-
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.
Kaby Lake review at Bit-tech!
- Thread starter C6ckneyGeezer
- Start date
did you watch the video yes you can argue the ram helps but in witcher 3 for eg you could see 30-40 fps difference.
yet people will still say there is no benefit
its a big difference.
1) One or two games =/= "many games"
2) Nobody is using a Titan X paired with an i7-7700K for 1080p gaming. In reality, at 1440p or 2160p, the GPU will be the bigger bottleneck and the difference will be smaller, if it exists at all (depending on settings).
3) If you watch the latter half of the video, they show that even with these stupid settings that are designed to force the CPU to be the bottleneck, the RAM speed makes the most difference. So it's the newer platform and DDR4 support that makes more difference than the CPU.
Yes, a Skylake or Kaby Lake chip will be 30+% faster than a Sandy Bridge chip at the same clock. We all know this. The question is whether that actually makes any difference in gaming. Running a totally synthetic benchmark that intentionally makes the CPU the bottleneck and, shock horror, shows a 30+% difference, doesn't show anything about real-world gaming performance. Even the guy talking says this at 4:00! Are you intentionally being ignorant?
The most interesting thing about the video is the RAM speed comparison but, again, the benchmarks are worthless at showing real-world differences.
Last edited:
People will go to any and all length to justify a purchase... I'm impressed by anyone who is actually honest and acknowledges their £350 7700k isn't actually pulling a 40% FPS increase in games over someone with a Sandy/Ivy CPU. Most people are more than happy to delude themselves however.
The only thing thing that would interest me in upgrading to a 7700K is if I could get my minimum FPS up in WoW to keep it running at 50FPS+ in raids etc. With everything maxed out at 1080P my 3770K does seem to grind to a halt...maybe not quite a halt close.
I agree. Whilst I'm fortunate to be installing a kaby i7 tomorrow night all I'm expecting over my older i7 4790k is lower voltage and lower temps clock for clock. The kaby should sit happily at 4.8 whereas the DC was pushing its limit.
Certainly a couple of 100mhz more on the kaby won't benefit me so I won't do it!
thing is delude and actual benchmarks. what we talking about minimums ? avg fps ? max fps. sorry but you can see that difference.already seen it.
tried it with a i3570k at 4.2 ghz with a 970 gtx.and with modern i7s.
then tried again with 1070s.at many resolutions and with many of the top games.measuring min max and avg.thing is many people dont benchmark before upgrading.
as the video shows in the witcher for eg i2500k vs a 7600k upto 40 fps difference.nobody sees it lol.you think that gap wont be bigger with a i7 ? it will. the games that use it will show you the difference.bf1 does also. older i5s get big minimum drops.
newer games coming are finally taking avantage of it.what you think zens doing it for ?
before saying no difference bench it.properly with games or progs that use the extra power you buying.youll see the difference.if you dont notice it notice the benchmarks.youll see then even if your eyes dont.
Internet is fine, it's a lightly used fibre connection with the PC connected via Ethernet.
WoW's been around a while and doesn't really make best use of multi-threading from what I can recall last time I checked you get light usage on most cores and one that's almost maxed out.
IIRC isn't WoW still reliant on a fast single threaded performance to get the most out of it (I also recall that, despite looking like it does, it can be VERY demanding once you have a lot of units (players, enemies etc on screen at once).
I would say clocking the 3770K as high as it will go should net a reasonable to decent performance improvement in the scenarios it is needed.
I would say clocking the 3770K as high as it will go should net a reasonable to decent performance improvement in the scenarios it is needed.
Playing a casual game that requires no skill on absolute maximum settings which you wouldn't notice anyway, is worth upgrading every generation? Is there nothing else you can think of to spend thousands of pounds on that you must waste it on meaningless upgrades? When we get down to it fact is people only buy this stuff because it makes them 'feel' competitive because they aren't winning in games as much as they would like. I'd say it's all down to overcompensation. Having the latest and greatest won't make you a pro gamer. Common sense would tell you to spend money on something more worthwhile, like a high quality sound system or something.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 12,876
- Location
- Surrey
If your CPU is limiting your framerate target, then you upgrade your CPU. There's no skill curve or placebo nonsense needed in this discussion, thanks. Not sure if parody.
Associate
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2013
- Posts
- 75
I've been very impressed with my 7700k so far, framerates seem more stable with far less stuttering than I got on my 2500k @ 4.8GHz, tested DX Mankind Divided, Witcher 3 & DOOM.
Whether it's down to the increased RAM speed, the fact that i5s don't like SLI setups, or the CPU itself, I'm not complaining.
Whether it's down to the increased RAM speed, the fact that i5s don't like SLI setups, or the CPU itself, I'm not complaining.
A normal person with average finances simply lowers the settings so he gets max FPS?
Spend the money on a gaming monitor instead... or a million other things. Much better utilization of resources.
Associate
- Joined
- 5 Dec 2016
- Posts
- 8
- Location
- UK
I just order a new gaming rig with a Z270 motherboard but with a 6700k CPU with a Kraken X62 cooler and a Titan Pascal gpu. I was worried about power consumption and heat off of the Kabylake 7700k and worst fps. I'm using a 4k Hdr tv as a monitor so I'm capped at 60 fps in any resolution.The question I got really is did I make the right choice in cpu? I'm brand new to the PC world I'm coming from a crappy console mind you.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 12,876
- Location
- Surrey
lol, normal person. Of course it would come down to personal finances, how stupid of me. What if you have finances and already own a capable monitor?
Moving on swiftly!
because it affects what companies think they can get away with charging. If nobody bought it would drive prices down. Supply and demand