4 ms·

just be aware that Ryzen is probably operating much closer to it's limit than the Intel counterparts, so overclocking could be limited. If that is not interesti

by kayoone 10y ago

just be aware that Ryzen is probably operating much closer to it's limit than the Intel counterparts, so overclocking could be limited. If that is not interesting for you anyway, then god speed. Also in terms of gaming performance, Intel will probably remain king, due to single threaded performance and OC potential. Personally, i'd always take 8 cores vs 4 for the same price even if they are 10-20% slower.

RussianCow 10y ago
In my experience, most modern games aren't CPU-bound anymore; more and more work is being pushed onto the GPU with every generation. My brother has a quad-core AMD CPU (don't remember which) with a powerful GPU, and his CPU is very rarely the bottleneck—there are few games he can't max out at 1080. Also, according to AMD's benchmarks, the Ryzen CPUs are very close to Intel's in single-threaded performance.
- IAmGraydon 10y ago
  This. Gaming hasn't been bottlenecked by the CPU in a long time. Anything from an i5 up performs pretty much the same with the same GPU.
  - s_m_t 10y ago
    And you'll only be bottlenecked by the GPU if you want to play AAA titles at high settings or at a resolution beyond 1080p. I'm still using an ATI Radeon HD 5770 and I haven't seen a compelling reason to upgrade my card.
  - kayoone 10y ago
    Entirely depends on the game.
  - ionised 10y ago
    SOme games still will require a beasty CPU. Total War is one example.
- cma 10y ago
  It is a big deal in VR, at 90Hz, two eyes, you have 3x the draw calls of a game running at 60Hz. There are some optimizations to reduce the per-eye overhead, but it is still a lot. Sony's headset can run at native 120Hz, increasing things more, but not too many games are using that mode.
  - Retric 10y ago
    4k at 60fps is 498 million pixels per second, Rift @ 90FPS is 233 million pixels per second. GPU's can deal with making 2 images without meaningful CPU overhead. The real issue is stutter and latency not CPU or GPU GFLOPS.
    - Arelius 10y ago
      Pixels/second aren't a very useful metric when speaking about CPU performance. Your comparison seems to show that CPU performance might be much more important than GPU perf for VR. Also, you're correct that GPU's can play all sorts of tricks to get multiple projected views for low CPU-overhead. But that is with significant software support. Otherwise VR will have to build twice the amount of framebuffers/frame as a single view game.
    - cma 10y ago
      We're talking about draw calls on the CPU, not pixel fill. Still wrong about Rift vs 4K though. Due to the lens unwarping you have to render to a much larger render target to get native screen res. About 1.7x more pixels than he native res. > GPU's can deal with making 2 images without meaningful CPU overhead. I meant to say that with this "There are some optimizations to reduce the per-eye overhead, but it is still a lot." But I didn't word it well. I didn't mean per-eye overhead was a lot after the optimizations, but that the increase in CPU usage was still a lot in spite of them due to the higher update rates.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
- kayoone 10y ago
  Physics heavy games at lower resolutions can still get a lot of benefit out of faster cores. Battlefield 1/4 multiplayer as an example. The Division is another game that benefits greatly from CPU power. Another thing is that many enthusiasts nowadays go for high refresh rate monitors and at 1080p/1440p you can still be CPU bottlenecked if you are shooting for >144FPS on a 144Hz screen.
drzaiusapelord 10y ago
Do people even overclock anymore? I think the mass overclock gains of the 2500k days are probably behind us as even intel is getting close to its top end due to its poorly performing architectures. I thought the whole idea behind turbo is that its an official overclock and once the chip gets too hot it moves back to 'stock' speeds, then back up, etc. All you need to worry about is keeping the stock cooler or not.
kllrnohj 10y ago
> just be aware that Ryzen is probably operating much closer to it's limit than the Intel counterparts, so overclocking could be limited. Overclocking is also limited on the Intel counterparts, so that's not really a big deal. Most kaby lakes won't do 5ghz, and good ones hit the wall at 5ghz. That's not much of an increase over the stock 4.2/4.5ghz for the 7700K Also AMD is claiming a lower TDP than Intel, so that would suggest Ryzen has more OC headroom than Intel has. Although of course this is all wait-and-see.
fcanesin 10y ago
All the info shows otherwise. This shows ryzen overclocking to 5.1GHz on all cores and beating Cinebench world record. http://mirror.ninja/5vixv8 http://mirror.ninja/5vixv8 PS: mirror since it was removed from YouTube.
- smitherfield 10y ago
  *With liquid nitrogen cooling. We still don't have a real-world test.
  - fcanesin 10y ago
    Yes, on the show floor. The comment above was that the Broadwell-E processor could go further, there is not support for this clain. The referred processor is unstable above 5GHz, even with liquid nitrogen (note that the frequency record is 5.8GHz but on CPU-z, a far cry from running Cinebench). Ryzen has this video on its side. My personal opinion is to wait for more data, march 2 is not far away. For sure anandtech and the other good bench sites will have a Perf/$ graph.

by kayoone 10y ago

RussianCow 10y ago

In my experience, most modern games aren't CPU-bound anymore; more and more work is being pushed onto the GPU with every generation. My brother has a quad-core AMD CPU (don't remember which) with a powerful GPU, and his CPU is very rarely the bottleneck—there are few games he can't max out at 1080. Also, according to AMD's benchmarks, the Ryzen CPUs are very close to Intel's in single-threaded performance.

