[PCWorld] Intel challenges AMD's Ryzen 3000 CPUs to take the Core i9-9900K's real-world gaming crown - Page 17 - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

[PCWorld] Intel challenges AMD's Ryzen 3000 CPUs to take the Core i9-9900K's real-world gaming crown

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #161 of 172 (permalink) Old 06-19-2019, 05:17 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
zGunBLADEz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,502
Rep: 99 (Unique: 72)
Quote: Originally Posted by Scotty99 View Post
Just curious, is that in a game? I ask because when i had my ryzen cpu no matter of memory tweaking would surpass even 100mhz of core clock in cpu intensive games (WoW/pubg etc)
we didnt have this discussion before on the ryzen 1st gen??

i went lower all way down to almost 60ns on a ryzen..just like cluckos and we were achieving better than what most reviewers were saying it should net you.. Not only that you can go and browse i had a 1700/1800x and a 2700x i even have my scheduler tweaked before windows actually patched a better scheduler on 1903.. still my tweaked version is betters than windows..


the goal here on a cpu bottleneck is give the gpu usage the %, you cant claim intel is giving you more frames.. it just give you more gpu usage you can level the game out..

a cpu magically is not giving you more frames is just giving you better hardware usage. You as a user have the opportunity to tweak this.. thats why in a gpu bottleneck is a straight line between them both practically equal you dont see the intel with 2ghz over ryzen to joke about it magically giving you 50 more frames lol

In gaming latency is king specially in low resolutions and fast fps.. on intel with 3200 CL 16 the latency is around 55ns all way down to 40ns (for a ballpark) im talking about stable stuff not suicide benches...

zGunBLADEz is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #162 of 172 (permalink) Old 06-19-2019, 05:22 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Scotty99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6,307
Rep: 72 (Unique: 56)
Quote: Originally Posted by zGunBLADEz View Post
we didnt have this discussion before on the ryzen 1st gen??

i went lower all way down to almost 60ns on a ryzen..just like cluckos and we were achieving better than what most reviewers were saying it should net you.. Not only that you can go and browse i had a 1700/1800x and a 2700x i even have my scheduler tweaked before windows actually patched a better scheduler on 1903.. still my tweaked version is betters than windows..


the goal here on a cpu bottleneck is give the gpu usage the %, you cant claim intel is giving you more frames.. it just give you more gpu usage you can level the game out..

a cpu magically is not giving you more frames is just giving you better hardware usage. You as a user have the opportunity to tweak this.. thats why in a gpu bottleneck is a straight line between them both practically equal you dont see the intel with 2ghz over ryzen to joke about it magically giving you 50 more frames lol

In gaming latency is king specially in low resolutions and fast fps.. on intel with 3200 CL 16 the latency is around 55ns all way down to 40ns (for a ballpark) im talking about stable stuff not suicide benches...
You still didnt answer the question lol, in games specifically (not benchmarks or memory programs) you found more performance with memory tweaks than upwards of 500mhz core clocks? Again i ask because i always find core clocks to matter more in games, i havent even found one game that responds better to memory tweaking.

Gaming pc
(9 items)
HTPC
(8 items)
CPU
Intel Core i7 8700k
Motherboard
Rog Strix z370-F
GPU
Nvidia Founders Edition RTX 2060
RAM
Gskill Trident-z RGB 3000
Hard Drive
Samsung 960 evo 1tb
Power Supply
EVGA 750 G3
Cooling
NZXT Kraken x62
Case
NZXT S340 elite
Monitor
Dell S2417DG
CPU
AMD Athlon 5350
Motherboard
Asrock AM1B-ITX
RAM
4GB crucial 1600mhz
Hard Drive
OCZ Agility 3 60gb
Case
Linkworld 920-01
Monitor
Vizio Smartcast E55
Keyboard
Logitech K400
Audio
Vizio 3.1 Soundbar
▲ hide details ▲
Scotty99 is offline  
post #163 of 172 (permalink) Old 06-19-2019, 05:25 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
zGunBLADEz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,502
Rep: 99 (Unique: 72)
Quote: Originally Posted by Scotty99 View Post
You still didnt answer the question lol, in games specifically (not benchmarks or memory programs) you found more performance with memory tweaks than upwards of 500mhz core clocks? Again i ask because i always find core clocks to matter more in games, i havent even found one game that responds better to memory tweaking.
yes in gaming ram tweaks that net you lower latency = better gaming performance on cpu bottlenecks scenarios in ryzen is a bit different as the ram mhz helps the communication between CCX's the way its designed.

on intel i can have better hardware usage with better latency and less mhz than trying to overclock the cpu to 50x and having cheapo ram.. like everything theres some games that likes mhz as well too.
But general latency ===> mhz...point is if you tweaking you seeing a bit of gain because...

i can have 4000MHz ddr4 with 40ns i can also have 40ns with 3466 cl14s my single ipc score is the same on cb15 for example the difference is very minimal
thats why you see people trying to do 3200MHz cl 12s XD



2yrs ago
https://www.overclock.net/forum/26278727-post619.html

[email protected] 3200 cl16 = 77ns random pic from google

my 8700k with 1GHz difference 42x vs 52x
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	aida64.jpg
Views:	3
Size:	141.4 KB
ID:	275072  

Click image for larger version

Name:	Screenshot (93).png
Views:	10
Size:	407.6 KB
ID:	275076  



Last edited by zGunBLADEz; 06-19-2019 at 05:54 AM.
zGunBLADEz is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #164 of 172 (permalink) Old 06-19-2019, 05:53 AM
News Junkie
 
Newbie2009's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Ireland
Posts: 8,188
Rep: 300 (Unique: 234)
People with 9900k cpu are gaming at 1080p?

All AMD PC
(9 items)
CPU
AMD 3600X - stock
Motherboard
Asrock B450 Micro ATX Fatality
GPU
5700xt Anniversary Edition 2150/900
RAM
Corsair 3200mhz 16gb @ 3466mhz
Hard Drive
1tb m.2 SSD
Power Supply
Corsair SFX 750
Case
Fractal Design Node 202
Operating System
Windows 10
Monitor
Sony 55"
▲ hide details ▲
Newbie2009 is offline  
post #165 of 172 (permalink) Old 06-19-2019, 05:54 AM
 
The Robot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,314
Rep: 129 (Unique: 81)
Quote: Originally Posted by Newbie2009 View Post
People with 9900k cpu are gaming at 1080p?
At 720p, apparently

Main
(17 items)
Nintendo DS
(8 items)
CPU
6700K
Motherboard
Gigabyte Z170X-Gaming 3
GPU
MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X
RAM
G.Skill Ripjaws V 16GB 3000
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Evo 500GB
Hard Drive
WD Blue 3TB
Power Supply
EVGA 650 G2
Cooling
Noctua NH-D15S
Cooling
Nanoxia Deep Silence 140mm
Cooling
Nanoxia Deep Silence 120mm
Case
Corsair 400Q
Operating System
Windows 10 Enterprise
Monitor
ViewSonic XG2703-GS 1440p
Keyboard
Leopold FC750 (MX Brown)
Mouse
Logitech Performance Mouse MX
Audio
Mayflower Objective2 + ODAC Rev. B Combo
Audio
Audio-Technica ATH-A990Z
CPU
ARM946E-S 67.028 MHz
CPU
ARM7TDMI 33.514 MHz
RAM
4 MB
Hard Drive
256 kB
Power Supply
850 mAh
Operating System
DS OS
Monitor
3" 256×192 18-bit
Monitor
3" 256×192 18-bit
▲ hide details ▲
The Robot is offline  
post #166 of 172 (permalink) Old 06-19-2019, 05:55 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
zGunBLADEz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,502
Rep: 99 (Unique: 72)
Quote: Originally Posted by Newbie2009 View Post
People with 9900k cpu are gaming at 1080p?
for the sake of argument i guess they do..

dont forget with low settings quake graphics too XD

i actually downclock, downvoltage my cpus at 4k where im gpu bottlenecked the way i play games im always gpu bottlenecked lol
1080p is a peasant resolution in my eyes.. i didnt become a hardware enthusiast to go backwards 10 yrs ago type of resolution but that seems the norm now a days they see high fps as a strain on hardware 1080p/720p low settings 200fps+? gpu usage at 60%? thats not even a chuckle


Last edited by zGunBLADEz; 06-19-2019 at 06:07 AM.
zGunBLADEz is offline  
post #167 of 172 (permalink) Old 06-19-2019, 05:59 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Woundingchaney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,185
Rep: 121 (Unique: 97)
Quote: Originally Posted by Newbie2009 View Post
People with 9900k cpu are gaming at 1080p?
This is pretty much the crutch of the entire comparison or argument in general. People arent buying this new hardware to run older games at very low settings. In just about any real world scenario when taking into account actual consumers and their intentions these testing parameters are completely invalid.

Any current PC gamer more than realizes that modern cpus simply are a far secondary concern when compared to the gpu solution. Its been years since I have even felt the need to upgrade my cpu to play games, most of the time I simply do to keep my build relatively modern.

