2500k to 8400/8600k

~>Dg<~ · 7 Oct 2017 at 11:59

above your girlfriend is wanting to stream.for solely games the intel option is better.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 7 Oct 2017 at 12:05

southernorth said:
I never really understood the benefits of that argument. Sure, you can upgrade for the next 2 years through AM4 if you want, but it's a very small minority of people that actually upgrade their CPU every 2 years or less whilst keeping the same motherboard. The vast majority keep their entire system the same for way longer than 2 years.

A lot of people on AMD platforms I know have gone through two CPU changes in their systems - I have gone though two on my current Intel one,ie, Core i5 to Core i7 on mine.

In the end many people will upgrade their CPU if they can over a new build if that is an option - I am sure many on a SKL/KL Core i3 for example,would love to plonk in a Core i5 8400 but in the end have to change their mb if they want to since Intel CBA to keep compatibility.

If Intel had done so,it really would have put AMD under a ton of pressure.

DragonQ · 7 Oct 2017 at 12:17

~>Dg<~ said:
above your girlfriend is wanting to stream.for solely games the intel option is better.

Sigh. Try reading my post next time instead of repeating the same drivel. I said I'd go R5 1600(X) if she wasn't going to be streaming.

~>Dg<~ · 7 Oct 2017 at 13:10

which still makes no sense.only ryzen to choose ryzen is if you multitasking and gaming over lower tier intel.if its just for gaming their is only one reason and its budget not performance.

the guy is mainly gaming get a intel.bf1 faster,witcher faster, pubg miles faster. all the big games people play in mp which is mainly todays gaming is better on intel.sometimes its close sometimes big differences.

so what if it ends up being £100 pound more for eg if you keep it 2 or 3 years ? you end up with a faster system for those 3 years for peanuts.even on budget builds.

the only reason to pick ryzen is budget or if you multitasking on a budget.which they are good for.

Boomstick777 · 7 Oct 2017 at 13:12

~>Dg<~ said:
if its soley for gaming go with the new intel chips.they are faster.better.

Subjective? depending on the chip. 5% more gaming performance or 50% more performance elsewhere. I think Ryzen is better. So yeah 'better' is subjective.

Out of the 1800X vs 8700K I would still go Ryzen because AM4 will be supported for years, whereas Intel bend you over for new chipset every year. Sometimes within 10 months.

~>Dg<~ said:
the only reason to pick ryzen is budget or if you multitasking on a budget.which they are good for.

Pfft this guy just trolling at this point. 1950X budget multitasking xD Intel defense force on point today.

The fanboy types are the reason I will stay with AMD. The user base just seems less nerdy and fan girly xD

AndreiD · 7 Oct 2017 at 13:18

I can understand a lot of people in here are trying to justify their Ryzen purchases, but objectively the new Intel chips are faster to much faster than Ryzens for 1080p gaming. Ryzen is very good if you do some rendering, encoding, etc. on the side.

And the price difference becomes very questionable when you remember that you have to spend extra for B-die if you want to get the most out of Ryzen.
The 8400 build might even be cheaper since you can slap any Hynix kit on it and it'll run at its rated speed.

@Dellboy You have reviews for the 8400 here: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i5_8400/ and here https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Proce...y-Intel-Core-i7-8700K-and-Core-i5-8400-Review
Pick whatever is faster for whatever purpose the CPU will be used for, that fits in the desired budget.

Dr Delphi · 7 Oct 2017 at 14:18

As for the upgrade from i5 3570k are there any benchmarks people want me to try moving from the i5 3570k to an 8600k, as I'm about to do that today/tomorrow?

jigger · 7 Oct 2017 at 14:20

~>Dg<~ said:
which still makes no sense.only ryzen to choose ryzen is if you multitasking and gaming over lower tier intel.if its just for gaming their is only one reason and its budget not performance.

the guy is mainly gaming get a intel.bf1 faster,witcher faster, pubg miles faster. all the big games people play in mp which is mainly todays gaming is better on intel.sometimes its close sometimes big differences.

so what if it ends up being £100 pound more for eg if you keep it 2 or 3 years ? you end up with a faster system for those 3 years for peanuts.even on budget builds.

the only reason to pick ryzen is budget or if you multitasking on a budget.which they are good for.

No.

gavinh87 · 7 Oct 2017 at 14:35

jigger said:
No.

