Thread has been deleted
Last comment
Ryzen 3000 or intel?
 | 
United States DMcCarthy 
holding my money for ryzen or invest in a classy intel?
2019-06-26 13:36
#2
 | 
Slovakia ypsylonnn 
R
2019-06-26 13:37
#5
 | 
Slovakia VERGlL 
I have ryzen 1600x and im dissapointed by it, low FPS in CS and LOL, now im afraid to buy another AMD
2019-06-26 13:39
How many fps you have?
2019-06-26 13:40
#15
 | 
Ukraine AndriyK 
Disapointed in AMD cpu for gaming ? What a surprise
2019-06-26 13:52
#357
 | 
Netherlands ZoMilan 
Considering the price, yes it's a surprise.. 130€ cpu getting compared to 200€+ i5 a lot.. That obviously brings your expectations up
2019-07-01 09:20
I have a 2600 and I've had 0 issues with fps. It's quite impressive tbh
2019-06-26 13:57
#19
 | 
Slovakia VERGlL 
Well i have heard that newer generations are much better in single core performance
2019-06-26 13:57
#21
 | 
Israel Rea77y 
i have a 1600 and no problems 300 fps all the time in csgo and no frame lag or anything
2019-06-26 15:07
#22
 | 
Pakistan ostraka 
My fps drops under 150 with 1600.
2019-06-26 15:22
#24
 | 
Israel Rea77y 
well thats weird I play on max setting 1080 p 16:9 and never get under 230
2019-06-26 16:15
lol you must have got one in a million cpu because i run 720p all low with a 2600 @ stock and i get much lower fps
2019-06-26 16:47
Do you have a graphics card? That would actually help...
2019-06-26 17:45
gtx 980 ti i get like 160-550 fps shitty graphics card i guess
2019-06-27 08:05
#137
 | 
Latvia Kirbys 
Try cranking everything up, to put more stress on the gpu,
2019-06-27 08:26
Kind of...
2019-06-27 09:16
#298
 | 
France squiggly 
+1
2019-06-28 12:54
Ryzen gpus really benefit from fast ram also insufficient cooling prevents oem boosting from working as intended.
2019-06-28 08:06
more than enough for csgo, i had 100 fps with a 670 like 6 months ago. measure the cpu and gpu heat while playing and act upon it
2019-06-28 09:44
#297
 | 
El Salvador cohesive 
+1
2019-06-28 12:54
activate multicore rendering mens)) and disable anti-aliasing ez 200+ fps (with 1080p all low + medium shadows)
2019-07-03 17:12
i have
2019-07-03 17:12
du brauchst 2 ram sticks, ferstest du?! ram with 3000+ mhz if possible
2019-07-03 17:17
ok thx
2019-07-03 17:20
#358
 | 
Netherlands ZoMilan 
2600 doesn't have integrated graphics, just like 1600
2019-07-01 09:22
Yeah I know that's why I said a graphics card would help...
2019-07-01 10:42
#65
 | 
Israel Rea77y 
I have a gtx 1070 that's why I get the fps
2019-06-26 19:02
I have a gtx 980 ti thats probably why
2019-06-27 08:02
#145
 | 
Israel Rea77y 
it's really strange you should probably check if your card is thermal throttling
2019-06-27 10:23
lmfao 980ti is comparable to a 1070 only like 3% difference
2019-07-01 11:20
What speed is your ram running at?
2019-06-26 23:47
3000 or 3200 but apparently the difference between gtx 980 ti and gtx 1070 is that big.
2019-06-27 08:02
Alright, that must be it then. Unlucky m8
2019-06-27 09:36
The difference between 1070 and 980ti even on very GPU bound games is minimal. In CPU bound game like CSGO there's literally zero difference. Could be that you're more sensitive to low fps and know when to look at the fps counter. youtu.be/iZGDFxTD3bQ Ryzen CPUs clearly don't have the greatest minimum framerates in CSGO.
