Soldato
AMD cannot do DX11 well confirmed?
-
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.
Intel 8400 VS 8700K VS 2700X
- Thread starter Boomstick777
- Start date
AMD cannot do DX11 well confirmed?
Caporegime
Yep,since they forget you can select the GPU from the side box.
The OP has a GTX1060 6GB.
From the comments of the OP,I assume they are at 1080p,so are GPU limited.
They say they want a new qHD or 4K monitor,so looking at the results at 1080p I expect that a GTX1080TI will also be more GPU limited - the CPU results are at 1080p.
A qHD monitor has double the pixels of a 1080p one and 4K has 4 times the number of pixels of a 1080p one.
OP,your current CPU is fine at 1080p and so is your GPU.
If you are wanting to run this game right now at 4K,you are going to be more GPU limited IMHO.
So,my advice stands,OP,just buy the game and play it on your current setup.
If you really want a new shiny 4K monitor,get a faster card.
I would still wait and see how the 8C CFL-S looks,or even 7NM Ryzen if appears a few months after it.
Last edited:
Thought this was known for years lol. Games still using a 9 year old graphics API as standard is pretty depressing.
You can change the resolution for the charts too: left most drop-down box.
Caporegime
Caporegime
Some gameplay at 1080p with a GTX1060 3GB and 6GB and a Ryzen 5 1600 - the GPU is at 99% utilisation.
Soldato
A calculator could push a 1060 tbh
Some of us prefer single player games and don’t play the latest mp only trends.
Soldato
It's again though.... you have to be in the mood to care about hundred of frames at small res (taken with this 1 game as a sample and still not being able to be completely sure of 1800x vs 2700x) before it's worth having an Intel. You just said more or less the same...
Currently, 1080ti at 1080p (completely ****ing wasted) has a CPU bottleneck, otherwise....
Soldato
Do you prefer single player games on high end GPU's at pointlessly high frame rates? (I'm not having a pop, remembering previous.... sensitivities
).The "debate" has to be REALLY heavily framed at the moment to make a case for AMD being poor at games or Intel being specifically, a decent proportion better.
IF AMD beat Intel even in the edge case, single thread, high end GPU, max fps, low end visuals, 100's of frames battle that's totally the only important measure of a CPU's overall prowess.... there'd still be folks there with "some of us like our AVX512 calculations to be done faster and don't only play games".
It's already becoming a tediously small amount of ground being stuffed full of flags that apparently need to be taken to "win".
Strongest AMD (1800x) vs Strongest Intel chip (7600K) there with a 1080ti:
res----min/max---------min/max
1080p: 83/106 (amd) vs 96/124 (intel)
1440P: 83/103 (amd) vs 91/103 (intel)
2160p: 46/55 (amd) vs 46/55 (intel)
the only clear win there is on a 1080ti at poor res.
Last edited:
Do you prefer single player games on high end GPU's at pointlessly high frame rates? (I'm not having a pop, remembering previous.... sensitivities
The "debate" has to be REALLY heavily framed at the moment to make a case for AMD being poor at games or Intel being specifically, a decent proportion better.
IF AMD beat Intel even in the edge case, single thread, high end GPU, max fps, low end visuals, 100's of frames battle that's totally the only important measure of a CPU's overall prowess.... there'd still be folks there with "some of us like our AVX512 calculations to be done faster and don't only play games".
It's already becoming a tediously small amount of ground being stuffed full of flags that apparently need to be taken to "win".
Strongest AMD (1800x) vs Strongest Intel chip (7600K) there with a 1080ti:
res----min/max---------min/max
1080p: 83/106 (amd) vs 96/124 (intel)
1440P: 83/103 (amd) vs 91/103 (intel)
2160p: 46/55 (amd) vs 46/55 (intel)
the only clear win there is on a 1080ti at poor res.
Hmm so I can’t say anything if my question isn’t answers instead of being taken off on a tangent I didn’t ask for, oh and let’s not forget being told off for clarifying what I meant/asking the question again as it wasnt answered then I’m being sensitive? Sure whatever.
But to answer your question, I’m not a FPS “*****” don’t need 500fps or anything silly. Simply want it smooth and not constantly being jerky/slide show, going to be playing on a 4K tv so want it playable on that res.
Last edited:
Soldato
If you're playing at 1080p then intel, above that resolution, you're more and more graphics card bound and could save money by going Ryzen and buying a better GPU.
Soldato
Ryzen has no problems with BF1 or Fortnite, PUBG will struggle on any cpu it's still a mess of a game.
Soldato
Caporegime
The OP is talking about FarCry 5 and Metro:Exodus - the first will run fine at 1080p with their current setup,and for FarCry5 I would be more inclined to wait,especially for the updated Nvidia gaming GPUs this year,if the OP wants to try out things like RTX,etc.
its not that ryzen can do well in all of those its the fact that intel is way infront in those games.look at those games and how many play them . its literally 90 percent of pc gaming at the moment.why would you opt for 20-30 fps less ? why have a okay cpu when you can have a better cpu for gaming ? because its okay ? nah makes no sense.
Soldato
Because it was cheaper so you could buy a better GPU and overall get better performance in those games?
What res would the "20-30 fps less" be based on?
Fortnite, for example, is already GPU limited at 1440p.
Alternatively, the whole idea of "these are competitive titles, many folks want to hit a 60fps @ 1080p minimum" would rather move away from the 20-30fps views too. (Meaning, they're "for the masses". There's other games you'd want to get the measuring sticks out for).
We're again in the "only 200fps vs 300fps at 1080p is important" ballpark of "Intel wins".
Last edited: