-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Nvidia Has a Driver Overhead Problem, GeForce vs Radeon on Low-End CPUs
- Thread starter RavenXXX2
- Start date
Consoles r poop!
better than people's old quad and hexacore cpus haha
I would rather play on a PC than a console, I have a 4970k @ 5GHZ and a 3090FE, and I will not upgrade till at least AlderLake if it pans out well so not sure why you feel Iand other cannot game on a 4 core or even 6 core.
I have had this since 2013-2014 instead of upgrading nearly with each new CPU/Mobo/GPU like I used to do.
Look at the TimeSpy I uploaded in someone's thread, double the FPS that Humbug gets in BF4 @ 1440 Ultra (180FPS AFAIR).
I have had this since 2013-2014 instead of upgrading nearly with each new CPU/Mobo/GPU like I used to do.
Look at the TimeSpy I uploaded in someone's thread, double the FPS that Humbug gets in BF4 @ 1440 Ultra (180FPS AFAIR).
Should have bought a 6700xt you would have higher framerate
8 cores are minimum? You're a bit exaggareting
But I do think the IPC power of new consoles will surely ruin a lot of CPUs, anything below 5600x, and even 5600x itself
i see pc master race people on subs claiming 3600 is faster and has more cache, and with superior, low-level console CPU optimization, even a 3700x will be nowhere near what series x/ps5 cpu can achieve.
Since no one can run ac odyssey/rdr2/horizon zero down with 1.6 ghz 8 jaguar cores at 30 fps. at best, you might get 20 fps, and at worst it will drop below 15 fps. that's how much developers can squeeze cpu performance out of consoles. apply that logic to 8 3.5 ghz zen 2 cores, and see how even a "5 ghz" 10900k crumbles under it
But I do think the IPC power of new consoles will surely ruin a lot of CPUs, anything below 5600x, and even 5600x itself
i see pc master race people on subs claiming 3600 is faster and has more cache, and with superior, low-level console CPU optimization, even a 3700x will be nowhere near what series x/ps5 cpu can achieve.
Since no one can run ac odyssey/rdr2/horizon zero down with 1.6 ghz 8 jaguar cores at 30 fps. at best, you might get 20 fps, and at worst it will drop below 15 fps. that's how much developers can squeeze cpu performance out of consoles. apply that logic to 8 3.5 ghz zen 2 cores, and see how even a "5 ghz" 10900k crumbles under it
4 and even 6 core cpus are struggling to drive RTX3000 GPUs, HU benchmark data speaks for itself
yeah but gotta factor in ipc as well
https://youtu.be/yHxqDFzVPW8?t=986
this scene alone is literal proof that equivalent pc cpu gets 1.7-2 times less performance compared to the console cpu (and no, it's not specific to this game. i tested in ac odyssey, rdr 2, horizon zero dawn and many more games. you need 2 times more raw cpu power to hit rock solid 30 fps compared to 1.6 ghz jaguar cores of ps4).
going by this logic, there's literally no cpu that can reliably double what the 3.5 ghz zen 2 can achieve. this is very bad news for pc gamers, unless developers change how they port to PC, but honestly, i don't have high hopes
No thanks, will stick to Nvidia and no it would not get higher FPS at 1440p or even 1080p as I am at 5GHZ.
I prefer to actually play games and see my FPS on screen is decent and games feels fine to play not e-peen synthetic benches as I have grown out of that.
Not sure what you have been smoking so early on a Monday morning Rim but you do not normally talk so much nonsense in my book.
@JohnG7 - Gamersnexus did a revisit on your cpu (and others in the stack), last year - 2020 vs. 2014 CPUs: Intel i7-4790K, 4770K, & i5-4690K vs. 10600K, 10900K, 3700X, 3900X - YouTube
I seen it, also the bottleneck at 1440p is about 14-17% going by the tools you can use online
Either way nothing is worth upgrading to as I am not struggling and have a backlog of games from past few years, I get very high FPS in nearly all games and no less than 90FPS is some poorly optimised games.
RAGE2 1440p MAX like 200-240+FPS most of the time.
I no longer watch those YT channels as they are normally full of you know what esp Linus with his videos like high speed ram does not matter in games then a few month later a total backtrack (a sell out).
Either way nothing is worth upgrading to as I am not struggling and have a backlog of games from past few years, I get very high FPS in nearly all games and no less than 90FPS is some poorly optimised games.
RAGE2 1440p MAX like 200-240+FPS most of the time.
I no longer watch those YT channels as they are normally full of you know what esp Linus with his videos like high speed ram does not matter in games then a few month later a total backtrack (a sell out).
Last edited:
You have a GPU that's twice as fast as mine and you're getting double the frame rates at 1440P in an 8 year old game, i'm sure you do in campaign mode.
Go on a 64 player map and watch that CPU of yours choke your GPU to death.
noooo how dare you continue using your old cpu1!1 how dare you get %99 usage!! turn down to medium or high-medium mixed settings to make it bottleneck!!
I do not do MP period, I will again have a top CPU when one is worth upgrading to for me if I cannot get good FPS at 1440p with max settings in most games.
240FPS in Rage 2 ok for you?
And Humbug do not cry like a little boy I was getting at Grim5 for talking nonsense not at you but your screenshot was above mine and I have lowered CPU core for now due to not done my cooling mods yet.
240FPS in Rage 2 ok for you?
And Humbug do not cry like a little boy I was getting at Grim5 for talking nonsense not at you but your screenshot was above mine and I have lowered CPU core for now due to not done my cooling mods yet.
Why do you feel you have to justify your self and your CPU?
I do not but still Grim5 talking poop about 4-6 cores no good today so best buy a super duper new console (also poop) is a bit much for a Mon morn.
I could buy any Mobo/CPU right now but none I fancy and I will not touch Rocketlake but will see about AlderLake in Sep2021 or wait till 2022.
Until AMD got things sorted in recent years there was nothing worth it for years after Sandybridge/Haswell/the refreshed Devils Canyon that was really breakthough.
I could buy any Mobo/CPU right now but none I fancy and I will not touch Rocketlake but will see about AlderLake in Sep2021 or wait till 2022.
Until AMD got things sorted in recent years there was nothing worth it for years after Sandybridge/Haswell/the refreshed Devils Canyon that was really breakthough.
Same reason why you're trying to justify your own CPU purchase, to prove that it has its valid uses.
You get useful benefits out of your own CPU, because you want much higher frames,
He gets the frames he wants, and might as well use his new GPU power to push higher fidelity.
In the majority of cases, you will play with downgraded graphics in heavy-to-run AAA games to get the benefit of your CPU, while he will play with superior graphics.
In the light-to-run AAA competitive games, your CPU and GPU will push more frames even wit higher settings, and you will play with superior frames (yeah, you'll be getting sweet 220 fps in apex while he will get 140 fps, wow, what a downgrade. i'm literally shuddering, how are we supposed to hit enemies at 140 fps wow) and only place where a 47900k will crumble is battlefield 5 64 player map, which you said yourself, and no one ever cares for that game, because of the reason itself, the horrible performance. it pruned so many players due to performance reasons that it's playerbase is dwindled. might as well play tons of alternatives that have better performance, better support and content and bigger community, period)
Let's go with Cyberpunk. Let's say your CPU can deliver 120 fps and his CPu can deliver 60 FPS.
You will have to go ham on your graphical settings to hit 120 fps, at 1440p. He can stay at 1440p and push fidelity settings. In the end, 60 vs 120 in Cyberpunk won't matter much, since you're literally shooting at poorly written AI (even if they were written well, it wouldn't matter much).
You get high framerates in multiplayer games, even at high fidelity, and he won't be able to, and yes. But he specifically says he doesn't play multiplayer games. So I guess the debate should be settled.
Both purchases are valid and justified for their own purposes
You get useful benefits out of your own CPU, because you want much higher frames,
He gets the frames he wants, and might as well use his new GPU power to push higher fidelity.
In the majority of cases, you will play with downgraded graphics in heavy-to-run AAA games to get the benefit of your CPU, while he will play with superior graphics.
In the light-to-run AAA competitive games, your CPU and GPU will push more frames even wit higher settings, and you will play with superior frames (yeah, you'll be getting sweet 220 fps in apex while he will get 140 fps, wow, what a downgrade. i'm literally shuddering, how are we supposed to hit enemies at 140 fps wow) and only place where a 47900k will crumble is battlefield 5 64 player map, which you said yourself, and no one ever cares for that game, because of the reason itself, the horrible performance. it pruned so many players due to performance reasons that it's playerbase is dwindled. might as well play tons of alternatives that have better performance, better support and content and bigger community, period)
Let's go with Cyberpunk. Let's say your CPU can deliver 120 fps and his CPu can deliver 60 FPS.
You will have to go ham on your graphical settings to hit 120 fps, at 1440p. He can stay at 1440p and push fidelity settings. In the end, 60 vs 120 in Cyberpunk won't matter much, since you're literally shooting at poorly written AI (even if they were written well, it wouldn't matter much).
You get high framerates in multiplayer games, even at high fidelity, and he won't be able to, and yes. But he specifically says he doesn't play multiplayer games. So I guess the debate should be settled.
Both purchases are valid and justified for their own purposes
Last edited:
I've been keeping an eye on Rainforest best sellers, both the 5600X and 5800X are still outselling Comet Lake, Rocket Lake are there but completely absent from the top 12.
It seems the tables have flipped, as Steve Burke put it Intel are now the budget brand, its up to Intel to undercut AMD and they ain't doing that.
Yeah even a 10400f +z490+ with highly oc'ed and tuned ram can do some serious things in games, at a much cheaper price
But I guess 11400f+b560 will be the new "b450+3600" combo of gaming, since b560 will allow ram oc this time (i hope above 3000 mhz)
But I guess 11400f+b560 will be the new "b450+3600" combo of gaming, since b560 will allow ram oc this time (i hope above 3000 mhz)