Gaming PC for £500

Danny75 said:
1. He doesn't have to.
2. His friend requested Intel.
3. OP said he was trying to fit in an i5.
4. Despite older socket, it's faster, DDR3 is cheaper, and GTX 1050Ti is faster.
Click to expand...

Prove it. Prove that i5 is faster than the quad core Ryzens.
He doesn't have to buy an old and dead platform without any future upgrade path.
 
4K8KW10 said:
Prove it. Prove that i5 is faster than the quad core Ryzens.
Click to expand...

Every serious independent benchmarker out there has already done so. Ryzen IPC is 11% slower than Intel 4th Gen, on average, clock for clock. Then you take clockspeed for particular model of chip into account, and whether it can be overclocked. Look it up.

Then you have the new Coffee Lake i3 quad core, which spanks the Ryzen 1200 even more.


4K8KW10 said:
He doesn't have to buy an old and dead platform without any future upgrade path.
Click to expand...

Like I already said, he doesn't. But you keep going on about upgrading and ignore that i5-4690 + 1050Ti is faster than 1200 + 560 right from the get go which makes it better bang for buck. He wouldn't have to wait to upgrade for better performance.

Also, unless he's thinking of upgrading very soon to a six or eight core, by the time he does so it would be pointless as Ryzen IPC would be far behind newer platforms. You'd get the cores but not the single core strength (compared to newer processors by then) that plenty of applications/games make use of. It remains to be seen how much AMD can improve IPC in future AM4 iterations.

In summary, he should go for a Ryzen build if he plans on upgrading processor within a couple of years. If he'd rather just get the best for his money now, and a 1050Ti, then i5-4XXX is a good option.
 
4K8KW10 said:
Ryzen 3 is a very good chip for the money! It isn't slower than i5-4. It is a lie to claim that Zen IPC is 11% lower than Haswell's.
Haswell is dead and buried :D

status at Intel's own website is END OF LIFE :D https://ark.intel.com/products/75048/Intel-Core-i5-4670K-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_80-GHz


https://www.anandtech.com/show/11658/the-amd-ryzen-3-1300x-ryzen-3-1200-cpu-review/4
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11658/the-amd-ryzen-3-1300x-ryzen-3-1200-cpu-review/5
Click to expand...

You pick one benchmark out of six benchmarks on that very page. In five of those benchmarks the i5-7400 is faster than Ryzen 1200. But it's not slower on average. Right.

Not only that but (a) this is a thread for a gaming system so you should focus on gaming benchmarks unless OP indicates interest in running brain analysis software for which none of the processors benchmarked in that list are adequate in the first place, according to the reviewer, and (b) the i5-4690 is 6% faster on average than the i5-7400.

Want to try again?
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom