Thanks.
-
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.
AMD Zen 5 rumours
- Thread starter Grim5
- Start date
Thanks.
Soldato
16 cores might be fine, but if you are stuck at 16 cores that means that your 300 euro r5 is also stuck at 6 cores, which is definitely not fine.
Caporegime
Associate
if the performance of just 6 cores goes up by double digit % with each generation that is definitely still fine, especially for gaming.
As we've seen with some of the older 16 core chips like the 3950x, they are almost dead products at this point as the latest 7800X3D spanks it at gaming, and is almost quite similar at a lot productivity apps as well
Soldato
According to tpup, the 7700 gets 18.5k. So it's both slower and 50% more expensive than the 13500. What the heck are we talking about here?
Caporegime
7700X
AMD Ryzen 7 7700X Benchmark, Test and specs
The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X is a 8 core processor. It can handle 16 threads simultaneously and was introduced in Q4/2022. The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X is based on
Will you stop posting with so much anger? Everytime you apply your fingers to the Keyboard the thread goes to ####..... We are trying to have a grown-up conversation here. leave or calm down.
Last edited:
I've bought a Ryzen 7600 and it pretty much maxes out my 144Hz monitor at 1440p for gaming, no real need for more now. I can upgrade once the prices drop and I need more umph.
Caporegime
Edit: my bad, apologies to @Bencher i did say 7700.
After looking initially i realised the 7700 and 7700X are near the same price and performance, the 7700 isn't that cheap anymore, my intention was to use the 7700X as an example but left out the X.
After looking initially i realised the 7700 and 7700X are near the same price and performance, the 7700 isn't that cheap anymore, my intention was to use the 7700X as an example but left out the X.
Last edited:
Associate
Exactly, its more just about GPU performance at this point moreso than CPU as I feel we've already had the big explosion of CPU gains in the last couple years. Unless you are going for extreme rates (above 240fps) which is pretty silly imo, as 144-240 seems like the perfect number. 360/480hz seems very pointless to me.
but like I was saying before, the gains in IPC are what matters the most, moreso than just increasing core counts
Soldato
You said 7700, I thought you actually meant the non x. The x gets 19800,still slower and vastly more expensive.7700X
AMD Ryzen 7 7700X Benchmark, Test and specs
The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X is a 8 core processor. It can handle 16 threads simultaneously and was introduced in Q4/2022. The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X is based onwww.cpu-monkey.com
Will you stop posting with so much anger? Everytime you apply your fingers to the Keyboard the thread goes to ####..... We are trying to have a grown-up conversation here. leave or calm down.
What anger are you talking, I'm completely zen, just mentioning facts. The fastest 8 core zen 4 is both slower and more expensive than the slowest intel 14 core. Okay
If you don't care about MultiThreading performance then zen 4 is fine I guess, but since the opposition is also fine while giving you free extra mt performance, then why not.
Last edited:
Caporegime
That is the point i was making, you assume too much, this instead of properly reading the conversation, i know English is not your first language but its not that that's the problem, you're perfectly capable of following a conversation, you just have too much precognition, you're projecting even. That's where the problems start.
Interestingly the 7600 performs a little better than my 5800X3d so there's obviously a number of factors, IPC, frequency and cache. I reckon this will be good until the "8800X3D" has dropped in price. It really depends on when you decide you need to upgrade.
Nope, 6 cores is not enough for gaming. I used a R5 7600 with a 4090, Cyberpunk was unplayable with huge FPS drops, CPU cores pegged at 100% the whole time. It and many other games, need 8 cores, especially when you turn on ray tracing (it has a CPU overhead as well as GPU overhead).
Last edited:
It not about how the 7600 performs or IPC, it’s about what developers target. If 90% of the user base has 4-8 cores, developers will target 4-8 cores. This will only change when the base core count increases. If the base core count was 8-16, games could have much better physics and destructible environments which can improve gameplay much more than extra graphics.
There's your issue, Nvidia parts
Seems good so far on a 6950XT with the 7600 and SAM.
Don
No they won't. Destructible environments and physics don't in any way depend on core count.
Soldato
Really? You tried cyberpunk with RT on a 6950xt and it played well? I mean come on...There's your issue, Nvidia parts
The point is, 6 cores are not enough nowadays to give you a high end experience, and that's why they shouldnt start at 300$ / € or what have you. Even if your interest is just gaming, 6 cores offer a subpar experience, not just in gaming itself but also loading times, shader compilation time etc. They should start at 200 and 8core + cpus should sit at the 300$ sweetspot
Last edited:
It requires processing power. More cores of the same architecture and frequency provide more parallel compute. If the algorithm can use parallel compute, extra cores help. If you don’t have the cores, nobody will work on the algorithms to use them. Even if the frequency is dropped down, parallel compute can give big improvements at less power/heat.
There's your issue, Nvidia parts
Try 4k with RT, 6 cores just choke.