• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

i5 8400 or Ryzen 1600

Joined
May 9, 2012
Messages
8,380 (1.93/day)
Location
Ovronnaz, Wallis, Switzerland
System Name main/SFFHTPCARGH!(tm)/Xiaomi Mi TV Stick/Samsung Galaxy S23/Ally
Processor Ryzen 7 5800X3D/i7-3770/S905X/Snapdragon 8 Gen 2/Ryzen Z1 Extreme
Motherboard MSI MAG B550 Tomahawk/HP SFF Q77 Express/uh?/uh?/Asus
Cooling Enermax ETS-T50 Axe aRGB /basic HP HSF /errr.../oh! liqui..wait, no:sizable vapor chamber/a nice one
Memory 64gb Corsair Vengeance Pro 3600mhz DDR4/8gb DDR3 1600/2gb LPDDR3/8gb LPDDR5x 4200/16gb LPDDR5
Video Card(s) Hellhound Spectral White RX 7900 XTX 24gb/GT 730/Mali 450MP5/Adreno 740/RDNA3 768 core
Storage 250gb870EVO/500gb860EVO/2tbSandisk/NVMe2tb+1tb/4tbextreme V2/1TB Arion/500gb/8gb/256gb/2tb SN770M
Display(s) X58222 32" 2880x1620/32"FHDTV/273E3LHSB 27" 1920x1080/6.67"/AMOLED 2X panel FHD+120hz/FHD 120hz
Case Cougar Panzer Max/Elite 8300 SFF/None/back/back-front Gorilla Glass Victus 2+ UAG Monarch Carbon
Audio Device(s) Logi Z333/SB Audigy RX/HDMI/HDMI/Dolby Atmos/KZ x HBB PR2/Edifier STAX Spirit S3 & SamsungxAKG beans
Power Supply Chieftec Proton BDF-1000C /HP 240w/12v 1.5A/4Smart Voltplug PD 30W/Asus USB-C 65W
Mouse Speedlink Sovos Vertical-Asus ROG Spatha-Logi Ergo M575/Xiaomi XMRM-006/touch/touch
Keyboard Endorfy Thock 75% <3/none/touch/virtual
VR HMD Medion Erazer
Software Win10 64/Win8.1 64/Android TV 8.1/Android 13/Win11 64
Benchmark Scores bench...mark? i do leave mark on bench sometime, to remember which one is the most comfortable. :o
corrected the previous post, tho i stay on Ryzen
mmhhhh.... yet the difference isn't huge at all even with the one from the article ....

that article conclusion is valide only for a 8400 at 190$ (the one i see are .... 230$) and the 1600/1600X 210/240$ (the one i see are ... 199 and 220$ )
situational indeed ... for me the 1600 (even the 1600X) are a far better choice than a 8400

also .... 720p results .... :laugh: ....

Conclusion: An interesting comparison comparing all angles of cost and performance in order to evaluate what's only important to a pure gamer that plans to play relatively current/old generation games that are not GPU bound I.e. 720p. Unfortunately very few folks fall into this category. Over the next year, we'll see games that will utilize multiple cores for various purposes other than simply running the game engine. Also a key benefit of the Ryzen platform is being able to upgrade to Zen2 in an affordable manner which cannot be said for intel's next 'lake' platform. Discarding the 720p results, Ryzen is a clear winner. Factoring in newer game titles Ryzen is a winner again. Accounting for overall system performance outside of gaming and future proofing your investment Ryzen is the winner again.
that comment is right nonetheless
 
Joined
Sep 1, 2009
Messages
1,182 (0.22/day)
Location
CO
System Name 4k
Processor AMD 5800x3D
Motherboard MSI MAG b550m Mortar Wifi
Cooling Corsair H100i
Memory 4x8Gb Crucial Ballistix 3600 CL16 bl8g36c16u4b.m8fe1
Video Card(s) Nvidia Reference 3080Ti
Storage ADATA XPG SX8200 Pro 1TB
Display(s) LG 48" C1
Case CORSAIR Carbide AIR 240 Micro-ATX
Audio Device(s) Asus Xonar STX
Power Supply EVGA SuperNOVA 650W
Software Microsoft Windows10 Pro x64
AMD is keeping the socket through 2020, i feel it would benefit someone like the OP more than then intel rig.
 

lyndonguitar

I play games
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
1,877 (0.37/day)
Location
Philippines
System Name X6 | Lyndon-ROG
Processor Intel Core i7-8700k | Intel Core i7 6700HQ
Motherboard Gigabyte Z370 Aorus Gaming 5 | Asus ROG-GL552VX
Cooling Deepcool Captain 240EX
Memory 16GB Corsair Vengeance LED | 8 GB
Video Card(s) NVIDIA GTX 1080 8 GB GDDR5X | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M 4GB
Storage SSDs: 500GB, HDDs: 2TB, 2TB, 3TB | SSD: 250GB, HDD: 1TB
Display(s) Samsung 49" CHG90 3840x1080@144Hz, Panasonic 32" HDTV, | 15.6"1080p
Case Cougar Panzer Max
Audio Device(s) HyperX Cloud II | Corsair Gaming H1500 7.1 | ROCCAT Kave 5.1 | Edifier M3200
Power Supply EVGA 750GQ
Mouse Logitech G403 | Razer Deathadder Chroma | Logitech G302 | Mad Catz Cyborg R.A.T. 5
Keyboard Corsair Vengeance K70 Cherry MX Red
Software Windows 10
corrected the previous post, tho i stay on Ryzen
mmhhhh.... yet the difference isn't huge at all even with the one from the article ....

that article conclusion is valide only for a 8400 at 190$ (the one i see are .... 230$) and the 1600/1600X 210/240$ (the one i see are ... 199 and 220$ )
situational indeed ... for me the 1600 (even the 1600X) are a far better choice than a 8400

also .... 720p results .... :laugh: ....


that comment is right nonetheless

there are 1080p and 1440p results though, scroll down.

anyway, 720p results is to show the REAL power of the CPU. it's quite useless to compare higher resolutions because the workload gets pushed to the GPU even more. so for longevity, in the next few years, when GPUs get stronger and stronger, The gap between the 8400 and the 1600 will only widen and the 8400 will definitely last longer. also the 8400 is cheaper on average, but the cheap motherboards I think won't come until next year, so there's that.

Zen+ is rumored to be increased clockspeeds of the Ryzen series, so they'll be better in gaming than Ryzen and will finally match up to Intel levels of gaming performance. I hope., so that's another thing to consider(because you can ditch the 1600 by then if you buy one now, no need to change mb)
 

hat

Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
21,731 (3.43/day)
Location
Ohio
System Name Starlifter :: Dragonfly
Processor i7 2600k 4.4GHz :: i5 10400
Motherboard ASUS P8P67 Pro :: ASUS Prime H570-Plus
Cooling Cryorig M9 :: Stock
Memory 4x4GB DDR3 2133 :: 2x8GB DDR4 2400
Video Card(s) PNY GTX1070 :: Integrated UHD 630
Storage Crucial MX500 1TB, 2x1TB Seagate RAID 0 :: Mushkin Enhanced 60GB SSD, 3x4TB Seagate HDD RAID5
Display(s) Onn 165hz 1080p :: Acer 1080p
Case Antec SOHO 1030B :: Old White Full Tower
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty Pro - Bose Companion 2 Series III :: None
Power Supply FSP Hydro GE 550w :: EVGA Supernova 550
Software Windows 10 Pro - Plex Server on Dragonfly
Benchmark Scores >9000
I keep seeing people praise ryzen for overclocking potential... And while it's nice they let us do that, it's kind of a moot point when the i5 8400 already runs at 3.8 out of the box, which is the same speed one could expect from ryzen, maybe a nice even 4.0 if you're lucky.

I like amd and am rather discontented with Intel for the way they're running their business and the products they put out, but Intel is still just better.
 
Joined
Nov 23, 2013
Messages
359 (0.09/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 3700X
Motherboard MSI B350 Tomahawk Arctic
Memory 4x8GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200Mhz
Video Card(s) Gigabyte 6700XT Gaming OC (2.80Ghz core / 2.15Ghz mem)
Storage Corsair MP510 NVMe 960GB; Samsung 850 Evo 250GB; Samsung 860 Evo 500GB;
Display(s) Dell S2721DGFA; Iiyama ProLite B2783QSU;
Case Cooler Master Elite 361
Power Supply Cooler Master G750M
Well first of all, I'd never buy a CPU that has SMT disabled just because the company felt like it for the same money that I can get double the threads.
Either give me the hardware OR give me the discount.
But anyway, that's just me.

Now a lot of people keep running on the "Intel is better" mantra, but better for what exactly?
Just look at those TPU benchmarks.
A 1600 Ryzen destroys the 8400 in pretty much any real-life software scenario, whereas for games the 8400 will indeed deliver more FPS in the majority of titles, BUT (with the exception of Hitman) these are 5-15 FPS in 1080p where you already have the game running with 100+ FPS in most cases. What's the actual point of that? None.
Even if you don't do anything, but game there's no reason to get the 8400. EVEN if you don't consider your future upgrade paths.
 

Mussels

Freshwater Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
58,413 (8.21/day)
Location
Oystralia
System Name Rainbow Sparkles (Power efficient, <350W gaming load)
Processor Ryzen R7 5800x3D (Undervolted, 4.45GHz all core)
Motherboard Asus x570-F (BIOS Modded)
Cooling Alphacool Apex UV - Alphacool Eisblock XPX Aurora + EK Quantum ARGB 3090 w/ active backplate
Memory 2x32GB DDR4 3600 Corsair Vengeance RGB @3866 C18-22-22-22-42 TRFC704 (1.4V Hynix MJR - SoC 1.15V)
Video Card(s) Galax RTX 3090 SG 24GB: Underclocked to 1700Mhz 0.750v (375W down to 250W))
Storage 2TB WD SN850 NVME + 1TB Sasmsung 970 Pro NVME + 1TB Intel 6000P NVME USB 3.2
Display(s) Phillips 32 32M1N5800A (4k144), LG 32" (4K60) | Gigabyte G32QC (2k165) | Phillips 328m6fjrmb (2K144)
Case Fractal Design R6
Audio Device(s) Logitech G560 | Corsair Void pro RGB |Blue Yeti mic
Power Supply Fractal Ion+ 2 860W (Platinum) (This thing is God-tier. Silent and TINY)
Mouse Logitech G Pro wireless + Steelseries Prisma XL
Keyboard Razer Huntsman TE ( Sexy white keycaps)
VR HMD Oculus Rift S + Quest 2
Software Windows 11 pro x64 (Yes, it's genuinely a good OS) OpenRGB - ditch the branded bloatware!
Benchmark Scores Nyooom.
I keep seeing people praise ryzen for overclocking potential... And while it's nice they let us do that, it's kind of a moot point when the i5 8400 already runs at 3.8 out of the box, which is the same speed one could expect from ryzen, maybe a nice even 4.0 if you're lucky.

I like amd and am rather discontented with Intel for the way they're running their business and the products they put out, but Intel is still just better.

I tested a ryzen 1400 (4c 4t) vs my i7 3770k (also 4c 4t) - the ryzen at 3.85Ghz perfectly matched the i7 at 4.7ghz, except games with GPU settings at minimum, where the i7 got 10% more at best

they may clock lower, but they're more efficient per clock too. I ran a lot of synthetic benches between the two setups, and games often showed improvements on ryzen where benches showed intel in the lead - everythings intel optimised in the benchmarks, which throws some results off.
(big hardware changes, havent updated my specs yet)
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2014
Messages
1,838 (0.53/day)
Location
Calabash, NC
System Name The Captain (2.0)
Processor Ryzen 7 7700X
Motherboard Asus Crosshair X670E Hero (soon to be replaced by Gigabyte X670E AORUS Master)
Cooling 360mm Be Quiet! Pure Loop 2 FX, 4x Be Quiet! 140mm Silent Wings 4 (1x exhaust 3x intake)
Memory 32GB (2x16) G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo (6000Mhz)
Video Card(s) MSI GeForce RTX 3070 SUPRIM X
Storage 1x Crucial MX500 500GB SSD; 1x Crucial MX500 500GB M.2 SSD; 1x WD Blue HDD, 1x Crucial P5 Plus
Display(s) Aorus CV27F 27" 1080p 165Hz
Case Phanteks Evolv X (Anthracite Gray)
Power Supply Corsair RMx (2021) 1000W 80-Plus Gold
Mouse Varies based on mood; is currently Razer Basilisk V3; Basilisk Ultimate for gaming
Keyboard Varies based on mood; currently HyperX Alloy Origins 65
Well first of all, I'd never buy a CPU that has SMT disabled just because the company felt like it for the same money that I can get double the threads.
Either give me the hardware OR give me the discount.
But anyway, that's just me.

Now a lot of people keep running on the "Intel is better" mantra, but better for what exactly?
Just look at those TPU benchmarks.
A 1600 Ryzen destroys the 8400 in pretty much any real-life software scenario, whereas for games the 8400 will indeed deliver more FPS in the majority of titles, BUT (with the exception of Hitman) these are 5-15 FPS in 1080p where you already have the game running with 100+ FPS in most cases. What's the actual point of that? None.
Even if you don't do anything, but game there's no reason to get the 8400. EVEN if you don't consider your future upgrade paths.

Couldn't have said it better myself. :cool:
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Messages
2,388 (0.67/day)
Location
Shenandoah Valley, Virginia USA
System Name Home Brewed
Processor i9-7900X and i7-8700K
Motherboard ASUS ROG Rampage VI Extreme & ASUS Prime Z-370 A
Cooling Corsair 280mm AIO & Thermaltake Water 3.0
Memory 64GB DDR4-3000 GSKill RipJaws-V & 32GB DDR4-3466 GEIL Potenza
Video Card(s) 2X-GTX-1080 SLI & 2 GTX-1070Ti 8GB G1 Gaming in SLI
Storage Both have 2TB HDDs for storage, 480GB SSDs for OS, and 240GB SSDs for Steam Games
Display(s) ACER 28" B286HK 4K & Samsung 32" 1080P
Case NZXT Source 540 & Rosewill Rise Chassis
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply Corsair RM1000 & Corsair RM850
Mouse Generic
Keyboard Razer Blackwidow Tournament & Corsair K90
Software Win-10 Professional
Benchmark Scores yes
and now with the new 1700x, witch is also useless.

You see the Ryzen 1700X as useless? Mine chews through WCG work units like a hot knife through butter.
Gaming with it is great too.
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
3,475 (1.33/day)
Processor R5 5600X
Motherboard ASUS ROG STRIX B550-I GAMING
Cooling Alpenföhn Black Ridge
Memory 2*16GB DDR4-2666 VLP @3800
Video Card(s) EVGA Geforce RTX 3080 XC3
Storage 1TB Samsung 970 Pro, 2TB Intel 660p
Display(s) ASUS PG279Q, Eizo EV2736W
Case Dan Cases A4-SFX
Power Supply Corsair SF600
Mouse Corsair Ironclaw Wireless RGB
Keyboard Corsair K60
VR HMD HTC Vive
Well first of all, I'd never buy a CPU that has SMT disabled just because the company felt like it for the same money that I can get double the threads.
Either give me the hardware OR give me the discount.
But you DO get a discount. 8400 is considerably cheaper than 8700.

Now a lot of people keep running on the "Intel is better" mantra, but better for what exactly?
Just look at those TPU benchmarks.
A 1600 Ryzen destroys the 8400 in pretty much any real-life software scenario, whereas for games the 8400 will indeed deliver more FPS in the majority of titles, BUT (with the exception of Hitman) these are 5-15 FPS in 1080p where you already have the game running with 100+ FPS in most cases. What's the actual point of that? None.
Even if you don't do anything, but game there's no reason to get the 8400. EVEN if you don't consider your future upgrade paths.
Threaded performance is not everything and you might be surprised how little people actually use well-threaded applications. Even threads in this forum are mostly targeted directly to gaming. OP of this thread:
The rig won't likely ever be used outside of the desktop use or gaming.

But OK, lets look at TPU benchmarks:
- Scientific/Synthetic are not relevant to even production-minded of us.
- MP3 encoding is essentially single-threaded, Ryzen has no game there.
- Video encoding - h.264 1600x is 2 seconds faster, 1600 2 seconds slower than 8400. Whatever h.265 does differently, Intel is slightly faster there overall.
- Photoshop, Word, Excel, Powerpoint - 1600(x) loses to 8400.
- 7Zip 1600 is faster in compressing, much faster in decompressing (7Zip decompression is a strong point for Ryzen overall).
- WinRAR - 8400 is faster.
- Antivirus/Java/SQL are strange for benchmarks but OK. AV 8400 faster, Java/SQL 1600 faster.
- Blender/Cinebench - 1600 is faster. Euler - 8400 is faster.
- Web and Gaming is squarely to 8400.
When we are talking about desktop and gaming, 8400 does look better here.
 

eidairaman1

The Exiled Airman
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
40,435 (6.61/day)
Location
Republic of Texas (True Patriot)
System Name PCGOD
Processor AMD FX 8350@ 5.0GHz
Motherboard Asus TUF 990FX Sabertooth R2 2901 Bios
Cooling Scythe Ashura, 2Ă—BitFenix 230mm Spectre Pro LED (Blue,Green), 2x BitFenix 140mm Spectre Pro LED
Memory 16 GB Gskill Ripjaws X 2133 (2400 OC, 10-10-12-20-20, 1T, 1.65V)
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon 290 Sapphire Vapor-X
Storage Samsung 840 Pro 256GB, WD Velociraptor 1TB
Display(s) NEC Multisync LCD 1700V (Display Port Adapter)
Case AeroCool Xpredator Evil Blue Edition
Audio Device(s) Creative Labs Sound Blaster ZxR
Power Supply Seasonic 1250 XM2 Series (XP3)
Mouse Roccat Kone XTD
Keyboard Roccat Ryos MK Pro
Software Windows 7 Pro 64
But you DO get a discount. 8400 is considerably cheaper than 8700.

Threaded performance is not everything and you might be surprised how little people actually use well-threaded applications. Even threads in this forum are mostly targeted directly to gaming. OP of this thread:

But OK, lets look at TPU benchmarks:
- Scientific/Synthetic are not relevant to even production-minded of us.
- MP3 encoding is essentially single-threaded, Ryzen has no game there.
- Video encoding - h.264 1600x is 2 seconds faster, 1600 2 seconds slower than 8400. Whatever h.265 does differently, Intel is slightly faster there overall.
- Photoshop, Word, Excel, Powerpoint - 1600(x) loses to 8400.
- 7Zip 1600 is faster in compressing, much faster in decompressing (7Zip decompression is a strong point for Ryzen overall).
- WinRAR - 8400 is faster.
- Antivirus/Java/SQL are strange for benchmarks but OK. AV 8400 faster, Java/SQL 1600 faster.
- Blender/Cinebench - 1600 is faster. Euler - 8400 is faster.
- Web and Gaming is squarely to 8400.
When we are talking about desktop and gaming, 8400 does look better here.

poor selection, having to swap boards for a new cpu just about yearly is stupid.
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
3,475 (1.33/day)
Processor R5 5600X
Motherboard ASUS ROG STRIX B550-I GAMING
Cooling Alpenföhn Black Ridge
Memory 2*16GB DDR4-2666 VLP @3800
Video Card(s) EVGA Geforce RTX 3080 XC3
Storage 1TB Samsung 970 Pro, 2TB Intel 660p
Display(s) ASUS PG279Q, Eizo EV2736W
Case Dan Cases A4-SFX
Power Supply Corsair SF600
Mouse Corsair Ironclaw Wireless RGB
Keyboard Corsair K60
VR HMD HTC Vive
poor selection, having to swap boards for a new cpu just about yearly is stupid.
While you are technically right, are you honestly sure it is that relevant? Generally, upgrades tend to be over several years and both CPU and motherboard will get replaced together and after several years.

Just look at OP or you or me. OP is on a motherboard and cpu from 2010. You are on a motherboard and CPU from 2012. I am on motherboard and CPU from 2015. It has been a little while for OP so he needs to think about an upgrade. There is nothing available for his current motherboard worth upgrading to and has not been for years. Are you thinking about an upgrade? You might, but that will mean replacing motherboard as well as CPU (and some other things). I have no incentive to think about an upgrade. My current platform is also pretty much dead and any upgrade will mean both new mobo and CPU.

Replacing CPUs yearly is stupid. Well, not stupid but just an expensive hobby and not performance- or value-driven.
 
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
5,398 (0.92/day)
Location
Australia
System Name Night Rider | Mini LAN PC | Workhorse
Processor AMD R7 5800X3D | Ryzen 1600X | i7 970
Motherboard MSi AM4 Pro Carbon | GA- | Gigabyte EX58-UD5
Cooling Noctua U9S Twin Fan| Stock Cooler, Copper Core)| Big shairkan B
Memory 2x8GB DDR4 G.Skill Ripjaws 3600MHz| 2x8GB Corsair 3000 | 6x2GB DDR3 1300 Corsair
Video Card(s) MSI AMD 6750XT | 6500XT | MSI RX 580 8GB
Storage 1TB WD Black NVME / 250GB SSD /2TB WD Black | 500GB SSD WD, 2x1TB, 1x750 | WD 500 SSD/Seagate 320
Display(s) LG 27" 1440P| Samsung 20" S20C300L/DELL 15" | 22" DELL/19"DELL
Case LIAN LI PC-18 | Mini ATX Case (custom) | Atrix C4 9001
Audio Device(s) Onboard | Onbaord | Onboard
Power Supply Silverstone 850 | Silverstone Mini 450W | Corsair CX-750
Mouse Coolermaster Pro | Rapoo V900 | Gigabyte 6850X
Keyboard MAX Keyboard Nighthawk X8 | Creative Fatal1ty eluminx | Some POS Logitech
Software Windows 10 Pro 64 | Windows 10 Pro 64 | Windows 7 Pro 64/Windows 10 Home
lol, how well was the phenom II x 6, bulldozer and piledriver in future proofing. This is th estandard AMD response, it doesn't work great but down the road it will because we all know technology gets quicker as it ages...:kookoo:

What are you talking about? we are not talking about back then we are talking about now, Ryzen, please keep on track!

The Phenom II X6 was actually very good at the time, bulldozer wasnt great but piledriver was not bad at all. What are you talking about? everyone knows Ryzen works really well, better then anyone expected actually. Ryzen only needs a frequency pump to put it basically on par with Intel in gaming or single threaded tasks which should be addressed next yr hopefully.

FYI my 8350 has actually gotten faster over time with how software can now make use of 8cores alot better then it ever used to, even in games it has closed the gap alot from back in the days against the i7-2600.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2016
Messages
1,025 (0.37/day)
Location
Croatistan
System Name 1.21 gigawatts!
Processor Intel Core i7 6700K
Motherboard MSI Z170A Krait Gaming 3X
Cooling Be Quiet! Shadow Rock Slim with Arctic MX-4
Memory 16GB G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4 3000 MHz
Video Card(s) Palit GTX 1080 Game Rock
Storage Mushkin Triactor 240GB + Toshiba X300 4TB + Team L3 EVO 480GB
Display(s) Philips 237E7QDSB/00 23" FHD AH-IPS
Case Aerocool Aero-1000 white + 4 Arctic F12 PWM Rev.2 fans
Audio Device(s) Onboard Audio Boost 3 with Nahimic Audio Enhancer
Power Supply FSP Hydro G 650W
Mouse Cougar 700M eSports white
Keyboard E-Blue Cobra II
Software Windows 8.1 Pro x64
Benchmark Scores Cinebench R15: 948 (stock) / 1044 (4,7 GHz) FarCry 5 1080p Ultra: min 100, avg 116, max 133 FPS
Ryzen 5 will be not only cheaper but also more powerful and more future proof. AMD will continue with their AM4 platform for a few years, while Intel might move from LGA1151 (v3) onto new platform during the next year. There's not much sense buying Intel these days, because you can get more for your money from AMD. The fact that Intel's top "mainstream" CPU can offer some 7 or 8 FPS more in certain games that's definitely not worth the extra price. AMD's are right now the best possible bang for the buck.
 

eidairaman1

The Exiled Airman
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
40,435 (6.61/day)
Location
Republic of Texas (True Patriot)
System Name PCGOD
Processor AMD FX 8350@ 5.0GHz
Motherboard Asus TUF 990FX Sabertooth R2 2901 Bios
Cooling Scythe Ashura, 2Ă—BitFenix 230mm Spectre Pro LED (Blue,Green), 2x BitFenix 140mm Spectre Pro LED
Memory 16 GB Gskill Ripjaws X 2133 (2400 OC, 10-10-12-20-20, 1T, 1.65V)
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon 290 Sapphire Vapor-X
Storage Samsung 840 Pro 256GB, WD Velociraptor 1TB
Display(s) NEC Multisync LCD 1700V (Display Port Adapter)
Case AeroCool Xpredator Evil Blue Edition
Audio Device(s) Creative Labs Sound Blaster ZxR
Power Supply Seasonic 1250 XM2 Series (XP3)
Mouse Roccat Kone XTD
Keyboard Roccat Ryos MK Pro
Software Windows 7 Pro 64
While you are technically right, are you honestly sure it is that relevant? Generally, upgrades tend to be over several years and both CPU and motherboard will get replaced together and after several years.

Just look at OP or you or me. OP is on a motherboard and cpu from 2010. You are on a motherboard and CPU from 2012. I am on motherboard and CPU from 2015. It has been a little while for OP so he needs to think about an upgrade. There is nothing available for his current motherboard worth upgrading to and has not been for years. Are you thinking about an upgrade? You might, but that will mean replacing motherboard as well as CPU (and some other things). I have no incentive to think about an upgrade. My current platform is also pretty much dead and any upgrade will mean both new mobo and CPU.

Replacing CPUs yearly is stupid. Well, not stupid but just an expensive hobby and not performance- or value-driven.

Cpus are drop in, don't require a driver reinstall or os format, mobos do. ryzen has an upgrade path, intels 2066 skt has an upgrade path. Msdt for intel don't...
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2014
Messages
1,838 (0.53/day)
Location
Calabash, NC
System Name The Captain (2.0)
Processor Ryzen 7 7700X
Motherboard Asus Crosshair X670E Hero (soon to be replaced by Gigabyte X670E AORUS Master)
Cooling 360mm Be Quiet! Pure Loop 2 FX, 4x Be Quiet! 140mm Silent Wings 4 (1x exhaust 3x intake)
Memory 32GB (2x16) G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo (6000Mhz)
Video Card(s) MSI GeForce RTX 3070 SUPRIM X
Storage 1x Crucial MX500 500GB SSD; 1x Crucial MX500 500GB M.2 SSD; 1x WD Blue HDD, 1x Crucial P5 Plus
Display(s) Aorus CV27F 27" 1080p 165Hz
Case Phanteks Evolv X (Anthracite Gray)
Power Supply Corsair RMx (2021) 1000W 80-Plus Gold
Mouse Varies based on mood; is currently Razer Basilisk V3; Basilisk Ultimate for gaming
Keyboard Varies based on mood; currently HyperX Alloy Origins 65
I get so tired of this "you like X so you must be a fan boi" BS -- on both sides, mind you, but I've noticed Intel fans tend to be a bit more obnoxious about it, even going so far as to call people who buy AMD "poor" just because they don't feel the need to blow X amount of money on something that, at best, is only a couple steps ahead of (insert AMD CPU here) for a sh**load more money. Take Coffee Lake for instance. You can't find nearly any of them (with the exception of maybe the lowly i3's, but "gamers" don't want those) and the ones that you do manage to find demand a SIGNIFCANT premium. All I gotta say is if you're dumb/impatient enough to fork over said premium (especially if you're already on Skylake or Kaby Lake) for a CPU, whether it be CFL i7 or i5 just to have an additional two cores and petty bragging rights is just stupid. Intel's got you eating out of their hand, for sure. Hook, line, and sinker.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
5,398 (0.92/day)
Location
Australia
System Name Night Rider | Mini LAN PC | Workhorse
Processor AMD R7 5800X3D | Ryzen 1600X | i7 970
Motherboard MSi AM4 Pro Carbon | GA- | Gigabyte EX58-UD5
Cooling Noctua U9S Twin Fan| Stock Cooler, Copper Core)| Big shairkan B
Memory 2x8GB DDR4 G.Skill Ripjaws 3600MHz| 2x8GB Corsair 3000 | 6x2GB DDR3 1300 Corsair
Video Card(s) MSI AMD 6750XT | 6500XT | MSI RX 580 8GB
Storage 1TB WD Black NVME / 250GB SSD /2TB WD Black | 500GB SSD WD, 2x1TB, 1x750 | WD 500 SSD/Seagate 320
Display(s) LG 27" 1440P| Samsung 20" S20C300L/DELL 15" | 22" DELL/19"DELL
Case LIAN LI PC-18 | Mini ATX Case (custom) | Atrix C4 9001
Audio Device(s) Onboard | Onbaord | Onboard
Power Supply Silverstone 850 | Silverstone Mini 450W | Corsair CX-750
Mouse Coolermaster Pro | Rapoo V900 | Gigabyte 6850X
Keyboard MAX Keyboard Nighthawk X8 | Creative Fatal1ty eluminx | Some POS Logitech
Software Windows 10 Pro 64 | Windows 10 Pro 64 | Windows 7 Pro 64/Windows 10 Home
Clearly intel has pretty much hit its fastest and has done for awhile now, Ryzen is a brand new arch which has room to grow, the past is living proof of this from Phenom to Phenom II and bulldozer to Piledriver and excavator. The difference is this time Ryzen is already very close to intel from the word go.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
19,366 (3.72/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
No.. wasnt considering next gen for either. Just talking software optimizations. I wouldnt expect miracles out of it (ryzen). ;)

For zen2 or w/e, i dont expect more than 5-10% gains. Which, is good, and should be spot on with current intel or beating it. I hope it gets higher clocks as well. :)
 

eidairaman1

The Exiled Airman
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
40,435 (6.61/day)
Location
Republic of Texas (True Patriot)
System Name PCGOD
Processor AMD FX 8350@ 5.0GHz
Motherboard Asus TUF 990FX Sabertooth R2 2901 Bios
Cooling Scythe Ashura, 2Ă—BitFenix 230mm Spectre Pro LED (Blue,Green), 2x BitFenix 140mm Spectre Pro LED
Memory 16 GB Gskill Ripjaws X 2133 (2400 OC, 10-10-12-20-20, 1T, 1.65V)
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon 290 Sapphire Vapor-X
Storage Samsung 840 Pro 256GB, WD Velociraptor 1TB
Display(s) NEC Multisync LCD 1700V (Display Port Adapter)
Case AeroCool Xpredator Evil Blue Edition
Audio Device(s) Creative Labs Sound Blaster ZxR
Power Supply Seasonic 1250 XM2 Series (XP3)
Mouse Roccat Kone XTD
Keyboard Roccat Ryos MK Pro
Software Windows 7 Pro 64
No.. wasnt considering next gen for either. Just talking software optimizations. I wouldnt expect miracles out of it (ryzen). ;)

For zen2 or w/e, i dont expect more than 5-10% gains. Which, is good, and should be spot on with current intel or beating it. I hope it gets higher clocks as well. :)

Ryzen + is expected next year
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
19,366 (3.72/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
Yep..but that isnt zen2. I expect less out of "+" than i do zen2. Perhaps increased clocks and some overclocking headroom, minimal ipc gains at best.
 

Regeneration

NGOHQ.COM
Joined
Oct 26, 2005
Messages
3,076 (0.46/day)
Both CPUs offer somehow similar performance, but Intel CPUs are normally better for overclocking, even locked ones.

For example, your current AMD 1090T, I had one of those, poor overclocker, tcase max 62c, managed to boost it by only 200-300 MHz.
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
19,366 (3.72/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
I get so tired of this "you like X so you must be a fan boi" BS -- on both sides, mind you, but I've noticed Intel fans tend to be a bit more obnoxious about it, even going so far as to call people who buy AMD "poor" just because they don't feel the need to blow X amount of money on something that, at best, is only a couple steps ahead of (insert AMD CPU here) for a sh**load more money. Take Coffee Lake for instance. You can't find nearly any of them (with the exception of maybe the lowly i3's, but "gamers" don't want those) and the ones that you do manage to find demand a SIGNIFCANT premium. All I gotta say is if you're dumb/impatient enough to fork over said premium (especially if you're already on Skylake or Kaby Lake) for a CPU, whether it be CFL i7 or i5 just to have an additional two cores and petty bragging rights is just stupid. Intel's got you eating out of their hand, for sure. Hook, line, and sinker.
The $120 difference (MSRP) of 8700K when compared to 1600X isn't that much when purchasing a new system for over a grand or even for a cpu/mobo/ram combo. With that, you receive a few % faster CPU in IPC, 100MHz faster base clock, 400 MHz faster all core boost, and a 700 Mhz single core speed difference. Many 8700K can see 5GHz all cores with dual-rad AIO...a 1GHz difference with the 1600x maxed out on its overclocking too. Some math... that is a full 25% faster not including IPC.

Those can EASILY be worth it to many people. I am not saying there isn't a time or place for Ryzen, its a hell of a performer. On the flip side, for the same money, one can have an OCTO core (Ryzen 7 1700X) compared to the Intel for the same price. If the person uses the additional cores, its a no-brainer to me, go Ryzen. If not, the buyer needs to determine if the above earlier example is worth it. Or if cores don't matter, is a 300 Mhz base clock increase, 500 Mhz all core boost and 900 Mhz single core speed difference worth it. Again, if 8700K reaches 5 GHz all cores, that's a 1GHz advantage again with the 1700x maxed out.

It just depends on needs. Both are incredibly viable chips for the majority of users. If people are looking to save a money, there are only usage scenarios that should steer people away from Ryzen. On the other hand, if people want the (slightly) faster in IPC, higher clocked out of the box and better overclocker for more........................................is it really a hook, line, and sinker type deal? Is it really a "SIGNIFICANT" premium??? Seems there are plenty of circumstances where buyers wouldn't be a 'sucker' to choose the higher performing part. ;)
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
278 (0.06/day)
System Name MSI GT72S 6QE
Processor Core i7 6820HK
Motherboard Intel Sunrise Point CM236
Cooling 2 fans
Memory 2x 8 GB SO-DIMM DDR4-RAM (2133 MHz)
Video Card(s) NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M - 8192 MB
Storage 1 ssd 3 hard drives
Display(s) 17.3 inch 16:9, 1920x1080 pixel, LG Philips LP173WF4-SPF1 (LGD0469), IPS, Full HD
Case ??!!!
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC899
Power Supply most beautiful brick you have ever seen
I think TPU needs to write an article on why high resolution gpu bound scenarios should not be used for cpu gaming benchmarks. Too many people seem to not know this/are in need of education on the matter.
 
Joined
Aug 6, 2017
Messages
7,412 (3.05/day)
Location
Poland
System Name Purple rain
Processor 10.5 thousand 4.2G 1.1v
Motherboard Zee 490 Aorus Elite
Cooling Noctua D15S
Memory 16GB 4133 CL16-16-16-31 Viper Steel
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super Gaming X Trio
Storage SU900 128,8200Pro 1TB,850 Pro 512+256+256,860 Evo 500,XPG950 480, Skyhawk 2TB
Display(s) Acer XB241YU+Dell S2716DG
Case P600S Silent w. Alpenfohn wing boost 3 ARGBT+ fans
Audio Device(s) K612 Pro w. FiiO E10k DAC,W830BT wireless
Power Supply Superflower Leadex Gold 850W
Mouse G903 lightspeed+powerplay,G403 wireless + Steelseries DeX + Roccat rest
Keyboard HyperX Alloy SilverSpeed (w.HyperX wrist rest),Razer Deathstalker
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores A LOT
I think TPU needs to write an article on why high resolution gpu bound scenarios should not be used for cpu gaming benchmarks. Too many people seem to not know this/are in need of education on the matter.
The problem is not as much 1440p being a high res, as it is the choice of scenes. Even with a GTX 1080 at 1440p I often found myself bottlenecked by the CPU. If you have a game running at 70-100 fps but there's certain parts of it where the CPU gets hammered and fps drops to 50 then it's not very comfortable playing, even with g-sync. Pretty much every modern game that came out in the last year or two can be both insanely GPU or CPU intensive depending on settings and locations. Ryzens just don't cope well with certain locations at certain settings, Intel is the most consistent across the board. 4c/4t i5s often got hammerred by multi threaded games and showed low min fps and stutter, 6c/6t i5s are actually pretty kickass CPUs for current games, even the locked SKUs that run at close to 4GHz. Ryzen looks well suited for CPU intensive games with a high core count, but that doesn't always reflect the reality. Tests show inconsistent results from game to game and from location to location. Like in Watch Dogs 2, all 12 threads on R5 1600 are utilized, the GPU usage sits at 98%, and yet somehow the fps isn't there and it loses to i5 8400.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
Messages
2,186 (0.43/day)
Location
England
Wow what did I create by asking my question! :D

Took me a fair while to read through all the comments but thank you for them. So far you guys between you sound exactly like what I've been thinking on the subject. So still no closer to a decision. I almost feel like I should go with the Intel build, something is pulling me towards it however I feel Ryzen and the platform may be more suited to me which doesn't help ofcourse! I'm on 6 cores now and yes its an old chip but I also find it hard upgrading to another 6 core CPU, stupid I know, the gains are obvious over my 1090T. I guess I want to see more when I upgrade? How silly is that.

EDIT: Not that it really makes any difference to what my system is upgrading from in the original post but I've updated my system specs to what I have now, the others listed was somewhat out of date as I've not been here awhile.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 1, 2014
Messages
1,838 (0.53/day)
Location
Calabash, NC
System Name The Captain (2.0)
Processor Ryzen 7 7700X
Motherboard Asus Crosshair X670E Hero (soon to be replaced by Gigabyte X670E AORUS Master)
Cooling 360mm Be Quiet! Pure Loop 2 FX, 4x Be Quiet! 140mm Silent Wings 4 (1x exhaust 3x intake)
Memory 32GB (2x16) G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo (6000Mhz)
Video Card(s) MSI GeForce RTX 3070 SUPRIM X
Storage 1x Crucial MX500 500GB SSD; 1x Crucial MX500 500GB M.2 SSD; 1x WD Blue HDD, 1x Crucial P5 Plus
Display(s) Aorus CV27F 27" 1080p 165Hz
Case Phanteks Evolv X (Anthracite Gray)
Power Supply Corsair RMx (2021) 1000W 80-Plus Gold
Mouse Varies based on mood; is currently Razer Basilisk V3; Basilisk Ultimate for gaming
Keyboard Varies based on mood; currently HyperX Alloy Origins 65
Anyone who calls someone else "poor" based on their preference of PC tech is a loser. My issue is with the whole AMD mind set of "it's not fast now but wait until it's optimized and it will be faster then" of delusional fan boys. This has been the battle cry for AMD fan boys for years now and I've built just as many PCs with AMD (from Athlon 64 to Phenom II X4 and everything in-between) as I have with Intel over the decades. AMD offered good performance for your money in the now but starting with the Phenom II X 6 performance I saw no reason to update from my OC Phenom II X 4 955. Every message board you went to you heard, the X6 performance will be better in Windows 7, just wait and see yet it trailed the higher clock Phenom II x 4 in practically every task. The i5-2500k came out and it was no a brainer to switch to that chip. Then you had bulldozer come out and the AMD fan boy message was just wait and see until Win 7 gets optimized in the next patch and games will start using six core immediately because the new Xbox & PS4 are using AMD jaguar cores. Never Happened. Then Piledriver will fix everything, nope. Windows 8 will fix everything, nope. Windows 10? Nope.

Heh, believe me, there are actually people out there who have that mindset, which, I agree, makes them a douchebag. Totally. And, now that you've explained your reasoning to me, I can understand where you're coming from, even if I don't entirely agree with you. But, to be fair, Windows 8 sucked no matter which CPU was running it, lol. I think 8 had the shortest lifetime out of all the Windows OS thus far. And 8.1 -- now with more Start button! -- wasn't much better. :laugh:

Wow what did I create by asking my question! :D

Lol, don't worry. Just add AMD Vs. Intel to that ever growing list of rivalries and passionate fans.:D
 
Top