Interesting
[HW Unboxed] AMD Ryzen 5 1600 vs. Intel Core i7-7800X: 30 Game Battle!
FLCLimax
1 - 20 of 693 Posts
Joined
·
4,621 Posts
Joined
·
456 Posts
And when I said ryzen is almost on par with 7700k as of late people calls me a fanboy.
Joined
·
2,091 Posts
Quote:
That said:
30 games, same performance, half the price of a 7800X.
It isn't. The 7700K is just a beast gaming wise. If your main concern is gaming it is the CPU to go.Originally Posted by artemis2307
And when I said ryzen is almost on par with 7700k as of late people calls me a fanboy.
That said:
30 games, same performance, half the price of a 7800X.
Joined
·
894 Posts
So of all of that you can only use 3 or 4 games for comparison, since everything else is either Framecaped or GPU bound....Also he is either lying about using a 1080Ti or reusing videos since in some games it either shown GTX 1050 or the info from Riviatuner were showing wrong clockspeeds and mem speeds.
C6E R9 3950X 32g DDR4 3200 500gb M.2 2x4gb Toshiba HDD EVGA GTX 1070Ti air cooled ( Noctua NH-D15S )
Joined
·
1,061 Posts
Ryzen looks good enough for me to buy in ( just bought a mini Itx Asrock board ) - no CPU yet , not sure which one to get .
That was a pretty decent review too , never heard of this guy before .
That was a pretty decent review too , never heard of this guy before .
Joined
·
3,667 Posts
Quote:
It's 10% faster on average including games that simply dog out on Ryzen and one game that gets worse on Ryzen with each patch...@ 5ghz. In many newer games it's roughly 1 to 2% faster than Ryzen 5.Originally Posted by Imouto
Quote:
It isn't. The 7700K is just a beast gaming wise. If your main concern is gaming it is the CPU to go.Originally Posted by artemis2307
And when I said ryzen is almost on par with 7700k as of late people calls me a fanboy.
That said:
30 games, same performance, half the price of a 7800X.
Joined
·
6,539 Posts
Quote:
It's because you use terms like 'almost on par'. If you look at these numbers an overclocked R5-1600 offers 91.3 % of the Average Frame and 90.4 % of 1% Min FPS when compared to an overclocked 7700k. If you meant its within ~9%, then I guess your right.Originally Posted by artemis2307
And when I said ryzen is almost on par with 7700k as of late people calls me a fanboy.
Joined
·
2,258 Posts
Not so sure how long the 7700K's lead will last though.. Game optimization plays a pretty big role in how the CPU's perform, now that AMD has compelling CPU's devs are going to start actually optimizing for them.
![thumb.gif]( "thumb.gif")
It's also "only" 10% faster on average.. At framerates far above 100fps I think it's reasonable to call it "on par", at those framerates no one would be able to say which is which in a blind test. So yeah the 7700K is the clear winner in gaming if you like having graphs sitting next to you - but the 1600 is hardly a slouch either, and is far cheaper.. A $200 6 core with the fastest GPU in the world, @ 1080P, in Intel-optimized games only being 10% behind makes me think even if gaming was your main concern, you'd be more than fine with the 1600.
As Hardware Unboxed pointed out, he also needed to use/used $300 custom water cooling to achieve his clocks on the Intel side, the 1600 can hit its overclock on the stock cooler.. Not to mention it's a complete slaughter in non-gaming scenarios..
One thing I wish reviewers would do is have a "dirty bench", representing a system people watching would actually be using, no one has a squeaky clean system every time they play a new game. Discord/Steam chat, background processes, etc. will probably give the 6 core an edge even without dev optimization.
The 1600 is just a brilliant CPU. Forget the 7700K, people should spare a thought for the poor 7800X..
![redface.gif]( "redface.gif")
It's also "only" 10% faster on average.. At framerates far above 100fps I think it's reasonable to call it "on par", at those framerates no one would be able to say which is which in a blind test. So yeah the 7700K is the clear winner in gaming if you like having graphs sitting next to you - but the 1600 is hardly a slouch either, and is far cheaper.. A $200 6 core with the fastest GPU in the world, @ 1080P, in Intel-optimized games only being 10% behind makes me think even if gaming was your main concern, you'd be more than fine with the 1600.
As Hardware Unboxed pointed out, he also needed to use/used $300 custom water cooling to achieve his clocks on the Intel side, the 1600 can hit its overclock on the stock cooler.. Not to mention it's a complete slaughter in non-gaming scenarios..
One thing I wish reviewers would do is have a "dirty bench", representing a system people watching would actually be using, no one has a squeaky clean system every time they play a new game. Discord/Steam chat, background processes, etc. will probably give the 6 core an edge even without dev optimization.
The 1600 is just a brilliant CPU. Forget the 7700K, people should spare a thought for the poor 7800X..
Joined
·
711 Posts
Another way to look at it is that a quad-core is beating hexa core cpus in 30 games.
Joined
·
3,667 Posts
Quote:
Those numbers are "almost on par" though...and that's even accounting for skewed results like games that scale backward on Ryzen...and with a proven deficit in DX12 performance paired with NVIDIA GPU's ...maybe he's not the fanboy lol.Originally Posted by BinaryDemon
Quote:
It's because you use terms like 'almost on par'. If you look at these numbers an overclocked R5-1600 offers 91.3 % of the Average Frame and 90.4 % of 1% Min FPS when compared to an overclocked 7700k. If you meant its within ~9%, then I guess your right.Originally Posted by artemis2307
And when I said ryzen is almost on par with 7700k as of late people calls me a fanboy.
Joined
·
2,091 Posts
Quote:
Look at it this way, it may happen that your 1600 runs like a dog with a set of particular games where the 7700K will just offer the best performance, always. In fact those games where the 1600 runs like a clunker is where its average drops dramatically.
You said it. There are instances where the 1600 gets slaughtered where the 7700K is on par or the top consistently.Originally Posted by FLCLimax
It's 10% faster on average including games that simply dog out on Ryzen and one game that gets worse on Ryzen with each patch...@ 5ghz. In many newer games it's roughly 1 to 2% faster than Ryzen 5.
Look at it this way, it may happen that your 1600 runs like a dog with a set of particular games where the 7700K will just offer the best performance, always. In fact those games where the 1600 runs like a clunker is where its average drops dramatically.
Joined
·
10,011 Posts
So... is this really a result of Intel's rushing to release more parts? The IPC performance of Skylake X seems to be... almost worse than the typical Skylake CPUs...
Its clear that the 7700k is a little faster than anything
The point made here is the 1600x is on par with a 7800x. The processors costs half as much and the motherboards are far more affordable.
An X299 + 7800x motherboard is more expensive than an 1700x + X370.
The point made here is the 1600x is on par with a 7800x. The processors costs half as much and the motherboards are far more affordable.
An X299 + 7800x motherboard is more expensive than an 1700x + X370.
Joined
·
6,439 Posts
So what are peoples thought on the Core i7 6700 (Non-K) vs the Ryzen 5 1600 in scenarios like live streaming, rendering, etc. Clearly the Ryzen chips has more cores and threads, but is it going to be significantly better?
1 - 20 of 693 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
