Tech Gaming Hardware discussion (& Hardware Sales) thread

[empsim]

it’s posts like these that make hesitant on buying a pc. Wtf does this even mean?

It doesn't really matter, both will run games just fine.

 

[Oreomeister]

I may or may not have ordered an 1151 300 series rig a few days ago and just now, returned the cpu and mobo because this thread made me aware of lga1200 coming out soon.

I am a bit out of the loop. Luckily only two components need to be changed...

 

[560ti]

I am in urgent PC upgrade and to me Intel was always number 1. But seeing AMD sweeping charts for gaming CPU makes me really puzzled.

Any1 knows if Intel works on anything right now to compete with AMD? Or should I just go and buy AMD

AMD compared to modern i5 and i7 has same cores but more threads, better price, but lower clockrates and lower overclockability

All of these things are kinda moot though because 10th gen (which I think is due to come out in June) is lower priced, adding hyperthreading to the i5/i7 line, and will have a decent core clock advantage

But seeing AMD sweeping charts for gaming CPU makes me really puzzled.

It's not really too confusing. Generations have been more spaced out and competetive, 3000 series is competeting against intel 9th gen which came out the end of 2018 so of course it's going to be nicer (especially since intel is behind on nodes). 9th gen was more of a counter to the 2000 series so of course it's not going to fair well against the latest and greatest

10th gen intel in June (possibly late may) will have more attractice price, added hyperthreading, and a good all-core speed advantage along with more overclockability. Give it 6 more months and Ryzen 4000 series will be a more attractive option (see where this is going ?)

 

[My Spot]

Yeah, if you want to throw $500 at a cpu you can get the “best” gaming cpu, the 9900k. Every other price point AMD wins.

Sounds like AMD is for poor people then.

 

[My Spot]

So conflicted right now...I was an AMD guy from the late 90's all the way up until 3 years ago. I went from an AMD Phenom 2 (ran hot as fuck) to an Intel i5 6500, runs cool with stock fan. I don't OC, just never felt comfortable messing with it. I'm mostly a Total War gamer these days so the faster single cores of the Intel CPU made a big difference when gaming since TW games are very CPU intensive.This was my first ever Intel CPU, ironically Ryzen literally had just come out when i bought it.
But now that AMD redeemed themselves i dunno what to do....
Currently i have the i5 6500, GTX 1070 and 16gb ram. 2k 144hz gaming monitor.
I'm gonna wait on the 3080 series of cards as far as GPU. Probably get 32gb ram 2 SSD's, ect. ect.
Money isn't really an issue. I'm looking to spend 2-4k. Already have the solid gaming monitor so that's not part of the money i'd spend.
But i am jaded, get a new 10th Gen Intel or wait for Ryzen 4000...
That's the big question. I'm not a competitive gamer. Really the only games that push my current rig is heavily modded Rome 2, Attila, and in Kingdom Come Deliverance i get huge fps drops in the big battles on Ultra settings. But i have the money and figure it's about time i go all out and treat myself to a pc master race rig.

Go with Intel since you're not poor.

 

[GhostZ06]

Sounds like AMD is for poor people then.

So, you're poor?

 

[My Spot]

So, you're poor?

 

[Drain Bamage]

???

Nothing is wrong, Intel are still the performance kings. Its a premium brand, so if you are going for value buy AMD if you want peak performance buy Intel.

 

[GSP_37]

I won't buy Intel again because their CPU had that thing that'd guess what you wanted next that made it vulnerable to Meltdown/Spectre. I know AMD had some vulnerability too, but at least they weren't affected by one that Intel was.

 

[Woldog]

I won't buy Intel again because their CPU had that thing that'd guess what you wanted next that made it vulnerable to Meltdown/Spectre. I know AMD had some vulnerability too, but at least they weren't affected by one that Intel was.

Do you know anyone who was affected by Meltdown/Spectre lol

 

[jefferz]

I won't buy Intel again because their CPU had that thing that'd guess what you wanted next that made it vulnerable to Meltdown/Spectre. I know AMD had some vulnerability too, but at least they weren't affected by one that Intel was.

Lol good ol AMD fanboys.

 

[bdreason]

I'm still using an Intel i5 2500k. That's 9+ years of consistent gaming.

 

[Woldog]

I don't see why people pick sides. Why not just buy what is the best at the time you are spending the money and the best for what you intend to use it on.

 

[Madmick]

It's not complicated. Right now, for pure gaming, ignoring sales, there are effectively five price points on the market: $400+, $300, $225, $175, $75.

• ($490) i9-9900KF* or ($370) i7-9700KF*
• ($295) R7-3700X
• ($195) i5-9600KF*
• ($175) R5-3600
• ($75) i3-9100F [formerly $85 R5-1600AF, but those are out of stock again]

*requires aftermarket CPU cooler, and a decent one runs $30+

#1 is the epeen option, and hasn't been selling because: (a) these CPUs are barely better than the much cheaper 3700X for pure gaming, (b) on the flipside, for those who also stream or want workstation power, the R9-3950X and R9-3900X are vastly superior choices, (c) while the 9700K holds a pure gaming advantage, it still isn't the true epeen #1 gaming processor, and it lacks the multithreading the already cheaper 3700X carries, (d) they're on a platform everyone already knew was dead.

Intel's Comet Lake i9-10900K is out, and benchmarks in the wild are already starting to surface. Userbenchmark has over 50 samples though it isn't clear how many of these are discrete processors:
https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...0900k-processor-20m-cache-up-to-5-30-ghz.html
https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Intel-Core-i9-10900K/Rating/4071
Core i9-10900K CPU Score Spotted in 3DMark - let's chart that up

Spoiler: Time Spy CPU Score

Everyone expected a really modest gain from the architectural changes, and it looks like Intel is desperate to notch scores that defy this inescapable reality. It's reminiscent of the FX-9xxx series catastrophe. They obviously couldn't maintain an equal per-core performance as the 9900K while expanding to 10 cores with the same thermals:
Intel Core i9-10900K 10 Core Flagship CPU Runs Very Hot & Consumes 235W Power at 4.8 GHz – Over 90C Temps With a 240mm AIO Cooler

Anyone who bought a 9700K or 9900K last year fucked up. Even those who are affluent fucked up.

Because the gamers with more disposable income who more frequently upgrade, and who bought the 3700X with an X570 motherboard, are positioned to update their processor when the Ryzen 4000 series hits without even having to purchase a new motherboard. The way Ryzen has been making monumental leaps in performance with each successive generation, I fear Intel is in for another bad couple of years (like 2019) in the gaming CPU sector. These gamers are also ready to upgrade to a PCIe 4.0 SSD anytime, as soon as they come down in price, and more importantly as soon as they become relevant, which the new consoles might catalyze. The really solid X570 boards also still have tons of RAM speed headroom while the RAM market catches up as these gamers wait on those Ryzen 4000 processors.

Meanwhile, if those gamers had bought a 9900K, they would have been stuck with the option of keeping it, or buying this new 10900K for $488 MSRP all over again, but a also an expensive new LGA 1200 motherboard, and from the looks of it, unless they purchased a monstrous CPU cooler, an upgrade to one of those just to keep the damn i9-10900K from spontaneously combusting, too. If these gamers aren't rocking an RTX 2080 Ti at a minimum then what the hell were they thinking? Opportunity costs.

There's having money, and there's being stupid.

 

[My Spot]

9400F is $140 now. Still the shiznit for gaming.

 

[rob mafia]

9400F is $140 now. Still the shiznit for gaming.

...and the 3300x is/should be $120 and should be roughly as good for gaming and better at most everything else.

they should be out soon. like, this week-ish.

 

[Blayt7hh]

It's not complicated. Right now, for pure gaming, ignoring sales, there are effectively five price points on the market: $400+, $300, $225, $175, $75.

• ($490) i9-9900KF* or ($370) i7-9700KF*
• ($295) R7-3700X
• ($195) i5-9600KF*
• ($175) R5-3600
• ($75) i3-9100F [formerly $85 R5-1600AF, but those are out of stock again]

*requires aftermarket CPU cooler, and a decent one runs $30+

#1 is the epeen option, and hasn't been selling because: (a) these CPUs are barely better than the much cheaper 3700X for pure gaming, (b) on the flipside, for those who also stream or want workstation power, the R9-3950X and R9-3900X are vastly superior choices, (c) while the 9700K holds a pure gaming advantage, it still isn't the true epeen #1 gaming processor, and it lacks the multithreading the already cheaper 3700X carries, (d) they're on a platform everyone already knew was dead.

