Zen2. Is Intel now the gamers choice & price/perf king?

[Orange Nexus]

HT has no benefit for gaming on a fast 8-core CPU. On slower 4-core CPUs it can however eek out a little extra performance.

The 9700K runs out of cores in Battlefield.

 

[IT Troll]

The 9700K runs out of cores in Battlefield.

Benchmarks I have seen show it performs best with 6 or 8 cores without hyperthreading.
https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/battlefield-v-pc-performance-benchmarks,4.html

 

[Orange Nexus]

Benchmarks I have seen show it performs best with 6 or 8 cores without hyperthreading.
https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/battlefield-v-pc-performance-benchmarks,4.html

Check this out. . .

http://imgur.com/a/AijcmR0

 

[IT Troll]

Check this out. . .

http://imgur.com/a/AijcmR0

That is just the way that the engine behaves when playing at 1080p on some high-spec systems when not GPU limited. There are a couple of long threads on the Battlefield forum about this; it affects a wide-range of CPUs not just the 9700K. It is reporting using 100% of 8-cores at 4.9 GHz whilst staring at the floor of a back alley. But the 6-core runs at 92%. Clearly a bug in the code.

 

[Grim5]

Check this out. . .

http://imgur.com/a/AijcmR0

Can you replicate that result by providing a second source?

I see it the picture but it’s hardware to believe with my eyes. I don’t know why BFV would need 100% load on a 8 core, maybe he ran a virus scan at the same time.

I’ve never seen the game go over 60% and generally it sits between 40 and 60% on my 6 core.

 

[Orange Nexus]

That is just the way that the engine behaves when playing at 1080p on a high-spec system and is not GPU limited. There are a couple of long threads on the Battlefield forum about this; it affects a wide-range of CPUs not just the 9700K. It is reporting using 100% of 8-cores at 4.9 GHz whilst staring at the floor of a back alley. But the 6-core runs at 92%. Clearly a bug in the code.

It was just not at the exact same scene. But, if that was the 9900K, i bet none of the cores will get maxed. The HT will help. That's just how Battlefield is, even way back in BF3 where quad cores were getting eaten up. Except now it is 6 - 8 cores.

 

[IT Troll]

It was just not at the exact same scene. But, if that was the 9900K, i bet none of the cores will get maxed. The HT will help. That's just how Battlefield is, even way back in BF3 where quad cores were getting eaten up. Except now it is 6 - 8 cores.

Whilst not pixel perfect, it is pretty much the same scene. As per my previous link on core scaling. Whilst HT may reduce total CPU usage, it may also reduce FPS. In this case HT is making the CPU less efficient.

We've also performed some CPU core scaling, and the results are very interesting. Four cores with no SMT/HT performs worst. However, the most interesting observation is that when we disabled hyperthreading in a 6 or 8 core configuration, the performance overall increased substantially in the CPU bound resolutions for the RTX 2080 Ti.

 

[pmc25]

Some desperate reaching by the OP.

 

[signal11th]

Well I;ve always gone with this, AMD systems are for gamers that want to game reasonably well on a budget and Intel are for gamers that want the very best regardless of how much you get ripped off.

 

[Deleted member 209350]

Well I;ve always gone with this, AMD systems are for gamers that want to game reasonably well on a budget and Intel are for gamers that want the very best regardless of how much you get ripped off.

Its fair to assume this as AMD only got back into things when they released Ryze which has only been around since 2017 where they had to start from scratch. 1000 was a good start, 2000 improved by quite a big margin where people were already switching and now 3000 has seemed to have blown things out the water.

I assume by 4000 AMD will pretty much be dominating when it comes to gaming, unless Intel comes out with something massive

 

[opethdisciple]

Whilst on the subject of BFV, the game runs absolutely rubbish for me. As did BF1.

Thing is, I reckon it's DICE or server side issues rather than hardware.

For example once in a blue moon it runs smoothly. But then usually it's awful.

Hard to know if it's DICE breaking things with patches or server side issues...

 

[8 Pack]

As no one here knows what Ryzen 3 offers in gaming with blah blah blah memory at this, that and other settings, with whatever Core OC and Infinity OC I think this thread is 6 pages wasted!!!

 

[orbitalwalsh]

physical cores over logical core count .

i5 9600k at 5ghz and entry £100 gigabyte Z390 board or 3600x with B450 carbon / strix-e (limited board) will be the Gamers choice .

cheap, does the job. affordable, runs just as well. more cash on GPU or screen and GAMES!

streamers choice... 3900x !

nice to see a lot of BFV links, but if anyone can show me 10% of total steam library that scales perfectly or well with more then 4 cores ( disable SMT/HT ) then great ! but thats something like a few hundred games ....

and then ther's intel 10 core end of Q4

 

[Kirby Wurm]

physical cores over logical core count .

i5 9600k at 5ghz and entry £100 gigabyte Z390 board or 3600x with B450 carbon / strix-e (limited board) will be the Gamers choice .

cheap, does the job. affordable, runs just as well. more cash on GPU or screen and GAMES!

.

Without benchmarks we don't know that will be true in a few weeks time. Personally I would probably go for more cores/multiple threads for some additional future proofing.

 

[jigger]

As no one here knows what Ryzen 3 offers in gaming with blah blah blah memory at this, that and other settings, with whatever Core OC and Infinity OC I think this thread is 6 pages wasted!!!

Some people get samples. Before the shop the keepers.

 

[nomadd]

As no one here knows what Ryzen 3 offers in gaming with blah blah blah memory at this, that and other settings, with whatever Core OC and Infinity OC I think this thread is 6 pages wasted!!!

Agreed. But let's face it - you'll never stop the fanbois.

 

[Grim5]

.

Without benchmarks we don't know that will be true in a few weeks time. Personally I would probably go for more cores/multiple threads for some additional future proofing.

You generally don't buy entry level CPU for future proofing. Future proofing is the realm of those who like to splash out big once every few years.

 

[GAC]

Agreed. But surely ryzen 3 is better than ryzen 2 which is pretty good and more than enough for all of my games and apps.

its 1 better

 

[keyser]

Until July 7th just keep watching this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrVSt0pbo1g

 

[Kirby Wurm]

You generally don't buy entry level CPU for future proofing. Future proofing is the realm of those who like to splash out big once every few years.

My point is the 3600X looks like it will offer similar performance with the bonus of multithreading for the same price. Even if it's 5% slower it makes more sense.