Is it now worth upgrade to 5600x from 2700 gaming only

[MG42Maniac]

I've just purchased the 5600X for £223, it's replacing a 2700X, used for gaming at 3440*1440. It will cost about £120 to upgrade but I'm hoping for better minimums and the ability to run my RAM at 3600. I'm not expecting a night and day difference but it's not exactly costing a lot.

 

[scotty63]

I am glad that £223 isn't a lot for you mate but it's a lot for me! Hence putting up with what i have got and eeking it out and playing the waiting game!

 

[willhub]

Inflated prices and new tech on the horizon / new sockets, you're gonna have a bad time.

 

[scotty63]

Inflated prices and new tech on the horizon / new sockets, you're gonna have a bad time.

Same as it is at the moment ref inflated prices, Or did i miss something? Happy to wait it out mate.

 

[Cooler running]

It's a better CPU, but I wouldn't personally bother. I'm still happily on a 1600x... You're better off than I am. I guess with a 3080 you will see a notable difference.

 

[Jacky60]

ArmA 3 at 4K - GPU load 99-100%, CPU load 10-30%

Arma 3 is and always has been CPU bound. At 4K it's still very CPU bound, a 5600X would be a big jump in FPS over a 2700.

 

[_Cereal_]

Nvidia GPUs have overhead problems on old CPUS so yes, absolutely worth it, 5600x for 220 is a absolute bargain on top of it

 

[ninjag]

Arma 3 is and always has been CPU bound. At 4K it's still very CPU bound, a 5600X would be a big jump in FPS over a 2700.

That's certainly what I have found. Here's some stats after an hour or so on ARMA 3 on Ultra Settings 4k ultrawide. The CPU seems to be earning its keep and I can see the single thread bias of it, which is why I went with the 5600X for its single thread performance.

 

[Jacky60]

ArmA 3 at 4K - GPU load 99-100%, CPU load 10-30%

To be clearer Arma 3 really maxes one thread so while overall CPU load my be 10-30% the fps is constrained by how fast that single threaded performance is. Utilisation is always about 100% on one core for my 5960X.