Upgrade from 1070 to 2070 and performance lost.

[krisboats]

Let’s put it like this....

you have a 4790k and a 1070.

someone offers you a full platform upgrade to say a 5900x or a 3070...which one would you take assuming you couldn’t sell it?

it’s a complete no brainer. The extra £800+ outlay of the new platform would be nearly double the GPU outlay for much less gaming benefit. Even if you just said 5600x it’s still £500+.

I just don’t see the essential nature of moving from a 4790k. Very desirable yes, necessary and worth the money...not really otherwise I would have done it by now.

Averages will go up sure, but lows wont improve much. 6fps lows vs 40fps lows on my very same gpu due to swapping the cpu out. Thats a 6.5x increase on the lows (1070 to 2070s) as well as 10-15% increase in averages compared to a less than 30% difference on the averages (going 2070s to 3070) as it wont be hitting the full 30% benchmarks sites say it will if i kept a 4790k. So i could keep the 4790k, get an estimated 20-25% avg boost and still have bad lows and stuttering, or i could keep the 2070s and remove the lows and stuttering and get a 10-15% boost to averages. Not to mention the overall system speed benefits, nvme support, halving the encoding times etc.

Thats the point i was at and with that choice, the gaming difference between a system upgrade (£300 cpu, £60 ram and £150 mobo) vs a 3070 (£600-650) is a much closer call than you're making it out to be.

 

[McGraw]

Averages will go up sure, but lows wont improve much. 6fps lows vs 40fps lows on my very same gpu due to swapping the cpu out. Thats a 6.5x increase on the lows (1070 to 2070s) as well as 10-15% increase in averages compared to a less than 30% difference on the averages (going 2070s to 3070) as it wont be hitting the full 30% benchmarks sites say it will if i kept a 4790k. So i could keep the 4790k, get an estimated 20-25% avg boost and still have bad lows and stuttering, or i could keep the 2070s and remove the lows and stuttering and get a 10-15% boost to averages. Not to mention the overall system speed benefits, nvme support, halving the encoding times etc.

Thats the point i was at and with that choice, the gaming difference between a system upgrade (£300 cpu, £60 ram and £150 mobo) vs a 3070 (£600-650) is a much closer call than you're making it out to be.

my 3070 was £469

 

[ci_newman]

Averages will go up sure, but lows wont improve much. 6fps lows vs 40fps lows on my very same gpu due to swapping the cpu out. Thats a 6.5x increase on the lows (1070 to 2070s) as well as 10-15% increase in averages compared to a less than 30% difference on the averages (going 2070s to 3070) as it wont be hitting the full 30% benchmarks sites say it will if i kept a 4790k. So i could keep the 4790k, get an estimated 20-25% avg boost and still have bad lows and stuttering, or i could keep the 2070s and remove the lows and stuttering and get a 10-15% boost to averages. Not to mention the overall system speed benefits, nvme support, halving the encoding times etc.

Thats the point i was at and with that choice, the gaming difference between a system upgrade (£300 cpu, £60 ram and £150 mobo) vs a 3070 (£600-650) is a much closer call than you're making it out to be.

What you're missing out here though is a 4790k will not be bottlenecking a 1070. So he could sink £500 into a CPU upgrade and he'd hit the same framerate limits.

Going from 1070 - 3070 should drastically improve the average framerate. You wont see the same improvement by pairing a 1070 with a 5900x

 

[krisboats]

my 3070 was £469

Yeah but i can't buy one of those now so it's £600 to be comparable.

 

[krisboats]

What you're missing out here though is a 4790k will not be bottlenecking a 1070. So he could sink £500 into a CPU upgrade and he'd hit the same framerate limits.

Going from 1070 - 3070 should drastically improve the average framerate. You wont see the same improvement by pairing a 1070 with a 5900x

I'm not going from a 1070 to a 3070, i'd be going from a 2070s to a 3070.

 

[krisboats]

Decided to try running valley again. Left screen was the very very highest i was able to OC the 2070s to while using the 4790k. Took a good 10-15 runs to get there, starting the benchmark from a cold card etc. New score for the ryzen has it performing much more in line with results other people were getting.

 

[ANDREW GREEN]

Let’s put it like this....

you have a 4790k and a 1070.

someone offers you a full platform upgrade to say a 5900x or a 3070...which one would you take assuming you couldn’t sell it?

it’s a complete no brainer. The extra £800+ outlay of the new platform would be nearly double the GPU outlay for much less gaming benefit. Even if you just said 5600x it’s still £500+.

I just don’t see the essential nature of moving from a 4790k. Very desirable yes, necessary and worth the money...not really otherwise I would have done it by now.

Why not build a Ryzen 3600 system? £160 CPU, £70 B450 Mobo, £60 RAM. Will cost less than £300 and you'll have no nasty stuttering or bottlenecking of a costly card.

 

[McGraw]

Why not build a Ryzen 3600 system? £160 CPU, £70 B450 Mobo, £60 RAM. Will cost less than £300 and you'll have no nasty stuttering or bottlenecking of a costly card.

I’m ITX, want 32gb and no way would go 6 core today. Especially not when there’s higher IPC stuff out there that would benefit flight sims

when I go it’s 12 core minimum. Would have considered 5800x but no point in not spending the extra £100.

My 4790k has lasted over 6 years, not going to get less cores than a console

 

[ANDREW GREEN]

I’m ITX, want 32gb and no way would go 6 core today. Especially not when there’s higher IPC stuff out there that would benefit flight sims

when I go it’s 12 core minimum. Would have considered 5800x but no point in not spending the extra £100.

My 4790k has lasted over 6 years, not going to get less cores than a console

Worth watching, not much difference in performance between a 3600 and the higher cored parts

BTW I don't think Flight Simulator uses many cores IIRC. Part of the performance issue with it

 

[fs123]

Depends on the title, some titles need a 6 cores to perform optimally. Your CPU is a weaker version of the 2400G in this video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZoSWkyyDNE&t=401s

I doubt the OP will be bottlenecked by the 4790K @ 3440x1440. The gpu will be the bottleneck at such a resolution.

The [email protected] is faster than a 2400G and very close to a Ryzen 3600. I should know because I recently moved from a [email protected] to a Ryzen 3600.
The overclocked 4790K is still a pretty decent cpu so there is barely any difference between the two except when games use the extra cores. The 3600 may gain a bit more with a better cooler though.

Here's the benchmarks for Heaven on both my old and new systems.

Spoiler: Heaven results - Extreme preset 1600x900

[email protected] + Dark Rock Pro 3 Cooler


Ryzen 3600 Stock + stock cooler

OP is getting a much higher score of 250fps so I assume he is using a different setting. I know the 5700XT is close to a 2070S in normal games.

 

[krisboats]

I doubt the OP will be bottlenecked by the 4790K @ 3440x1440. The gpu will be the bottleneck at such a resolution.

The [email protected] is faster than a 2400G and very close to a Ryzen 3600. I should know because I recently moved from a [email protected] to a Ryzen 3600.
The overclocked 4790K is still a pretty decent cpu so there is barely any difference between the two except when games use the extra cores. The 3600 may gain a bit more with a better cooler though.

Here's the benchmarks for Heaven on both my old and new systems.

Spoiler: Heaven results - Extreme preset 1600x900

[email protected] + Dark Rock Pro 3 Cooler


Ryzen 3600 Stock + stock cooler

OP is getting a much higher score of 250fps so I assume he is using a different setting. I know the 5700XT is close to a 2070S in normal games.

I benched at 1920x1080 without the 8xAA. Everything else was highest setting. I didnt realise i'd missed off the 8xAA with the old cpu so just used the same settings to make it a fair comparison. I stick to the 1920x1080 as ive got at least one bench from each iteration of upgrades so i can see how its improved along the way.

I do get higher fps in games with the new cpu, but its the smoothness in the low end that feels most noticeable. Ive been able to squeeze a bit more out of the gpu on the new setup, not sure if its the pcie4 thats helping or what. I'm honestly not too up to date with new OC'ing methods got some reading to do

 

[McGraw]

Worth watching, not much difference in performance between a 3600 and the higher cored parts

BTW I don't think Flight Simulator uses many cores IIRC. Part of the performance issue with it

I know MSFS doesn’t use many cores, it’s the IPC I’m interested in plus the longevity of more cores

 

[krisboats]

OP is getting a much higher score of 250fps so I assume he is using a different setting. I know the 5700XT is close to a 2070S in normal games.

I'm getting 18% faster average fps and overall score (30fps more), 16% faster lowest frame, 17% faster highest fps using the same settings as you. Ryzen 5600x is stock speed.



Overall, whatever the issue was it does feel like i'm getting the proper performance now at least. Just a shame the game i want to play (destiny 2) they messed up and dropped a tonne of performance in the latest update

 

[Hakanese]

It's the problem with new tech, software has to catch up. You should hear the howling from the Warzone reddit

 

[welshrat]

I had a very similar experience going from 4790k to 3700X despite what the reviews say about the Intel part. That's only with a Vega 56. Everything runs so much better.

In fact I went 2600 first as a stop gap waiting for the 3700X, that's now in my lads machine as his 2500 sandy bridge was not cutting the mustard at all, to say he was pleased is an understatement.