3 ms·
It's also 0.1fps faster than the 6950X in the Civ VI AI test. And the 6950X is literally fucking $1700, that's over THREE TIMES more expensive than the top Ryze
by floatboth 10y ago
It's also 0.1fps faster than the 6950X in the Civ VI AI test. And the 6950X is literally fucking $1700, that's over THREE TIMES more expensive than the top Ryzen.
- onli 10y agoBut you ignore that the i7-7700K is faster in that benchmark. And that one is cheaper. So is the i5. If you do more than games, the Ryzen seems like a a good choice. It has serious power in applications, and is still fast in Games - which is a big step up compared to the FX. But no, it is not the goto choice for a gaming PC.
- floatboth 10y agoYeah, I'm not arguing with that, I actually made that same exact point in a different thread :) I'm just pointing out how it compares to more expensive 8/10-core CPUs.
- nottorp 10y agoIf the 6C/8T and 4C/8T parts will launch at the same frequency as the high end (and i've read that at least for the 6C they will) we'll end up with a CPU that is as fast as the 1800X in games (which is good enough no matter what the 120 fps enthusiasts say) but this time is cheaper than the 7700K. That will be the sweet spot for just gaming performance, not these ones.