2019-06-27 18:04
comparison of overclocked intels to stock ryzens (on old x370 mobos) nice try
2019-06-28 08:21
+1 how much did incel pay them lmfao
2019-06-28 11:17
"The difference between 1070 and 980ti even on very GPU bound games is minimal." You have no idea what you're talking about rofl
2019-06-28 14:53
youtu.be/fZPPFVajqvA?t=447 Like I said, minimal difference (on average obviously). Most 980 tis can do about 1400-1500mhz, so there's still plenty of overclocking headroom. Most 1070s boost pretty high at stock, so there's not a whole lot of OC headroom left. My 1070 boosts to about 2025-2050Mhz at stock. Also considering that 980ti has almost 50% more cuda cores (2816 vs 1920), so every 100Mhz of overclock has bigger gain on the 980ti.
2019-06-29 15:32
I run the game on 300 250 fps on a 750 gtx with my i5 8500
2019-06-28 22:13
RAM doesn't affect CS:GO speed that much. I'm running the first iterations of the slowest DDR5 and I still got 350-500 FPS in my setups with the same RAM and even lesser components at one point.
2019-06-27 13:45
Yeah I know this, but the ryzen cpus work way better with dual channel ram on higher speeds.
2019-06-27 16:12
oh i dont have dual channel that might be it?
2019-06-27 19:36
yes
2019-06-28 00:56
#216
 | 
Israel soprendo 
That’s a noob mistake
2019-06-28 07:43
It could be the solution yes
2019-06-28 08:41
This will have a big impact, you're limiting your bandwidth theoretically in half.
2019-07-19 17:45
I got another RAM and they run at 3200 MHz but Im not sure if I see a difference. Should I go higher than 3200?
2019-07-20 08:00
#487
 | 
Brazil Waldemar H. 
stay with 3200 your actually good to go with that
2019-07-20 20:59
Get another DIMM on dat PC and overclock the RAM, Ryzen loves fast memory!
2019-06-28 01:02
Will I risk damaging RAM when overclocking or does the motherboard have some kind of measures to avoid it?
2019-06-28 15:30
#45
 | 
Pakistan ostraka 
I play on 1080 too with everything lowest but MSAA at 4X (turning it off makes no difference). Multicore threading is on. Tried setting cpu affinity etc but nope. I'm really god damn disappointed by my CPU. Sadly I have an a320 chipset motherboard so I can't upgrade to 3rd gen ryzen. I will probably upgrade to intel anyway. My CPU is performing insanely well in cinebench and would be a beast in productivity tasks but since I never do anything to make use of that, I don't see that performance.
2019-06-26 17:07
#50
truth | 
Norway ludvik33 
Why are u playing at 1080?? what's ur rank?
2019-06-26 17:32
What does res have to do with rank? Its personal preference, im global and faceit lvl 8 on 1920x1080.
2019-06-26 21:46
#139
 | 
Asia gabefill 
agree
2019-06-27 09:19
#64
 | 
Israel Rea77y 
I got a 1070 in my build the Cpu isn't bottelneking it....
2019-06-26 19:01
#66
 | 
Pakistan ostraka 
i also got a 1070 yet my fps is utter shit
2019-06-26 19:03
#67
 | 
Israel Rea77y 
you got something fucked with your pc then
2019-06-26 19:10
#68
 | 
Pakistan ostraka 
It's just that cs barely uses my CPU. My CPU usage is only at 30% when playing the game.
2019-06-26 19:12
Maybe use -high in the launch options ?
2019-06-26 19:16
#72
 | 
Pakistan ostraka 
I already do. Also tried without it, no difference. Tried processlasso too with no help. It's just CS that has this problem sadly since intensive AAA games do actually use my cpu more than fkn 30%
2019-06-26 19:17
Mat_queue_mode -2 in launch options
2019-06-27 09:37
Clearly something software related is wrong. Thousands of other gamers with a similar setup are getting way better performance than you
2019-06-28 14:56
#387
 | 
Pakistan ostraka 
Yup but then I play a game like Forza Horizon 4 where my PC actually overperforms over benchmarks I've seen on YouTube. Even on userbenchmark.com, every single one of my parts is performing above average.