Intel's Comet Lake i9-10900K is out, and benchmarks in the wild are already starting to surface. Userbenchmark has over 50 samples though it isn't clear how many of these are discrete processors:
https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...0900k-processor-20m-cache-up-to-5-30-ghz.html
https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Intel-Core-i9-10900K/Rating/4071
Core i9-10900K CPU Score Spotted in 3DMark - let's chart that up

Spoiler: Time Spy CPU Score

Everyone expected a really modest gain from the architectural changes, and it looks like Intel is desperate to notch scores that defy this inescapable reality. It's reminiscent of the FX-9xxx series catastrophe. They obviously couldn't maintain an equal per-core performance as the 9900K while expanding to 10 cores with the same thermals:
Intel Core i9-10900K 10 Core Flagship CPU Runs Very Hot & Consumes 235W Power at 4.8 GHz – Over 90C Temps With a 240mm AIO Cooler

Anyone who bought a 9700K or 9900K last year fucked up. Even those who are affluent fucked up.

Because the gamers with more disposable income who more frequently upgrade, and who bought the 3700X with an X570 motherboard, are positioned to update their processor when the Ryzen 4000 series hits without even having to purchase a new motherboard. The way Ryzen has been making monumental leaps in performance with each successive generation, I fear Intel is in for another bad couple of years (like 2019) in the gaming CPU sector. These gamers are also ready to upgrade to a PCIe 4.0 SSD anytime, as soon as they come down in price, and more importantly as soon as they become relevant, which the new consoles might catalyze. The really solid X570 boards also still have tons of RAM speed headroom while the RAM market catches up as these gamers wait on those Ryzen 4000 processors.

Meanwhile, if those gamers had bought a 9900K, they would have been stuck with the option of keeping it, or buying this new 10900K for $488 MSRP all over again, but a also an expensive new LGA 1200 motherboard, and from the looks of it, unless they purchased a monstrous CPU cooler, an upgrade to one of those just to keep the damn i9-10900K from spontaneously combusting, too. If these gamers aren't rocking an RTX 2080 Ti at a minimum then what the hell were they thinking? Opportunity costs.

There's having money, and there's being stupid.

When it comes to gaming rigs the $200 and $300 price points are usually the sweet spot. Those 500 and up chips usually give you little to no return on investment in games. If you are on any kind of budget at all and gaming is pretty much all you plan to use it for, then pumping more money than that into your CPU is a bad way to spend your budget. So it is pretty cool to see AMD taking one of the prime spots from Intel. Intel has been playing some stupid games the last couple years.

Hopefully AMD can do some damage in the GPU market soon as well. Nvidia has been even worse than Intel without competition from AMD. That 2000 series of cards was total garbage. They were selling cards that basically matched the performance of the previous gen. The only card that made any real advancement was the 2080 Ti, and that was being sold at an absolutely ludicrous price.

 

[rob mafia]

When it comes to gaming rigs the $200 and $300 price points are usually the sweet spot. Those 500 and up chips usually give you little to no return on investment in games. If you are on any kind of budget at all and gaming is pretty much all you plan to use it for, then pumping more money than that into your CPU is a bad way to spend your budget. So it is pretty cool to see AMD taking one of the prime spots from Intel. Intel has been playing some stupid games the last couple years.

Hopefully AMD can do some damage in the GPU market soon as well. Nvidia has been even worse than Intel without competition from AMD. That 2000 series of cards was total garbage. They were selling cards that basically matched the performance of the previous gen. The only card that made any real advancement was the 2080 Ti, and that was being sold at an absolutely ludicrous price.

i've always favored nvidia in my builds due to their efficiency (they've always been a solid step or two ahead of amd, obviously), but the rumours around the near future are interesting. just rumours, so no idea, but hearing that 'big navi' might be a real monster... and nvidia was just bitching about their mistake (and late recovery) with tsm and trying to prevent amd from leapfrogging them.



so i don't know if amd will be making significant gains vs nvidia or not, but competition would be nice.

 

[jefferz]

i've always favored nvidia in my builds due to their efficiency (they've always been a solid step or two ahead of amd, obviously), but the rumours around the near future are interesting. just rumours, so no idea, but hearing that 'big navi' might be a real monster... and nvidia was just bitching about their mistake (and late recovery) with tsm and trying to prevent amd from leapfrogging them.



so i don't know if amd will be making significant gains vs nvidia or not, but competition would be nice.

Personally I need to see AMD take some major steps towards improving their drivers on their video cards before I consider buying one again.

 

[rob mafia]

Personally I need to see AMD take some major steps towards improving their drivers on their video cards before I consider buying one again.

yeah, that was a debacle.