• 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 to launch 6 core Coffee Lake-S CPUs & Z370 chipset 5 October 2017

At the end of the day you don't drop £600 on a CPU/mobo and quibble over a few pounds on the cooling solution.

And if you are delidding to save £40 on a cooler you probably shouldn't be rolling the dice invalidating your warranty on a £350 CPU.
 
Last edited:
Prozn said:
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.
Click to expand...

Only for people on internet forums who are hardware enthusiasts. What you fail to realise is what happens if your motherboard goes kaput and the motherboards are not made anymore. For most people it would be far more preferable to get a replacement motherboard,instead of shelling out for a new CPU and motherboard.

What you fail to understand is why SB/IB have lasted so long in the RL. Its because until very recently CPUs and motherboards were being made for them(!) so it was viable to keep SB/IB systems going - an example being my system which I manage to source a reasonable spec mini-ITX motherboard even when SB/IB were long gone.

Also,unlike hardware enthusiasts on internet forums I know quite a few people who have upgraded a CPU in their old system - again in RL if someone can drop in a better CPU they will. Not everyone is starting with a £300+ CPU in their system for example.




Stanners said:
Let's not get in to petty arguments.
Click to expand...

As a gamer who likes certain games which run "poorly" on Ryzen I am probably more likely to get Coffeelake if I was buying now,but the fact of the matter is everyone does different things with their PCs. I have mates who really don't game but do run a reasonable amount of stuff which a 8C/16T CPU like a Ryzen 7 1700 would be preferable to say a Core i5 8600k and they are not the type who overclock either.

I really do not understand why on tech forums its some black and white choice.
 
Last edited:
I think part of the reason that SB/IVB/HSW have lasted a while is that, while it might be getting to worthwhile upgrading now, it means replacing RAM with DDR4 too which is quite highly priced now.

32GB of decent DDR4 would cost me £400+ which is crazy.
 
chroniclard said:
Its interesting how previous performance suddenly becomes poor when a slightly faster CPU comes out. :)
Click to expand...

E-PEEN and oneupmanship due to gear acquisition syndrome which they need to justify,so become fans of the new gear they have got,and when they replace it 10 seconds later the latest gear is the best and the old one is "crap". You have had people here ditching perfectly good setups to get a slightly newer Intel and AMD CPU,when they really should have upgraded to a better graphics card for example.

rtho782 said:
I think part of the reason that SB/IVB/HSW have lasted a while is that, while it might be getting to worthwhile upgrading now, it means replacing RAM with DDR4 too which is quite highly priced now.

32GB of decent DDR4 would cost me £400+ which is crazy.
Click to expand...

That is not helpful but its also simply the fact most people are GPU limited,and don't run 120HZ screens. Hence SB/IB/HSW are still good enough for many people especially with sub £300 graphics cards which are most of the market,and tech like GSync and Freesync also have helped.

I would also argue many don't run FPS counters on the side,and will really only change parts when they go kaput or the performance drops get intolerable.
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
E-PEEN and oneupmanship due to gear acquisition syndrome which they need to justify. You have had people here ditching perfectly good setups to get a slightly newer Intel and AMD CPU,when they really should have upgraded to a better graphics card for example.



That is not helpful but its also simply the fact most people are GPU limited,and don't run 120HZ screens. Hence SB/IB/HSW are still good enough for many people especially with sub £300 graphics cards which are most of the market,and tech like GSync and Freesync also have helped.
Click to expand...

The need of FPS in 1080p is strong, people like having 400fps in CS:GO on 60hz screen.
 
jaffveyda said:
The need of FPS in 1080p is strong, people like having 400fps in CS:GO on 60hz screen.
Click to expand...

I actually remember reading about competitive gamers and many apparently drop settings in the game to make it look utterly crap. Why?? It not only boosts FPS but in a number of games it cuts down on foliage,etc meaning its easy to spot your enemy from distance,etc.

Most gamers from my experience over the last 20 years,are not that competitive - its why consoles which target 30~60FPS still seem acceptable,and also why if you look at Steam that most people are really at GTX1060 level performance and below,game at 1080p and probably have a 4C/4T or 2C/4T CPU. Also the most common "expensive" card is the GTX1070,which is outranked by the GTX960 IIRC.

Its why even Digital Foundry and channels like Hardware Unboxed kind of mock themselves when they always state we are not testing a "normal" situation by running a GTX1080TI at 1080p since we are actively looking for "CPU limitations".

They state it in their reviews FFS!!

I mean don't get me wrong,I would rather have a Core i5 8400 over a Ryzen 5 1600 for the games like FO4 I play since I have modded it to no end and have massive settlements.

However,amongst all of my mates who play the game I am the only one who has taken modding and settlement building and ran with it,ie,I am at the mod limit for example.

All of them do perfectly fine on slower CPUs,but I am aware I am a niche.

OTH,I have a mate who has a Ryzen 5 1600 and a RX570,and for the games he runs like Overwatch he has not complained one bit about performance. Another mate who is going to get a Ryzen 7 1700 but less for gaming but more for some of his worked related stuff.

Its good to have a choice now!!
 
Last edited:
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
As a gamer who likes certain games which run "poorly" on Ryzen I am probably more likely to get Coffeelake if I was buying now,but the fact of the matter is everyone does different things with their PCs. I have mates who really don't game but do run a reasonable amount of stuff which a 8C/16T CPU like a Ryzen 7 1700 would be preferable to say a Core i5 8600k and they are not the type who overclock either.

I really do not understand why on tech forums its some black and white choice.
Click to expand...

And I do not know why if people want to discuss the merrits of Ryzen/CoffeeLake they can not create a thread to discuss that in a grown up manner. That then leaves the actual Coffeelake thread for people to discuss Coffeelake. Don't get me wrong it is nice to see comparrisons against othr CPU's, just not the bickering.
 
Stanners said:
And I do not know why if people want to discuss the merrits of Ryzen/CoffeeLake they can not create a thread to discuss that in a grown up manner. That then leaves the actual Coffeelake thread for people to discuss Coffeelake. Don't get me wrong it is nice to see comparrisons against othr CPU's, just not the bickering.
Click to expand...

I think the main issue there has to be a "winner" in all of this stuff,so it descends to one is "crap" and the other is the "bestest". I think it really depends on what you run and what you want from a rig.

Personally I prefer the CPU performance of Coffeelake in the games I play(a number have crap engines,but can't do much about that),but I prefer the platform approach AMD seems to be pushing since I keep my stuff for long.

My attitude with Coffeelake,is the CPUs are solid,but it seems a bit rushed - the lack of B360 chipsets for a few months,kind of dents the value proposition of the Core i5 8400,and Core i3 8100 which for me look like very nice budget CPUs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom