CPU choice... how important is resolution & GPU?

[Legend]

So many benchmarks are at 1080p and many even at 720p (!?), so if you're at ultrawide for example (3440x1440) and have a 1080 or 1080Ti, how do you make sense of these, and therefore how does that impact CPU choice for a gaming system... i.e if you were looking at the 7700K vs 1700X/1800X, or possibly the 6C 1600X. And for arguments sake, let's say you will be custom watercooling, so max clocks can be achieved. The latter three are all going to top out around the 4GHz mark, but you will comfortably hit just under 5GHz (possibly over) on a 7700K. Thing is, if you're really pushing the resolution at ultrawide (or even 4K), won't the GPU be the bottleneck, and not the CPU?

Value/performance argument aside, which I know AMD win, should your money go to Intel or AMD if you want the best FPS and overall raw performance? Does the future proofing argument make sense, i.e with more games in the future taking advantage of those cores, or does the resolution + top end GPU make that a far weaker argument?

 

[Poneros]

Pure performance, Intel is king. But are you really gonna pay £1K more for a 10% performance difference? If we're talking 7700K vs 1700, then there's a bit of a discussion to be had because there's multi-tasking to be taken into account, CPU usage, future development, bla bla bla. Here's what I'll say the quick judgement is: Super high fps (144 or more hz) -> 7700K; anything else the 1700.

And yeah, unless you have a 1080ti, you'll always get better returns from investing the money into the GPU than the CPU (if you have a G4560 at least). I think in this space the real king is going to be the R5. In my mind I split them like this: Value (G4560), High fps (i7 7700K), Balls out (i7 6950x), High-end value & overall great (R7 1700; and here you might be able to decide in the future that in fact just the R5 will be enough). I don't see the justification for i3, i5 & R3s. I'm talking strictly gaming + occasional other demanding activities (rendering, video editing, etc). Then there's also form factor to consider, because AMD doesn't have any itx mobos out yet, and Intel's X99 itx has limited cooling options, so you're going to go i7 7700K for the most part.

 

[B1gbeard]

I found one of the Gamer Nexus videos really helpful when he said that running tests at 720 and 1080 to remove the GPU bottleneck can give you an idea of future performance at say 4k. When you add a more powerful GPU down the line, thus removing some of the GPU bottleneck, the differences between the Ryzen and Intel chips as it stands would increase again with the Intel pulling ahead. This doesn't take into account any extra performance AMD can get from the Ryzen in up and coming updates for BIOS/Windows etc.

I guess at the moment we still don't know.

 

[Legend]

Pure performance, Intel is king. But are you really gonna pay £1K more for a 10% performance difference? If we're talking 7700K vs 1700, then there's a bit of a discussion to be had because there's multi-tasking to be taken into account, CPU usage, future development, bla bla bla. Here's what I'll say the quick judgement is: Super high fps (144 or more hz) -> 7700K; anything else the 1700.

And yeah, unless you have a 1080ti, you'll always get better returns from investing the money into the GPU than the CPU (if you have a G4560 at least). I think in this space the real king is going to be the R5. In my mind I split them like this: Value (G4560), High fps (i7 7700K), Balls out (i7 6950x), High-end value & overall great (R7 1700; and here you might be able to decide in the future that in fact just the R5 will be enough). I don't see the justification for i3, i5 & R3s. I'm talking strictly gaming + occasional other demanding activities (rendering, video editing, etc). Then there's also form factor to consider, because AMD doesn't have any itx mobos out yet, and Intel's X99 itx has limited cooling options, so you're going to go i7 7700K for the most part.

Yeah that makes sense, certainly as things stand. It just seems there is some uncertainty what with the motherboard BIOS issues for Ryzen and things not being fully optimised... the question is whether we could possibly see a scenario in the coming months where the tables are turned and a 1700X is roundly beating a 7700K in games? Personally, I don't see this as likely, given it's not as though loads of games are suddenly going to be taking advantage of more than 4 cores, and with Intel always having the lead in raw clock speed, they will retain that top spot for raw performance surely?

But yes, we just don't know at present I guess, which is slightly frustrating.

 

[haszek]

Yeah and in the same video he said he doesn't know what is gonna happen in the future...how does he know like you said, that with all the fixes, with all new game development this processor is not gonna be better in a few years when graphics card for 4k will give you >100 fps? he doesn't...he probably doesn't even play games as he doesn't have time with all the tests and numbers he cares about

 

[B1gbeard]

I think he was just basing it on what we know at the moment. If AMD can't find any extra gaming performance then it makes sense. I've pretty much decided to buy into Ryzen and I mostly game. As new CPU's come out It'll be nice to just change the CPU for something better without changing MB's etc.

 

[haszek]

I think he was just basing it on what we know at the moment. If AMD can't find any extra gaming performance then it makes sense. I've pretty much decided to buy into Ryzen and I mostly game. As new CPU's come out It'll be nice to just change the CPU for something better without changing MB's etc.

I agree, I would place my bet in development and improvement even further than what we've got already

 

[Doug2507]

I guess it all depends on what you use the rig for. So much chat on here about which one is 'better' but nobody takes into account the amount of variables the end user has for requirements.

I purely game on mine, no rendering/encoding/streaming etc so I go for max fps, hence on a heavily oc'd 7700k. (5.2+). I also play a whole variety of games including new and old and I'd prefer to have a higher average across all than just 'maybe' better on new titles.

If I were doing other things I'd maybe consider ryzen if I were on an older platform as they're very well priced for the performance imo.

All the talk of devs moving to coding for multicore is good but games aren't made in a day and it'll take time for this to come through. By then intel will have x299, amd will have matured a bit and the playing field will be different from what it is now. 'Future proofing' with ryzen is a weak argument right now imo as the architecture will mature (larger gains) and intel will have x299.

I'm pretty sure for the next couple of years 7700k will he perfectly fine for 1440p/4k. At the end of the day gpu is king for gaming, always has been. All these ryzen v intel benches are presented in such a way to make you think there's a massive difference. In reality it's nothing compared to gpu difference between generations.

All this if/but/maybe speculation about ryzen getting a massive boost due to bios updates is just that. Take it for what it is right now, any improvement would just be a bonus. The (over)hype(ed) train for amd was strong but results aren't as good as hoped. Thinking it'll be sorted with a couple of updates is just naive.

 

[Firestar_3x]

It all boils down to trusting AMD and motherboard partners to sort the current issues out, and tbh i'm finding it hard to.

Trying to decide if i should swap my 4690k @ 4.6ghz out for either a 7700k or 1700 and it is proving to be a very hard choice to make.

 

[Stretlow]

It all boils down to trusting AMD and motherboard partners to sort the current issues out, and tbh i'm finding it hard to.

Trying to decide if i should swap my 4690k @ 4.6ghz out for either a 7700k or 1700 and it is proving to be a very hard choice to make.

I've ordered and cancelled both in the last three days.. I'm getting on my own nerves

 

[Dirk Diggler]

So many benchmarks are at 1080p and many even at 720p (!?), so if you're at ultrawide for example (3440x1440) and have a 1080 or 1080Ti, how do you make sense of these, and therefore how does that impact CPU choice for a gaming system...?

At 3440*1440 or 4K gaming it's the GPU that's the bottleneck so your CPU choice is straight forward and probably best decided on budget, surely? A Kabylake i7 if you're flush or an i5 if you need to stretch the budget for the GPU.

 

[rolypolyman]

Planning on holding out for the 1600X as I'm really not happy paying £300+ for any cpu, however, I am liking what I see of the 1700 so...........happy to let things settle a bit re motherboards, bios etc.

 

[Legend]

At 3440*1440 or 4K gaming it's the GPU that's the bottleneck so your CPU choice is straight forward and probably best decided on budget, surely? A Kabylake i7 if you're flush or an i5 if you need to stretch the budget for the GPU.

But precisely because the GPU is the bottleneck, why wouldn't an 8C (or 6C if waiting for the 1600X) be the better choice, given some games will be able to utilise those extra cores, and going forwards more games undoubtedly will start to?

 

[Dirk Diggler]

But precisely because the GPU is the bottleneck, why wouldn't an 8C (or 6C if waiting for the 1600X) be the better choice, given some games will be able to utilise those extra cores, and going forwards more games undoubtedly will start to?

I'm not sure about multi core usage, but if the GPU can't produce the FPS then the CPU is irrelevant. At least that's my understanding of it, and I'd be happy to be corrected if I'm wrong.

This is why people can still game with 2500k CPU with a Pascal GPU.

 

[Legend]

I'm not sure about multi core usage, but if the GPU can't produce the FPS then the CPU is irrelevant. At least that's my understanding of it, and I'd be happy to be corrected if I'm wrong.

This is why people can still game with 2500k CPU with a Pascal GPU.

Exactly... yet reading what some people are saying, you'd think Ryzen was a failure because it's rubbish in games @720p ROFL!