• 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.

Rocket lake leaks

Very much so its all relative to resolution and many other factors

and in six months time it could change entirely and like I said in a couple of weeks I might decided to still get a 5600

hell in 99% of the games I play my old i5-6600 is still more than capable

I shouldnt be moaning about 70-80 fps in warzone on high but it bottlenecks my gpu badly the same with battlefield V but thats more down to how porly optimised the game has become with every patch
 
Game said:
Very much so its all relative to resolution and many other factors

and in six months time it could change entirely and like I said in a couple of weeks I might decided to still get a 5600

hell in 99% of the games I play my old i5-6600 is still more than capable

I shouldnt be moaning about 70-80 fps in warzone on high but it bottlenecks my gpu badly the same with battlefield V but thats more down to how porly optimised the game has become with every patch
Click to expand...

A game gets better optimised if with every patch it utilises the multi-threaded CPUs more ;)
 
Game said:
maybe but it tends to ruin the older processors bf1 was the same

but thats irrelevent :)
Click to expand...

It simply improves the gaming experience by adding more realism to the game.
It's called progress and the solution is to upgrade correspondingly. Then, you play your games with extremely high framerates again :)
 
4K8KW10 said:
It simply improves the gaming experience by adding more realism to the game.
It's called progress and the solution is to upgrade correspondingly. Then, you play your games with extremely high framerates again :)
Click to expand...

hence next months upgrade ;)

but I do have to factor in the pass down to the teenage children factor in this build so might keep the motherboard and cpu a shorter time
 
Game said:
https://www.techspot.com/review/2185-amd-zen-3-ryzen-5600-versus/
Click to expand...

Charts arranged by Intel at the top :D

And people accuse them of being AMD shills.

jU61w9T.png
 
I was as angry at Intel as everyone else but it's been constant price hikes from AMD to the point that Intel cpus are now a better value. So yeah I can't help but root for Intel this round.
 
NZXT30 said:
I was as angry at Intel as everyone else but it's been constant price hikes from AMD to the point that Intel cpus are now a better value. So yeah I can't help but root for Intel this round.
Click to expand...

Neither company are 'good guys', we consumers suffer when either party has a monopoly/advantage, just so happens Intel has been in that position far more.

This period is the best for us, AMD making strides and Intel actually competing, if they hit double-digit improvements with both Rocket Lake and then Alder Lake, and AMD hit another ~20+% improvement on Zen4, then whatever way you go you're getting a massive improvement on just a year ago... good times :)
 
NZXT30 said:
I was as angry at Intel as everyone else but it's been constant price hikes from AMD to the point that Intel cpus are now a better value. So yeah I can't help but root for Intel this round.
Click to expand...

Seriously considered a 9900K and almost bought one for £330 at the time, but i held my nose and dived in on a 5800X, no regrets, great chip but yes, damned expensive, £100 more than the 9900K, the 5800X is better but i think the 9900K was no doubt better value, can't argue with that but i'm not so convinced, as others have said that AMD are too greedy, remember the 1800X was £500 and we all thought that was cheap, it was for what it was, similar performance to Intel's £800 6900K.

Intel added more cores on and dropped the price, AMD did the same, now Intel are cheap and AMD are ahead on all the benchmark charts, even games. Now you can get a 10700K for £320, a 10600K for £210, that's really cheap, because in the DIY space now Intel are the under dog.

I still don't regret buying the 5800X, i ####'### love this chip. :) Its my new "Best Chip i ever owned"
 
Last edited:
Gives me an idea.

Your favourite chips:
AMD AthlonXP 3800+
Intel Core i7 930
AMD Ryzen 7 5800X

Most hated chips:
Skt 478 Intel Pentium IV 3.2Ghz HT (prescott) i believe. Yeeeesh....
AMD FX 9590, brings me out in hot sweats just thinking about it.

Honourable mention:
AMD Phenom II X6 1090T.
 
FoxEye said:
Personally I hope Intel give AMD a run for their money sooner rather than later. Lack of competition is never good, no matter who is out in front.
Click to expand...

Yes, I think this time around I think Intel have the better chance than AMD to give enthusiasts a new chip with a big launch volume as it is on 14nm.

I would not think i would ever type this but i am glad the chip is on 14nm this year and not 10nm/7nm.

Supply issues are not AMD's fault but a home-run Rocket-Lake-S chip that arrives in the thousands to U.K shores will be quite a tonic and Intel will get big props for that if they do. I don't see why they cannot, they have gobs of 14nm capacity.

I need to get a big more life out of my 9900k because i paid big bucks for it and it runs like a dream but at the same time i would also like a new motherboard with AX Wifi integrated.
 
Besty said:
Yes, I think this time around I think Intel have the better chance than AMD to give enthusiasts a new chip with a big launch volume as it is on 14nm.

I would not think i would ever type this but i am glad the chip is on 14nm this year and not 10nm/7nm.
Click to expand...

For supply purposes, it doesn't really matter what process intel are on, they have their own fab so they aren't competing with world+dog for TSMC's attention.
 
Jimmy Weirdarms said:
For supply purposes, it doesn't really matter what process intel are on, they have their own fab so they aren't competing with world+dog for TSMC's attention.
Click to expand...

To an extent yes but Intel still has X capacity of 10nm and Y capacity of 14nm, they have a bunch of fabs and upgrade them over time so by now they presumably have quite a bit of 14nm capacity, almost certainly more than the 10nm capacity. But yes, they at least don't have to compete for wafers, and pay 'so much' for them...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom