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.
Overwatch also hates overclocks. I still get the occasional crash (maybe once a week) and I've upped voltages and dropped frequencies on both my GPU and CPU about 5 times since finding benchmark-stable values. I've pretty much given up making that game happy.BF1 is pretty much a stress test by itself. It is very good at detecting instability in your machine and crashing out. If you can run BF1 for hours without crashing you are winning.
Having now used the 8700K for a few days, in my opinion, getting Ryzen out of spite for Intel is cutting off your nose to spite your face. I was tempted many times and was glad that I didn't.
Obviously availability is a problem. If someone needs a high end PC NOW, I would probably recommend a Ryzen 1700X. But other than that, ignoring cost:
1600/1600X - Eclipsed by i5-8400/i5-8600K
1700/1700X - Eclipsed by i5-8600K/i7-8700K
1800X - Only better in niche multi-core cases than i7-8700K. At this point, if you are buying for multi rather than single core performance, probably should be considering i9-7900X or Threadripper?
To longevity of the socket is fairly moot as 99.9% of people do not upgrade their CPU before even a 3 year socket becomes obsolete.
The stability of the ZX70 platform is much preferable to the longevity of Ryzen. Good performance now versus potential good performance in future.
What an odd (and incorrect) statement.
You assume everyone games and only games.
What about me, for arguments sake I don't game now. I create content, render videos and use huge graphics.
Buying a 1700 is cutting off my nose to spite my face is it? I'll see better perf with Intel will I?
Agree with this. At one point testing a bad overclock, Prime had my 6700K exceed 100 degrees. Thought the chip would throttle to save itself, but apparently not.Prime is unrealistically savage. You will see 10 degrees lower in something like blender or Aida 64. and 20 degrees lower actually gaming or video processing.
When I was OC'ing my rig I ran Prime on my rig and hit 89 degrees.
Since then, over 2 years all sorts of use I've hit a max of 74 degrees in real world use. I wouldn't use prime to gauge temps.
Don't listen to them. They simply can't accept that things changed 180° and now Intel loses on all fronts (ALL!).
Smoothness on Ryzen is better, Intel can give you more microstutter.
Ryzen 2 will give even more salt to Intel's wounds![]()
Don't listen to them. They simply can't accept that things changed 180° and now Intel loses on all fronts (ALL!).
Smoothness on Ryzen is better, Intel can give you more microstutter.
Ryzen 2 will give even more salt to Intel's wounds![]()
But you say (broad sweeping statement) that the 8600K eclipses the 1700. For content creation and rendering thats not even close to being true.No, if you bought a 1700 just out of spite for Intel, you are cutting off your nose to spite your face. If you have a specific use case then of course take the best option.
But you say (broad sweeping statement) that the 8600K eclipses the 1700. For content creation and rendering thats not even close to being true.
The general point of my comment was "if [conditional] you buy ryzen just to spite Intel [ie. no other considerations] then you are only spiting youself". After all, it seems that most of the salt is coming from gamers that have various old intel i7s and cannot get an 8700K.
I accept my comment was sweeping, especially in the 8600K vs 1700 - 8600K is 40% faster than 1700 in single core, and 40% slower in multi-core. But I was really referring to the people that make the choice with no considerations outside of emotion.
But even spite alone is more than emotion. I will most likely be buying Ryzen because I don't want to have to delid my CPU and loose the warranty just to overclock it. If folk are seeing 20 degree drops just by changing the thermal paste then Intel need to learn that this is not OK. Yes I am only 1 consumer but principles are principles. It's not spiting me personally at all because I will have the faster chip for content creation.
Edit: I'm non-delidded, running 5ghz and hit 60C while gaming and 70C under synthetics. Not everyone needs to delid.
Yes. You have other reasons. I wasn't talking specifically only to you, this is a public forum. Let's move on.
Edit: I'm non-delidded, running 5ghz and hit 60C while gaming and 70C under synthetics. Not everyone needs to delid.
Lisa Su tears.What are you using to cool it ?
Obviously availability is a problem. If someone needs a high end PC NOW, I would probably recommend a Ryzen 1700X. But other than that, ignoring cost:
1600/1600X - Eclipsed by i5-8400/i5-8600K
1700/1700X - Eclipsed by i5-8600K/i7-8700K
1800X - Only better in niche multi-core cases than i7-8700K.
What are you using to cool it ?
I skipped getting a pre-binned chip at the last minute, so far I'm super happy with my non-delidded 8700K. 5ghz at 1.3V/1.28V after vdroop. 70-72C with my NZXT X62 at quiet settings. Not tried pushing it any further yet!
Taken my PUBG FPS from the 55-80 to 100-130. Absolute madness.