 1700X until June or July anyway and when Zen 2 comes out next year I can just drop a new 2700X into the CHVI and keep on trucking, something you rarely get to do with Intel platforms.


3DMark11 - P25138
3DMark Firestrike - P20998

Intel Core i7 4930K @ 4.7GHz | Asus Rampage IV Extreme | 2 x EVGA GTX Titan SC (1254MHz) | 16GB Patriot Viper Extreme DDR3 2133MHz (4 x 4GB) | Corsair AX1200 | Silverstone Temjin TJ11 | Corsair Force 3 240GB (System) | 2 x Intel 320 160GB SSD (Dedicated Gaming Drives) | Hitachi Deskstar 1TB (Data) | MS Windows 10 Pro | EK Supreme HF/FC-Titan/Rampage IV Extreme blocks | Hardware Labs GTX 560/240 rads | Alphacool VPP-655 D5 pump | Bitspower mod kit/pump top/fittings/120mm res


Majin SSJ Eric is offline  
post #148 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 07:26 PM
 
budgetgamer120's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 4,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZealotKi11er View Post

Problem with Zen right now is that it needs a good 6 months to iron out problems. Much better to wait for Zen+ if you want to get AMD.

That is not the case for everyone.

Zen is not for everyone to upgrade to. Just as the Intel small increments in performance is not for everyone. Not everyone is using a 7700k.

But for people who are using 2500k/2600k and non k variants, AMD FX and older Zen is perfect.

Specially great for persons who have been looking for 6900k performance but did not want to spend $1000 on it.
budgetgamer120 is offline  
post #149 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 07:34 PM
MegaTechPC
 
Majin SSJ Eric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Saint Simons Island, GA
Posts: 19,208
Rep: 1092 (Unique: 517)
Heck, I'm not exactly CPU-limited in any way with my 4.7GHz 4930K and I still want to get a 1700X because I believe it will be at least on par with the 4930K in gaming (at my resolution) and it will be much better in all other tasks. Meanwhile the cost outlay will be minimal. I've told several other people that there is no reason at all to consider any R7 if they already have SL or KL i7's unless they need more cores. Certainly no reason for 7700K owners to be as defensive as they have been over Ryzen considering that they have the fastest gaming CPU's out there right now.


3DMark11 - P25138
3DMark Firestrike - P20998

Intel Core i7 4930K @ 4.7GHz | Asus Rampage IV Extreme | 2 x EVGA GTX Titan SC (1254MHz) | 16GB Patriot Viper Extreme DDR3 2133MHz (4 x 4GB) | Corsair AX1200 | Silverstone Temjin TJ11 | Corsair Force 3 240GB (System) | 2 x Intel 320 160GB SSD (Dedicated Gaming Drives) | Hitachi Deskstar 1TB (Data) | MS Windows 10 Pro | EK Supreme HF/FC-Titan/Rampage IV Extreme blocks | Hardware Labs GTX 560/240 rads | Alphacool VPP-655 D5 pump | Bitspower mod kit/pump top/fittings/120mm res


Majin SSJ Eric is offline  
post #150 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 07:36 PM
PC Evangelist
 
ZealotKi11er's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Toronto, CA
Posts: 45,761
Rep: 1794 (Unique: 1173)
Quote:
Originally Posted by budgetgamer120 View Post

That is not the case for everyone.

Zen is not for everyone to upgrade to. Just as the Intel small increments in performance is not for everyone. Not everyone is using a 7700k.

But for people who are using 2500k/2600k and non k variants, AMD FX and older Zen is perfect.

Specially great for persons who have been looking for 6900k performance but did not want to spend $1000 on it.

I think people that are looking for 6900K would not be using old SB and FX CPUs.

Even then 2500K and 2600K do not fall on the line with Zen 8-Core pring and if these people have been waiting for gaming Zen is still waste of money. If they wanted more multi threaded performance they would have jumped to 5820K 3 years ago.

Yamato
(10 items)
Ishimura
(13 items)
CPU
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X
Motherboard
ASUS TUF Gaming X570-Plus (Wi-Fi)
GPU
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti FE
RAM
G.SKILL Trident Z RGB (2x8GB) DDR4 3200MHz CL14
Hard Drive
Samsung SM961 512GB
Hard Drive
HGST DeskStar NAS 6TB
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNOVA 750 P2
Cooling
Gamdias Chione M1A-280R
Case
Fractal Design Meshify C TG
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
CPU
Intel Core i7-3770K @ 4.8GHz
Motherboard
ASRock Z77E-ITX
GPU
AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition
RAM
AVEXIR Blitz 1.1 16GB DDR3-2400MHz CL10
Hard Drive
SanDisk Ultra II 960GB
Hard Drive
Toshiba X300 5TB
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNOVA 750 G3
Cooling
Corsair H100i GTX
Case
Fractal Design Define Nano S
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
Monitor
LG OLED55C7P
Keyboard
Cooler Master MasterKeys MK750
Mouse
Finalmouse Air58 Ninja
▲ hide details ▲


ZealotKi11er is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off