IAmGraydon 10y ago
This. Gaming hasn't been bottlenecked by the CPU in a long time. Anything from an i5 up performs pretty much the same with the same GPU.
- s_m_t 10y ago
  And you'll only be bottlenecked by the GPU if you want to play AAA titles at high settings or at a resolution beyond 1080p. I'm still using an ATI Radeon HD 5770 and I haven't seen a compelling reason to upgrade my card.
- kayoone 10y ago
  Entirely depends on the game.
- ionised 10y ago
  SOme games still will require a beasty CPU. Total War is one example.
cma 10y ago
It is a big deal in VR, at 90Hz, two eyes, you have 3x the draw calls of a game running at 60Hz. There are some optimizations to reduce the per-eye overhead, but it is still a lot. Sony's headset can run at native 120Hz, increasing things more, but not too many games are using that mode.
- Retric 10y ago
  4k at 60fps is 498 million pixels per second, Rift @ 90FPS is 233 million pixels per second. GPU's can deal with making 2 images without meaningful CPU overhead. The real issue is stutter and latency not CPU or GPU GFLOPS.
  - Arelius 10y ago
    Pixels/second aren't a very useful metric when speaking about CPU performance. Your comparison seems to show that CPU performance might be much more important than GPU perf for VR. Also, you're correct that GPU's can play all sorts of tricks to get multiple projected views for low CPU-overhead. But that is with significant software support. Otherwise VR will have to build twice the amount of framebuffers/frame as a single view game.
  - cma 10y ago
    We're talking about draw calls on the CPU, not pixel fill. Still wrong about Rift vs 4K though. Due to the lens unwarping you have to render to a much larger render target to get native screen res. About 1.7x more pixels than he native res. > GPU's can deal with making 2 images without meaningful CPU overhead. I meant to say that with this "There are some optimizations to reduce the per-eye overhead, but it is still a lot." But I didn't word it well. I didn't mean per-eye overhead was a lot after the optimizations, but that the increase in CPU usage was still a lot in spite of them due to the higher update rates.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
kayoone 10y ago
Physics heavy games at lower resolutions can still get a lot of benefit out of faster cores. Battlefield 1/4 multiplayer as an example. The Division is another game that benefits greatly from CPU power. Another thing is that many enthusiasts nowadays go for high refresh rate monitors and at 1080p/1440p you can still be CPU bottlenecked if you are shooting for >144FPS on a 144Hz screen.

drzaiusapelord 10y ago

Do people even overclock anymore? I think the mass overclock gains of the 2500k days are probably behind us as even intel is getting close to its top end due to its poorly performing architectures. I thought the whole idea behind turbo is that its an official overclock and once the chip gets too hot it moves back to 'stock' speeds, then back up, etc. All you need to worry about is keeping the stock cooler or not.

kllrnohj 10y ago

> just be aware that Ryzen is probably operating much closer to it's limit than the Intel counterparts, so overclocking could be limited. Overclocking is also limited on the Intel counterparts, so that's not really a big deal. Most kaby lakes won't do 5ghz, and good ones hit the wall at 5ghz. That's not much of an increase over the stock 4.2/4.5ghz for the 7700K Also AMD is claiming a lower TDP than Intel, so that would suggest Ryzen has more OC headroom than Intel has. Although of course this is all wait-and-see.

fcanesin 10y ago

All the info shows otherwise. This shows ryzen overclocking to 5.1GHz on all cores and beating Cinebench world record. http://mirror.ninja/5vixv8 http://mirror.ninja/5vixv8 PS: mirror since it was removed from YouTube.

smitherfield 10y ago
*With liquid nitrogen cooling. We still don't have a real-world test.
- fcanesin 10y ago
  Yes, on the show floor. The comment above was that the Broadwell-E processor could go further, there is not support for this clain. The referred processor is unstable above 5GHz, even with liquid nitrogen (note that the frequency record is 5.8GHz but on CPU-z, a far cry from running Cinebench). Ryzen has this video on its side. My personal opinion is to wait for more data, march 2 is not far away. For sure anandtech and the other good bench sites will have a Perf/$ graph.