Soldato
We don't know the performance do we?
-
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.
Soldato
I can't see what X299 will bring to the table over and above X99/Z270 in terms of motherboard features.
Soldato
I guess.
Very telling with the 'if you have the funds' though, this won't be good value.
Associate
Will Skylake X likely be faster than an OC'd 7700K rig in major game titles? Or is it really aimed at desktop applications?
I'm still trying to gauge if this is the right upgrade for me from haswell or a waste of money...
I'm still trying to gauge if this is the right upgrade for me from haswell or a waste of money...
Depends how high it overclocks. One would assume not as highly as i7-7700K does but we don't know yet.
Associate
And if it does clock as well as the 7700K?
Then it will be an even more expensive hex-core version of the i7-7700K?
Associate
Im not asking about the price, Im asking if the two at the same speed are roughly equal in games that dont use more than 4 cores?
Caporegime
The performance in games where more than 4 cores are used will be higher than the 7700K, just as Ryzen 6 cores or more are faster than the 7700K when used.
But more-over 4 core CPU's are at the end of their reign as the best gaming chips, GPU's now are too powerful for even 5Ghz 4 core chips to keep up, that will only get worse.
Take this, the 7700K is at 5Ghz, the 1700 at 3.9Ghz, while the performance on them both is the same the 7700K's 8 thread are completely maxed out, i can't imagine its smooth....
The idea that less threads with higher Mhz is always faster is also a myth, TPU do probably the most conclusive reviews, in 40 tests the 7700K was 10% faster than Ryzen on 9 occasions, despite being 20% higher clocked, as time goes on that will only swing more to Ryzen's favour as the 7700K's 4 cores get saturated.
IMO these days for gaming 6cores or more are the way to go.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_7_1800X/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXVIPo_qbc4
Last edited:
Associate
The performance in games where more than 4 cores are used will be higher than the 7700K, just as Ryzen 6 cores or more are faster than the 7700K when used.
But more-over 4 core CPU's are at the end of their reign as the best gaming chips, GPU's now are too powerful for even 5Ghz 4 core chips to keep up, that will only get worse.
Take this, the 7700K is at 5Ghz, the 1700 at 3.9Ghz, while the performance on them both is the same the 7700K's 8 thread are completely maxed out, i can't imagine its smooth....
The idea that less threads with higher Mhz is always faster is also a myth, TPU do probably the most conclusive reviews, in 40 tests the 7700K was 10% faster than Ryzen on 9 occasions, despite being 20% higher clocked, as time goes on that will only swing more to Ryzen's favour as the 7700K's 4 cores get saturated.
IMO these days for gaming 6cores or more are the way to go.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_7_1800X/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXVIPo_qbc4
Now this is a really helpful post thankyou!
The main and only reason infact I'm looking to drop my Haswell rig is Battlefield 1... I've felt for a while now that during intense 60 player matches my CPU is letting me down.... and wondered if it would make use of more cores!
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 6,004
I suspect this is bull..... Okay, AMD do seem to like tying their product names to the competition(Pascal/Polaris, Vega/Volta, R5 = i5, R7 = i7 etc) but don't think they'd go as far as using the X399 product name for marketing purposes. If so, they need to quit with their approach - it's marketing at it's worse IMO and is the behaviour of a company or person clearly lacking confidence and ability. If a product is that good for example, it should sell itself, not need copycat marketing approaches
. In fairness, I have no idea who's copying who with the naming but it's rubbish anyway 
Permabanned
As i see it if 6core can hit 4.8+ and it should cause solder not tim so one can pump good volts on good water cooling.
Then it oill be top end gaming good for everything cpu.
Could call it Titan Xp of cpus. Best gaming hardware dot aimed twards it but twards pro/semipro workloads.
My overclocked 5820k was fantastic gaming cpu and great for video editing. Same as my overclocked 1700x is
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 May 2007
- Posts
- 3,221
Use a 1700 on stock and is a lot smoother than my previous i5 in bf1, it maxes out my gpu at around 30% cpu in game, which is max 53c using stock cooler that came with the cpu. Just check motherboard for recommended ram if you go the ryzen route to be sure it will run at decent speed.
Caporegime
I suspect this is bull..... Okay, AMD do seem to like tying their product names to the competition(Pascal/Polaris, Vega/Volta, R5 = i5, R7 = i7 etc) but don't think they'd go as far as using the X399 product name for marketing purposes. If so, they need to quit with their approach - it's marketing at it's worse IMO and is the behaviour of a company or person clearly lacking confidence and ability. If a product is that good for example, it should sell itself, not need copycat marketing approaches
The chances such a CPU would exist is anything but "bull", as for the naming.... having a similar naming scheme is actually very common in product marketing, Apple with the " i " was copied the world over, including by Intel, (i3 i5 i7)
For those of us old enough to remember back in the 80's when SAAB introduced the SAAB 90 Turbo everything there after had Turbo written on it....
Crytek named their new Engine Cryengine 5, not 4 which would have been the natural progression from 3, Unreal Engine is and has been on 4 for a long time, naming cryengine 5 looks like the next generation.
AMD already did the same with the Motherboards, 300 series is not a natural progression from the 900 series, it is from the 200 series, Intel's Boards are named 200 series.
AMD will have an 'enthusiast platform' because they will need to sell on the sever and workstation chips that didn't quite make it through the binning process, those enthusiast CPU's could have anything upto 32 cores and quad channel DDR4 and IMO the platform will be called X399.
These are the chips...
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 6,004
True, but the X399 name would indicate it's immediately better than X299 as it's a higher number, and completely following the same code format as the competitor and that's taking marketing a bit too far (smiley as I cannot take it too seriously), especially as it's the same format as the competitor. As I said, I wish they'd just let their products do the marketing. Putting an "I" in front of everything doesn't really represent something is better than another. I in i3 could have course just mean intel. And Turbo cars all needed to have a Turbo installed but we didn't see Ford bring out a 4 series 420, or Renault create an XR4i . Could BMW call their next Z5 a 719 instead, to show it's a compeititor to the Porsche 718 but better ? . I'm found of BMW's but lose a lot of respect if they did that!
(smiley as I cannot take it too seriously), especially as it's the same format as the competitor. As I said, I wish they'd just let their products do the marketing. Putting an "I" in front of everything doesn't really represent something is better than another. I in i3 could have course just mean intel. And Turbo cars all needed to have a Turbo installed but we didn't see Ford bring out a 4 series 420, or Renault create an XR4i . Could BMW call their next Z5 a 719 instead, to show it's a compeititor to the Porsche 718 but better ? . I'm found of BMW's but lose a lot of respect if they did that!
Associate
There have been a lot of examples over the last six months or so where the 7700k has been maxed out in a few of the latest games and if you are going crossfire or sil forget 4 core cpu`s going forward they are not going to be worth it.
Associate
Yeah, I've seen Battlefield 1 stress my quad to the max during busy 60 player matches...the game is really CPU heavy and loves more cores.
It's clear in my mind as a BF only gamer, moving forward on a 6-8 core chip is a must! There's no way I'd invest in a quad next.