Having owned both, I can say he's right.
BF1 is a **** ton smoother, even a mid range 1070 on the 1700 would drop to 70% utilization in big fights causing noticeable slowdown and stutter.
No such thing on the 8700k my 1070 is locked at 99% (at completely stock with 2133 ram) its as smooth as I've ever experienced. With the frame times locked at 6-8ms, on ryzen these would spike into the 50ms at times.
Of course, you will dispute this. Set them side by side in bf1 and pubg and you will be able to tell the difference.

jigger · 7 Oct 2017 at 14:38

gavinh87 said:
Having owned both, I can say he's right.
BF1 is a **** ton smoother, even a mid range 1070 on the 1700 would drop to 70% utilization in big fights causing noticeable slowdown and stutter.
No such thing on the 8700k my 1070 is locked at 99% (at completely stock with 2133 ram) its as smooth as I've ever experienced. With the frame times locked at 6-8ms, on ryzen these would spike into the 50ms at times.
Of course, you will dispute this. Set them side by side in bf1 and pubg and you will be able to tell the difference.

No.

~>Dg<~ · 7 Oct 2017 at 14:54

no point arguing on here tbh. people like me play games all day record all day and bench them all day. super sayen ryzen on bf1 check

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i7_8700K/12.html

so even top end ryzen is slower than a newer i5 for bf1.done.even i3s can beat them sometimes lol.

pubg

if you streaming games and play or recording and playing on same rig consider ryzen as a option if purely gaming no point just get a intel chip.bare truth.

Akagi · 7 Oct 2017 at 15:01

I went from a 2500K to a 2700K and it cost me nothing.

gavinh87 · 7 Oct 2017 at 15:03

~>Dg<~ said:
no point arguing on here tbh. people like me play games all day record all day and bench them all day. super sayen ryzen on bf1 check

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i7_8700K/12.html

so even top end ryzen is slower than a newer i5 for bf1.done.even i3s can beat them sometimes lol.

pubg

if you streaming games and play or recording and playing on same rig consider ryzen as a option if purely gaming no point just get a intel chip.bare truth.

Best thing is, gamers nexus did a streaming test, guess who won that?

jigger · 7 Oct 2017 at 15:05

Acme said:
I went from a 2500K to a 2700K and it cost me nothing.

The best upgrade is a free one.

Akagi · 7 Oct 2017 at 15:06

jigger said:
The best upgrade is a free one.

Actually I think I sold the i5 for more than I bought the i7 for...

jigger · 7 Oct 2017 at 15:12

Acme said:
Actually I think I sold the i5 for more than I bought the i7 for...

Result

just watch out for those 50ms spikes :eek:

Amraam · 8 Oct 2017 at 17:51

southernorth said:
I never really understood the benefits of that argument. Sure, you can upgrade for the next 2 years through AM4 if you want, but it's a very small minority of people that actually upgrade their CPU every 2 years or less whilst keeping the same motherboard. The vast majority keep their entire system the same for way longer than 2 years.

To answer the OP's question, various early benchmarks indicate that performance of the i5-8400 is very similar to the i7 7700k and i5 8600k in most games. That's a £100+ saving for not much performance loss. The Ryzen 5 1600 is also a good option, but it doesn't perform so well in games.

Is your brother purely intending to game or?

+1. Still rocking 2500k with Asrock Z68. Bought them in 2011 I believe? I tend to upgrade my GPU more often, which sadly means I tend to run tech 'out of sync'. Good car with old CPU, then new good CPU with old GPU. I seriously have no need to update my system but the itch is starting... :/

Swinbag · 9 Oct 2017 at 11:57

Amraam said:
+1. Still rocking 2500k with Asrock Z68. Bought them in 2011 I believe? I tend to upgrade my GPU more often, which sadly means I tend to run tech 'out of sync'. Good car with old CPU, then new good CPU with old GPU. I seriously have no need to update my system but the itch is starting... :/

I'm in a similar position to be fair, no real need to upgrade but the itch is getting 'itchier' lol - actually looking at shifting my 780 & picking up a used 980Ti to keep me happy for a while.

CWINK · 9 Oct 2017 at 12:12

I'd double check the 2500k is the bottleneck, perhaps with a 1070 it is, i run a 2500k at 4.5GHz with a 970 and i'm still more limited by the GPU than CPU.

imginy · 9 Oct 2017 at 12:18

8400 looks amazing for games it actually competes with the best gaming cpu's from the last gen the 7700k and 6700k and it's only £170.

Doesn't seem much point in getting anything else if it's just for gaming and if in future games do need more than the 8400 you always have the 8600k/8700k to upgrade to.

there is tons of reviews out there all show 8400 is the new gaming processor to go for
http://www.pcgamer.com/intel-i5-8400-review-the-best-new-gaming-cpu-in-years/