Woundingchaney is offline  
post #168 of 172 (permalink) Old 06-19-2019, 06:34 AM
Waiting for 7nm EUV
 
tpi2007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 11,383
Rep: 894 (Unique: 503)
Quote: Originally Posted by zGunBLADEz View Post
for the sake of argument i guess they do..

dont forget with low settings quake graphics too XD

i actually downclock, downvoltage my cpus at 4k where im gpu bottlenecked the way i play games im always gpu bottlenecked lol
1080p is a peasant resolution in my eyes.. i didnt become a hardware enthusiast to go backwards 10 yrs ago type of resolution but that seems the norm now a days they see high fps as a strain on hardware 1080p/720p low settings 200fps+? gpu usage at 60%? thats not even a chuckle
Quote: Originally Posted by Woundingchaney View Post
This is pretty much the crutch of the entire comparison or argument in general. People arent buying this new hardware to run older games at very low settings. In just about any real world scenario when taking into account actual consumers and their intentions these testing parameters are completely invalid.

Any current PC gamer more than realizes that modern cpus simply are a far secondary concern when compared to the gpu solution. Its been years since I have even felt the need to upgrade my cpu to play games, most of the time I simply do to keep my build relatively modern.

1080p resolution is tested because it's the more relevant way to ascertain how much fuel the CPU has in the tank for future games and GPUs, should you need it. Nowadays CPU A and B have enough horsepower to feed a top of the line GPU at 4K, to the point where the bottleneck is in the GPU, but GPU's evolve and one day there will be a difference between CPU A and B at 4K, because tomorrow's 4K performance is today's 1080p. More relevantly perhaps: 1440p high refresh gaming, which seems to be a sweetspot for now.


tpi2007 is offline  
post #169 of 172 (permalink) Old 06-19-2019, 06:40 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
zGunBLADEz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,502
Rep: 99 (Unique: 72)
Quote: Originally Posted by tpi2007 View Post
1080p resolution is tested because it's the more relevant way to ascertain how much fuel the CPU has in the tank for future games and GPUs, should you need it. Nowadays CPU A and B have enough horsepower to feed a top of the line GPU at 4K, to the point where the bottleneck is in the GPU, but GPU's evolve and one day there will be a difference between CPU A and B at 4K, because tomorrow's 4K performance is today's 1080p. More relevantly perhaps: 1440p high refresh gaming, which seems to be a sweetspot for now.
well that applies for people that hold hardware for what 5yrs+ even longer? theres still people on sandybridge waiting to jump tho...

4k would not be as easy to 1080P or 1440P to achieve those type of fps
between 3 vs 4k theres a almost a 30% gap of performance on current gpus..
both are gpu bottlenecked resolutions on the top of the line gpus..

by the time you need this "horsepower" you will be looking at new stuff.


myself i prefer a steady frametime line than high fps and erratic frametimes..


Last edited by zGunBLADEz; 06-19-2019 at 06:49 AM.
zGunBLADEz is offline  
post #170 of 172 (permalink) Old 06-19-2019, 06:49 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Woundingchaney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,185
Rep: 121 (Unique: 97)
Quote: Originally Posted by tpi2007 View Post
1080p resolution is tested because it's the more relevant way to ascertain how much fuel the CPU has in the tank for future games and GPUs, should you need it. Nowadays CPU A and B have enough horsepower to feed a top of the line GPU at 4K, to the point where the bottleneck is in the GPU, but GPU's evolve and one day there will be a difference between CPU A and B at 4K, because tomorrow's 4K performance is today's 1080p. More relevantly perhaps: 1440p high refresh gaming, which seems to be a sweetspot for now.
The problem with this is that the consumer demographic doesnt change. Whenever we actually see the industry move beyond 4k as a target resolution those consumers are not going to be interested in the relative performance of cpus under legacy resolutions and bare bones settings. The gaming industry itself moves relatively slow as well, realistically 1080p has been a target resolution for well over a decade and even now we are only getting to the point in which 4k is becoming mainstream, despite it being marketed way back at the 400 series.

Even concerning high refresh 1440p gaming, cpu/s is not at the forefront of the hardware focus. Anyone targeting that resolution and refresh for gaming with a budget is still going to primarily focus on their gpu solution. Realistically these cpu gaming performance conversations revolve around 2 consumer demographics, those with a lower budget and those with a higher budget and it just so happens that the comparison is not realistically relevant to either of them. Sure you have consumers that are going to spec out their build for the next 2 or 3 years, but by then literally every market indicator we have more than suggests their gpu is once again going to be the concern much more so than the longevity of their cpu solution.

Realistically I could be using a 4 year old cpu with virtually no noticeable difference in performance as far as gaming goes, nor would I most likely see any difference in years to come.

Woundingchaney 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