2019-07-01 16:20
#217
 | 
Israel soprendo 
Csgo is doesn’t take advantage of multi threads
2019-06-28 07:45
Shit mobo what can you expect :/ ryzen is heavily dependant on dual channel ram and benefits alot from their speed.
2019-06-28 08:08
#255
 | 
Pakistan ostraka 
I do have dual channel ram. Also I didn't know it was my shit motherboard causing 100fps drops. Thanks for that. HLTV amuses me everyday.
2019-06-28 11:03
Again, you clearly are doing something wrong and it is likely software related (bad drivers, OS bloat or malware, memory leak, misconfiguration of system settings, who knows). My setup cost significantly less than yours and I'm getting flawless performance in and out of CSGO. Sucks for you
2019-06-28 14:59
i mean its alot harder to built ryzen pc than a intel one. Cuz if u pick ryzen and want to get better performance then u need to pay attention to ram and speeds, then if motrherboard is tested with ryzen and etc. But still it shouldnt affect like for 100fps drops, even if u pick like low ram rates or single channel it wouldnt even make that much of difference Gl Man
2019-07-19 12:55
#392
 | 
Ukraine AndriyK 
motherboard have nothing to do with fps
2019-07-01 18:58
? Please educate yourself. Try looking up ryzen cpu's performances differing based on ddr and then read on what are the limitations on memory and OC on cheap mobos.
2019-07-02 08:34
#394
 | 
Ukraine AndriyK 
a320 can support up to 3200mhz ram wich is enough for ryzen. If you really think you need 4000mhz ram for ryzen, you should educate yourself. only thing he misses with cheap mobo is no abillity to oc cpu, or turn xmp. but neither is responsible for 100 fps for difference. 1600 is bad cpu for csgo, thats it. whoever says he gets 300 fps with it is liar. even 2600 cant get you 300 stable.
2019-07-02 10:41
3200 is more than enough but still if u pick a ryzen cpu then u should check if the ram is tested with the current motherboard in case u want max performance. "Bad cpu for csgo- 300fps constant" may i ask u why you need 300fps stable ? what doest that change for you ?if its 240 or 300 etc.
2019-07-19 13:01
#313
 | 
India akashp1997 
Who said that you can't use A320 with 3rd Gen Ryzen?
2019-06-28 21:13
#388
 | 
Pakistan ostraka 
I read it in a lot of places a while back. Might not be true but either way I'd want to upgrade my motherboard. Even though I don't plan to overclock, I could always use another m.2 slot etc.
2019-07-01 16:22
I have 1500x and i'm getting 250+ fps.
2019-07-18 16:39
yeah sure fucking liar, i9 9900k cant handle fps 300 all the time with 1080p max settings, amd fan gay ofc
2019-06-26 21:36
#120
 | 
Israel Rea77y 
I said most it's between 230 - 320 all the time on max 1080p
2019-06-26 21:50
dont bullshit me like this retard.
2019-06-26 21:58
#123
 | 
Israel Rea77y 
swear to god on my mom
2019-06-26 23:16
What you on about i got a 9900k and run 400-500 fps on 1440p?
2019-06-27 08:05
#148
 | 
Pakistan ostraka 
he's being sarcastic
2019-06-27 10:29
all the time? dude tarik, fl0m, ropz all of them has 9900k and 2080ti and in some maps it dropped to 220 sth like that, so its not all the time 400-500 5-10% of the time it drop to 220. its very rare actually. im saying he is lying with r5 1600 has stable 300 all the time.
2019-06-27 12:03
I dont really notice the drops tbh, could be that i just dont notice
2019-06-27 22:46
#140
 | 
Denmark MeToxi 
The new 3000 series is supposedly going to overtake Intel at single core performance for a cheaper price. I'm going to wait to a month after release before deciding since I'll have lots of community feedback by then.
2019-06-27 09:25
#20
 | 
Israel Rea77y 
i got a regular 1600 and no problems
2019-06-26 15:06
+111
2019-06-26 17:29
Me too, i have a 1800x which is the same as 1600x for CS, cause its basically the same processor and speed but with 2 more cores. And the FPS is CSGO is just fine.. And i have a GTX 1050 2gb.
2019-06-27 14:26
#191
 | 
Indonesia kitsugi 
+1 i have 2600x and its good
2019-06-27 16:16
What kind of ram kit do you have single or dual? If single, upgrading to dual channel is like buying a new better cpu. That is crazy how dual channel affects the performance.
2019-06-26 16:34
Real Vergil would always go blue
2019-06-26 19:12
#427
 | 
Argentina GREATfr 
Wtf u mean?
2019-07-18 01:14
You can't compare. The new generation that AMD is bringing looks like it will be a winner in every way, price, performance, low power usage and on the same time buying AMD will punish Intel for their spending years milking us all by only bringing upgrades when they absolutely must,
2019-06-26 19:42
+1
2019-06-27 08:22
I have a R5 1600 and gtx 1060, always locked at 250+ fps. I also have 16gb of RAM running at 3200MHz. you must have some setting issues to have fps problems in cs and lol
2019-06-26 19:50
250-300 fps on faceit with OC on 1600 wtf lol
2019-06-27 16:15
#215
 | 
North America noahB_ 
I have ryzen 2600 and my performance in cs is really good, i love it
2019-06-28 07:40
Lol you good? I have 1600 and I'm running around 250-300 on cs on most maps.
2019-06-28 07:55
csgo isnt optimized for ryzen the new ryzen chips has massive improvements in aplications (15% IPC) so the 3000 series could make a comeback in csgo you should really investogate those things on google
2019-06-28 13:05
#323
 | 
Germany 0b1_ 
I have a ryzen 5 2700x and its pretty good
2019-06-29 02:34
Got the 2600x and im more than impressed... AMD is the winner nowadays in value for money. The new series (the ones you are considering) are killers
2019-07-17 09:13
#413
 | 
Slovakia sanjuro 
because first ryzen's were shit in single core performance compared to intel, but now they catch up and are almost equal. Currently i would go for intel only if i would have custom water cooling built in my pc case, otherwise ryzen for sure.
2019-07-17 09:27
#432
 | 
Philippines pepelulz 
just use a 2600x lol
2019-07-18 08:25
How does one get disappointed by hardware? There are literally benchmarks for everything out there. You always know what you get.
2019-07-18 16:27
Go for intel
2019-06-26 13:41
#89
 | 
Iceland fatboislim 
why?
2019-06-26 21:29
much better for games?
2019-06-26 21:44
You were successfully indoctrinated
2019-06-27 08:23
#157
 | 
Iceland fatboislim 
not anymore
2019-06-27 13:36
Wait for third party benchmarks before making any decisions, who knows if AMD pulled off some kind of BS tricks again during their benchmarks. youtu.be/j7UBHjtCXhU?t=1274
2019-06-27 18:12
#353
 | 
Iceland fatboislim 
Yea every marketing campaign should be taken with grain of salt, but this time it looks pretty promising tho. Dont need to wait long now anyway.
2019-07-01 06:44
What?? In what way is it better for games? Stop commenting about something you have no knowledge about.
2019-06-29 14:44
Not anymore... Hes comparing the old AMD cpus with Intel and yes AMD used to suck back then. The new generation from AMD ( Ryzen 7 ) are killers.
2019-07-17 09:14
Intel, obviously. They are dropping their prices by 15%
2019-06-26 13:41
#90
 | 
Iceland fatboislim 
and yet amd brings much better cpu's that cost a lot less.
