Is this any good for ultra gaming and streaming?

faseman7

faseman7

faseman7

Associate
Joined
8 Mar 2011
Posts
52
Hi, Is this any good for ultra gaming and streaming? Thanks

I5 8860k
Asus z370-a mobo
H100i cooler
Asus strix 1070ti gpu
500gb nvme ssd
Corsair 750w psu
Corsair 16gb ram
 
Last edited:
Probably fine, though from what I've seen mentioned around on the web, it may pay to get a slightly better CPU where streaming is concerned (being an i5)?

What res?
 
Last edited:
That CPU model, that is correct, right? I ask simply because I've not heard of the 8860 before.

Thought it was one of the Xeon chips.

If it is, though far out of my experience, I would think provided it had a decent overclock, then those extra cores could be quite useful for streaming. Rest of the spec is good.
 
Last edited:
I think it will be good enough, though I believe I have seen instances where others have suggested i7/8 core processors for streaming, see what other folks on here say first. However, with a healthy overclock and good cooling, I should think that the 8600K will do a pretty good job though.

I don't stream as yet but I do like to use Adobe software (which involves more cores & threads), and if I was upgrading right now I'd be looking at the 8600K/R5 2600 or above as my choice of CPU.
 
you'll be severely limited by that 8600k if you're attempting to stream without the aid of a capture card or a 2nd pc.
https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwrevie...ew-stream-benchmarks-gaming-blender?showall=1

Moving on to the viewer-side chart, here’s where those numbers manifest: AMD’s 30% drop for streamer-side performance proves a worthwhile sacrifice, because it’s able to successfully encode 100% of frames for the stream. The 8600K completely crumbles when under the load of even Faster settings for encoding. You could get this to work, but it’d require dropping the encoding quality further and tuning some affinities and priorities. Even at our reasonable, realistic quality of Faster and 10Mbps, the 8600K struggles to keep up when left stock and untuned.
Click to expand...

As for the viewer experience, here’s what it looks like when left completely untuned by the player. It’s not so good for the 8600K, as illustrated plainly here, even though the streamer is getting over 160FPS AVG during this time period. The viewers get one frame every now and then – 1FENAT, as we affectionally call it. It’s our new metric. 1FENAT is equal to one frame every now and then. The upshot is that, when it does eventually cough-up a frame, it’s 58% likely to be within a 16.7ms delivery window.
Click to expand...
 
push i7 unless you encode of the GPU - then i5 8600k will be fine .

want to keep costs down then ryzen 8 core. all depends if you want the best fps for yourself of the reviewer etc
 
Intel will always offer the best FPS for the player and its close in terms of FPS for the Viewer . At ultra wide 1440p ryzen 2700x doesn't lose ground to i7/9 for non streaming gaming but with ultra wide 1080p there is a bit of a gap . From 1440p onward Ryzen closes the performance gap and more about GPU power.

New RTX cards allow for better encoding so that is another route - specially picking up ryzen 2600X or i7 9700k to keep down the costs ! Turing cores have advantage over Pascal with H265 encoding .

all depends on your budget , would deff push Gigabyte z390 board at £120- is entry board but its a lot better then most z370/390 boards like Asus 370-A.

Noticed you've gone for corsair parts. Their rep started to lark more on here and has confirmed their RMA policy is to replace units with Brand New rather then attempt to repair it ! RMA team is also UK based (woking if i can recall visiting samsung and seeing corsair office)


would personally pick ryzen 2700/9700 and sink extra cash into GPU :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom