• 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.

The next best thing for GPU performance

I've just had a look at TechPowerUp's 8700k review for both average and minimum FPS in gaming benchmarks. I'm actually surprised at the [email protected] v's [email protected] comparisons. There's a fraction of a frame in it on lot of the comparisons, and even when the newer chip pulls away it's not by much at all.

It's great that the CPU market is vibrant right now, but GPU remains king for gaming regardless of core count. I'll resurrect this thread on the next CPU release and see how things stack up. :)
 
The plot has thickened a little recently so I've brought this one back up for some advice. I'm getting a little annoyed at the hitching in AC:O and was contemplating pairing my 5930k up with the 1080ti as I currently have the 1080ti paired with the 6700k (the 5930k is currently paired with a 980ti). A couple of questions are holding me back:

  • Will I see much improvement with a 5930k/1080ti v's the 6700k/1080ti system? Both CPU's will be at 4.4GHz and both PCs are full custom water so this is going to be a bit of a chew switching things around. Worth it?
  • Is there anything imminent in H1 2018 that will significantly outperform both my current CPUs?
  • Is this Intel bug a factor; as in should I be looking to go AMD? Is there a Ryzen refresh due soon?

I've got plenty in the budget, but I don't want to be spending for the sake of it.
 
String said:
The plot has thickened a little recently so I've brought this one back up for some advice. I'm getting a little annoyed at the hitching in AC:O and was contemplating pairing my 5930k up with the 1080ti as I currently have the 1080ti paired with the 6700k (the 5930k is currently paired with a 980ti). A couple of questions are holding me back:

  • Will I see much improvement with a 5930k/1080ti v's the 6700k/1080ti system? Both CPU's will be at 4.4GHz and both PCs are full custom water so this is going to be a bit of a chew switching things around. Worth it?
  • Is there anything imminent in H1 2018 that will significantly outperform both my current CPUs?
  • Is this Intel bug a factor; as in should I be looking to go AMD? Is there a Ryzen refresh due soon?

I've got plenty in the budget, but I don't want to be spending for the sake of it.
Click to expand...

In b4 the AMD haters telling you your a moron for considering AMD CPU's... but to answer your questions, yes there is a Ryzen refresh, hopes are that the Ryzen+ stuff will hit around 4.4/4.5ghz mark, however given your current systems, i dont actually think theres any real room for improvement for you, most stuff is going to be a downgrade or sidegrade at best im afraid.

I dont think the 8700K is going to solve the issue, adding more cores will help i guess but i dont think the 8700k is going to be anything drastically better than what you have right now.

Although i do admit moving from my 4770k to the Ryzen 1700 totally eliminated the hitching i got in games, which after some research was common amongst many i7 owners.

I would look to see if others are having similar issues and see if theres a fix? i would also look to see the views of people that own the hardware, take a good few samples of each and make a decision.

Im fairly certain you will find many people with a 1080ti and a Ryzen playing AC:O, and likewise many with an 8700K and a 1080ti playing too, canvas a few forums, watch some youtube videos and then decide if the switch is worthwhile.
 
@SiDeards73 thanks for that.

I just downloaded the game onto the 5930k/980ti system and the 6 cores seem to cope much better, around 50% usage across all 12 threads compared to 90% across all 8 on the 6700k... and the hitching is gone, too.

Bit of a dilemma now. :(
 
String said:
@SiDeards73 thanks for that.

I just downloaded the game onto the 5930k/980ti system and the 6 cores seem to cope much better, around 50% usage across all 12 threads compared to 90% across all 8 on the 6700k... and the hitching is gone, too.

Bit of a dilemma now. :(
Click to expand...

Well the 8700k is going to be a bit faster then, and similar core performance for smoothness.

RyZen will be the same, please tell me your not 1080p on a 1080ti though on a 60hz monitor? Hehe :)

I would personally hold fire a while til we a) know the full extent of Meltdown / Spectre on Intel and to a much lesser extent AMD CPU'S and b) we see RyZen+ reviews.

If your 5930 is coping admirably then hang tight for a bit
 
8700k and a 1080ti here. AC runs pretty sweet and I see no hitching whatsoever on my 34 ultrawide (1440p). I don't have AA turned on though.

8700k has been a good purchase for me and I hope to have it 2 years (not sure about the 1080ti lifespan)
 
I'm going to pull the trigger on the next release, as 4 cores aren't cutting it any longer. It's looking like I'll go AMD this time too, unless Intel do something special (and reassuring).
 
I've switched the 6700k out for the 5930k and have it paired up with the 1080ti and first impressions are that it's a big improvement due to the extra cores.

I'll keep an eye out for what comes along this year, as I fear this bug with Intel may affect my 5930k and steer me over to AMD.

Time will tell. :)
 
String said:
I've switched the 6700k out for the 5930k and have it paired up with the 1080ti and first impressions are that it's a big improvement due to the extra cores.

I'll keep an eye out for what comes along this year, as I fear this bug with Intel may affect my 5930k and steer me over to AMD.

Time will tell. :)
Click to expand...
Do you regret going for the i7-6700K? I remember when it first came out, the i7-5920K was actually cheaper despite having an extra two cores and being on an HEDT platform and most people were recommending it above the Skylake chip.
 
DragonQ said:
Do you regret going for the i7-6700K? I remember when it first came out, the i7-5920K was actually cheaper despite having an extra two cores and being on an HEDT platform and most people were recommending it above the Skylake chip.
Click to expand...

It's slightly more complicated as I didn't buy purely for performance. I bought it as I wanted to go micro ATX and I couldn't find a motherboard for the 5930k. I later managed to pick up a motherboard (X99M Fatal1ty) from the MM which opened up my options again. So, at the time it was the best choice for me.

But yeah, the 4 core Intels seem to have had their day.
 
I think honestly you'll be waiting till 2019 and Zen 2 and maybe Icelake from Intel depending on what that ends up. There just is no reason over next few years. 2020 will be push for DDR5, So Zen 2 ready for that is fine as you could swap RAM/Mobo as it will use same socket. No idea on Icelake as details are sketchy.

And by that point there may even be some unified memory/storage with the 3D xpoint stuff going on instead. Nothing right now though will improve anything notable to what you have.
 
String said:
I've switched the 6700k out for the 5930k and have it paired up with the 1080ti and first impressions are that it's a big improvement due to the extra cores.

I'll keep an eye out for what comes along this year, as I fear this bug with Intel may affect my 5930k and steer me over to AMD.

Time will tell. :)
Click to expand...
As someone with Ryzen that moved from 5820k to it. I will say Hold Your Horses. What clock You got that 5930k at ?? Quite possible that Zen+ Wont match it ingaming !!!
 
Zeed said:
As someone with Ryzen that moved from 5820k to it. I will say Hold Your Horses. What clock You got that 5930k at ?? Quite possible that Zen+ Wont match it ingaming !!!
Click to expand...

It's running at 4.4GHz/1.25v

Yea, now that I've got it running with the 1080ti I think I may have more time to the next upgrade than I thought. I'll see what comes this year.
 
Brazo said:
'Still do fine'? Is a little misleading.

It would be more accurate to say they consistently top gaming benchmarks!
Click to expand...

Gaming benchmarks are far from the whole story, in fact IMO because of the way a lot of them are produced i feel they can be misleading, not deliberately so its just among a lot of reviewers there is a fundamental lack of understanding of how games work and crucially how the hardware interacts with the game engine.

I'll give you an example of this, a lot of reviewers still like to benchmark Cysis 3, its still very demanding on the hardware so why not?
The part most of them benchmark is the scene where you're following Psycho through the tunnels, they do this because what you are doing is walking in a predefined direction, and because there isn't anything going on its consistent, in their mind this makes sense, and in that sense it does, and with examples like that they conclude "how brilliant is the Pentium G4560, its even able to beat out an FX-8350.... however it demonstrates they know nothing what-so-ever about what a CPU does in a game, they clearly just think and even say as much that its just there to provide a few threads to power the GPU.

In an environment like that, that is all the CPU does, present it with a more complex scene, like 'Welcome to the Jungle' and it will be asked to do a lot more, Dynamic Shading / Lighting math, Draw Distance math, Object Painting, Ridged and Soft Body Physics math, VFX math...... that's a lot for a Dual and even Quad core CPU's to do and the truth is when asked to step up to that plate the Pentium G4560 can't do it, it grinds to a spluttering halt.


Rh_Ku6bm_zps171c6672.jpg

The truth is most review benchmarks bare little to no resemblance to real world performance, worse a lot of them are outright misleading, i can't imagine core i3 owners are getting a smooth gaming experience, while the FX-8350 doesn't get the highest FPS in most benchmarks vs that i3 it is the most consistent when pushed hard, in normal gaming its much easier to make the i3 fall flat on its face.

Another example of that is here..... from a reviewer who understands how games work.

https://youtu.be/4RMbYe4X2LI?t=4m40s
 
humbug said:
Gaming benchmarks are far from the whole story, in fact IMO because of the way a lot of them are produced i feel they can be misleading, not deliberately so its just among a lot of reviewers there is a fundamental lack of understanding of how games work and crucially how the hardware interacts with the game engine.

I'll give you an example of this, a lot of reviewers still like to benchmark Cysis 3, its still very demanding on the hardware so why not?
The part most of them benchmark is the scene where you're following Psycho through the tunnels, they do this because what you are doing is walking in a predefined direction, and because there isn't anything going on its consistent, in their mind this makes sense, and in that sense it does, and with examples like that they conclude "how brilliant is the Pentium G4560, its even able to beat out an FX-8350.... however it demonstrates they know nothing what-so-ever about what a CPU does in a game, they clearly just think and even say as much that its just there to provide a few threads to power the GPU.

In an environment like that, that is all the CPU does, present it with a more complex scene, like 'Welcome to the Jungle' and it will be asked to do a lot more, Dynamic Shading / Lighting math, Draw Distance math, Object Painting, Ridged and Soft Body Physics math, VFX math...... that's a lot for a Dual and even Quad core CPU's to do and the truth is when asked to step up to that plate the Pentium G4560 can't do it, it grinds to a spluttering halt.


Rh_Ku6bm_zps171c6672.jpg

The truth is most review benchmarks bare little to no resemblance to real world performance, worse a lot of them are outright misleading, i can't imagine core i3 owners are getting a smooth gaming experience, while the FX-8350 doesn't get the highest FPS in most benchmarks vs that i3 it is the most consistent when pushed hard, in normal gaming its much easier to make the i3 fall flat on its face.

Another example of that is here..... from a reviewer who understands how games work.

https://youtu.be/4RMbYe4X2LI?t=4m40s
Click to expand...

Completely game dependant tbh. Watching that digital foundry review would have you believe that a 1800x would give a smoother performance than a 7700k but computerbase.de shows that this isn't the case.

image sharing sites


image sharing sites



image sharing sites

Yes more threads are a good thing, but once above 8 threads then pure speed comes into play.
 
What prompted me to post in here again was my pain trying to get decent performance from AC:O with the 6700k. As you see, I've went back to the 5930k as the extra cores are making all the difference. This is the first game that I've seen the 4 core struggle with, but I know I'm going to spend a lot of time with this title so it's been worth the hassle of stripping down my custom loop to change the boards out.

As you both point out @gavinh87 & @humbug it can be game specific, even genre specific when you compare FPS (GPU bound) to MMO (CPU bound).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom