• 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.

Leaked AMD Ryzen 7 1700X vs i7 6800K Benchmarked In 13 Games & Power Consumption.

Doug2507 said:
Still waiting for ryzen vs 7700k gaming benches with both oc'd. Stroll on 2nd.
Click to expand...

Well enjoy the 2 fps advantage the 7700K will have whilst everyone else will have the more versatile chip (right now) which will be running games better in 2 years time.

As someone mentioned before, this is e8400/e8500 vs Q6600/Q9450 all over again. Q6600/Q9450 won in the end.
 
An Exception said:
Yes it'l be interesting. I guess it depends if the game like cores or clocks.
Also of note. Every 100Mhz overclock over stock, will have a bigger % impact on performance on the Ryzen, than on the 7700k.

screenshot_164.png
Click to expand...

Yep. I'm. Not anti amd in anyway, only thing that dictates my hardware choice is what's performing best for games overall. Looking forward to seeing where amd are at in a couple of years once the process matures. Same goes for the actual games with regards to devs taking full advantage of more cores.

Definitely going to be interesting times ahead.
 
muon said:
So end up paying twice? If you want thats up to you.

AM4 platform will also still be relevant in 2 years time as well.
Click to expand...

Lol, I'm already on 7700k. Why so argumentative man? Is that just the way you're meant to be on ocuk forums these days?
 
Doug2507 said:
Lol, I'm already on 7700k. Why so argumentative man? Is that just the way you're meant to be on ocuk forums these days?
Click to expand...

Ok, fine. Perhaps I should have asked for the context of your post.

I'm just not sure what gaming benchmarks will tell someone in your position exactly?
 
Doug you don't keep a cpu for six months lol. But yeah you will just upgrade if need be. Currently your platform is the best option for out and out gaming perf.
 
wedrum said:
meh i think i will just keep the 2500k @4.8ghz.
still eats through any game.
Click to expand...
Would be amusing if someone with a well clocked 2500K goes out and buys a 1080Ti for cheaper and thrashes the new shiney 1800X systems that have been purposely bought gaming upgrades with 480/1070/1080 cards in gaming benchmarks lol.
 
QUOTE="An Exception, post: 30547957, member: 102102"]Well according to this leak, the IPC (instructions per cycle) would put Ryzen & Kabylake about on par at least in CPU Mark. i.e. they perform about the same when at the same clock speed.
That alone is quite the achievement.

Is it? So when Intel makes multiple incremental, albeit small improvements and people moan about how slow CPU development is, and Intel being on asleep, it's now an achievement to be on par?
Must admit I am impressed by some of the prices but AMD also need to price lower anyway to get sales and expect it to bring Intel's prices down too. I am a bit surprised so many are excited seeing as for most of us, 4 cores is still enough.So just like with Intel chips, it's not really worth upgrading if you already have a chip of the last 3-4 years.
I am tempted to pick up the 1800X but for a work system rather than gaming (running virtual machines)
 
DarrenM343 said:
Is it? So when Intel makes multiple incremental, albeit small improvements and people moan about how slow CPU development is, and Intel being on asleep, it's now an achievement to be on par?
Must admit I am impressed by some of the prices but AMD also need to price lower anyway to get sales and expect it to bring Intel's prices down too. I am a bit surprised so many are excited seeing as for most of us, 4 cores is still enough.So just like with Intel chips, it's not really worth upgrading if you already have a chip of the last 3-4 years.
Click to expand...

The price while being extremely competitive in performance is the main thing.

The other is the astonishing TDP while doing it. Coming in at 65 and 95W while Intel has been sitting on 130-150W for their 6-10 cores for... ages? AMD is showing it can be done.
 
I'm not convinced about the power argument though, call me old fashioned but its rare to get something for nothing. Lets just wait until real benchmarks start coming through before deciding with our wallets.
 
DarrenM343 said:
Is it? So when Intel makes multiple incremental, albeit small improvements and people moan about how slow CPU development is, and Intel being on asleep, it's now an achievement to be on par?
Must admit I am impressed by some of the prices but AMD also need to price lower anyway to get sales and expect it to bring Intel's prices down too. I am a bit surprised so many are excited seeing as for most of us, 4 cores is still enough.So just like with Intel chips, it's not really worth upgrading if you already have a chip of the last 3-4 years.
I am tempted to pick up the 1800X but for a work system rather than gaming (running virtual machines)
Click to expand...

Yes running 8 cores at higher clocks than a 6 core at lower clocks on a similar process at a lower TDP is quite the achievement.
Intel clearly isn't going to be 'on par' either in multithreaded app. So without doubt, quite the achievement.
 
JimboJet said:
I'm not convinced about the power argument though, call me old fashioned but its rare to get something for nothing. Lets just wait until real benchmarks start coming through before deciding with our wallets.
Click to expand...

It's called progress.

A Pentium D from 2007 had a TDP of 130w.
 
Nelly said:
Would be amusing if someone with a well clocked 2500K goes out and buys a 1080Ti for cheaper and thrashes the new shiney 1800X systems that have been purposely bought gaming upgrades with 480/1070/1080 cards in gaming benchmarks lol.
Click to expand...

Yep, that's the way I am heading plus a better PSU. My 2500k is stable at 5.2, but settled at 4.8 to ensure longevity. I am itching to build something new but cpu wise/motherboard the numbers never added up over just slapping in a bad boy graphics card. After many years, Ryzen has wetted my appetite
 
mayebaza said:
Yep, that's the way I am heading plus a better PSU. My 2500k is stable at 5.2, but settled at 4.8 to ensure longevity. I am itching to build something new but cpu wise/motherboard the numbers never added up over just slapping in a bad boy graphics card. After many years, Ryzen has wetted my appetite
Click to expand...

Well you have a pretty good overclock. However if you look in the 'Kabylake is good for gaming' thread. Some users are saying they are getting less hitching and things than they used to have with a 2500k/2600k. I'm not really sure if thats the case however, as I would have thought a 2500k at high clocks brings plenty of power.
 
DarrenM343 said:
QUOTE="An Exception, post: 30547957, member: 102102"]Well according to this leak, the IPC (instructions per cycle) would put Ryzen & Kabylake about on par at least in CPU Mark. i.e. they perform about the same when at the same clock speed.
That alone is quite the achievement.

Is it? So when Intel makes multiple incremental, albeit small improvements and people moan about how slow CPU development is, and Intel being on asleep, it's now an achievement to be on par?
Must admit I am impressed by some of the prices but AMD also need to price lower anyway to get sales and expect it to bring Intel's prices down too. I am a bit surprised so many are excited seeing as for most of us, 4 cores is still enough.So just like with Intel chips, it's not really worth upgrading if you already have a chip of the last 3-4 years.
I am tempted to pick up the 1800X but for a work system rather than gaming (running virtual machines)
Click to expand...

Even if 4 cores is enough you're not excited at the prospect of 6 cores 12 threads for the pice of a 4 core 4 thread 7600K?

Always one...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom