-
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.
From 5820K to...?
- Thread starter CK61938
- Start date
Ive used both platforms extensively.
Bottom line is there's almost zero point upgrading a 5820K to a 3600/3600X or a 5960X to a 1700X/1800X/2700X/3700X/3800X at any resolution but especially at anything less than 4K with anything less than a 2080ti or better for gaming and even including video editing/productivity it's a small improvement for a significant financial outlay and a lot of hassle for little if any perceptible gain. Therefore it's a totally moot point and a semantic argument. Ipso facto OP should wait and upgrade GPU if bored or needs new shiny!
There is plenty of performance to be gained from a CPU upgrade literally dozens of new systems will wipe the floor with Haswell-E. If it’s worth the cost is another question entirely.
Finally a sensible question , and i'm glad you asked.
Stock vs stock the Ryzen cpu's will comfortably show a win in most scenarios, facts are facts and no one will deny this. But firstly lets give credit where credit is due, Haswell-E came out in 2014 , thats three years before the release of Ryzen so the fact we're even having this discussion is pretty amazing.
At the time of Ryzens release i was still rocking a 5960x and did many comparison benchmarks at the time and i can tell you now my setup which was 4.6 ghz and 3200mhz ram easily beat out even overclocked 1800x's in every scenario , i did this not because i'm an intel fanboy but because i'm genuinely a tech nerd and i like new toys.
Now let's fast forward 6 years since Haswell-E's release And we're still having the same sodding discussion , comparing the same chips. Lets put it this way, My x99 system saw me proud for the best part of SIX years, and even as recently as last month it still pushed my Titan XP to the maximum gamed without issue , could handle productivity tasks without breaking a sweat.
Anyhoo, No one here trying to say that Haswell-e is faster than 3rd gen Ryzen, its not, but when overclocked (core vs core ) Haswell-e isn't a million miles away and it certainly isn't worth swapping a 5820k for a 3600 thats just a fact, ask me the same question about a i7 2600k or a 3770k and i'll give you a completely different answer.
I'll gladly flesh this out some more but i have a mate over so i'll have to leave it as that for now.
People here are trying to say all kinds of nonsense.
Fact is, a 5820K a is just about comparable to a Ryzen 1600. Ryzen 3000 is in another league.
Another league in what way ? Gaming , not really , x99 is still very capable in that regard ,and that's exactly what the OP was asking , and Again Jigger your talking comparing cpu's that are SIX years apart , that's either amazing or showing how stagnant CPU development had become in the last 8 or so years , that's not a good thing for AMD or Intel.
In terms of performance. Judging running a game is more a test of the games engine, API, graphics driver.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 6,354
- Location
- Manchester
Everyone is wrong apart from you then?
By everyone you mean a few? Google will tell what I already know.
In gaming the OP with his 5820k would be a fool to upgrade his CPU to anything AMD until he'd upped his GPU. That was the question!
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 6,354
- Location
- Manchester
Still waiting on the proof that a 1800x is better than a 5960x when both are overclocked.
That's because there isn't any, but that's not to take anything away from the 1800x , its not a poor cpu by any means and at the time given the choice between them both i would have bought the 1800x , but that the time the 1800x didn't exist.
And also you need to remember this was the guy with the 5.5 Ghz stable 2500k Sandy (on water)
( We never did get the proof for that either)I'd also have bought the 1800X if it had been available and spent the difference on partying or some such thing!That's because there isn't any, but that's not to take anything away from the 1800x , its not a poor cpu by any means and at the time given the choice between them both i would have bought the 1800x , but that the time the 1800x didn't exist.
And also you need to remember this was the guy with the 5.5 Ghz stable 2500k Sandy (on water)
He’d be a fool unless he wanted significantly faster CPU at decent cost.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 6,354
- Location
- Manchester
Honestly if I was to build a new rig now it would be a AMD rig.
The last AMD cpu I bought was a Barton core? 2500+ that was a lemon. I think that was 20 years ago.
But these AMD flag wavers need to get a new hobby. It's getting real sad. You cant lie or will your rig to be better. Or are these flag wavers that delusional?
The last AMD cpu I bought was a Barton core? 2500+ that was a lemon. I think that was 20 years ago.
But these AMD flag wavers need to get a new hobby. It's getting real sad. You cant lie or will your rig to be better. Or are these flag wavers that delusional?
So I keep being told. But I am fine with the RX 590 as it can still play the latest games at 1080p and most with settings maxed out. I'll wait for the new AMD Zen 3 CPUs and see what we get in the GPU department from them. Also the 590 cost me £170.