2019-06-26 21:30
#149
 | 
Finland xore1 
not a lot
2019-06-27 10:31
not yet new gens will kill intel for this year atleast
2019-06-27 10:42
#153
 | 
Finland xore1 
depends on what intel does q3 q4
2019-06-27 10:53
I5 9400F is the answer
2019-06-26 13:42
yes if u want to have a shitty cpu
2019-06-26 16:29
+1 8600k user here btw
2019-06-26 17:36
xDDDD +1
2019-06-26 19:19
You wont get better cpu with 150euro Of course if budget is not limited than some i7 9900k
2019-06-26 23:34
#150
 | 
Finland xore1 
i7 9900k doesnt exist
2019-06-27 10:31
#159
 | 
Denmark sNju 
All the new AMD 7nm CPU's will be better than Intels in single- and multicore performance. Intels only option now is to sell their shit cheap af. Something they're definitely not known for.
2019-06-27 13:43
well and then intel comes up with new shit and amd is back to doglevel again. intel high end amd budget will always be like that.
2019-06-28 01:00
I'll believe it when I see it. Also why are people latching onto their cpu companies like they can do no wrong. Isn't competition better for the consumer as the companies are forced to make better products at more reasonable price?
2019-06-28 08:04
Because intel is like apple for a lot of people, except they actually had better products for most of their lifespan. I'm pretty sure they know this and won't drop their prices, because most plebs will just buy intel because 'it's better'.
2019-06-28 09:16
#321
 | 
Denmark sNju 
Leaks say Intel cutting 15% off prices at AMD launch. Intel will lose a lot of market share nomatter what. They already did with Zen.
2019-06-29 02:14
Intel wont have anything to bring in the next 1.5 years and thats a known fact. Their processes are publicly admittes to have been delayed alot.
2019-06-28 08:13
#320
 | 
Denmark sNju 
Problem is that Intel run their own factory, so they do everything in house. AMD cooperated with TSMC even though they have GlobalFoundries, which is kind of their own factory. So AMD could get their 7nm production under control much faster. Intel is not even close to matching them.
2019-06-29 02:12
It's more to do with AMD opting for smaller chiplet designs connected using infinity fabric vs intel being on the monolithic design.
2019-06-29 14:28
Overclocked R5 2600 >>> i5 9400F yes, in games
2019-06-28 08:02
but if u are a poor boy its necessary to also buy fast ram for ryzen. With 9400f you get away with 2666 ram and get solid gaming performance
2019-07-18 03:27
G.Skill Aegis 3000MHz is cheap and you can OC it to 3200MHz, maybe even more
2019-07-18 14:09
I'm probably going to go 9700K but only since Intel will drop prices and I've already running a 8600K setup with a 9000 series compatible motherboard. If I would had to buy new motherboard I likely would go AMD but I still expect Intel to holdup well in gaming performance on 9700K/9900K but probably such a small difference that it wouldn't be worth going Intel for that reason alone. I'd say go AMD Ryzen 3000 but it would be worth waiting until reviews are out IMO and even if you'd decide to go Intel you'd be able to get like at least 10~15% off than what they are today.
2019-06-26 13:45
going from 8600k to 9600k is waste of money when it comes to gaming. you gain like 10% fps. so if you run 120 now, you gain 12 fps. LOL
2019-06-26 13:48
I said 9700K not 9600K. 9700K also has 2 more cores and 8 cores starts showing improvements already today in some games. Besides my 8600K is a dud overclocker and running it only at disappointing 4.75GHz whereas I'm hoping if I pick up a 9700K I might be able to clock it up to 4.9~5GHz. 10% improvement wouldn't be bad for gaming and those numbers you presented looks sweet in my eyes as this is more a "do want" than "do need" upgrade but I use my CPU also for rendering videos in After Effects on an almost daily basis. I do have a 240Hz BenQ monitor too but I run it most of the time at 144Hz with strobing for better motion smoothness and image quality (240Hz affects contrast and sharpness slightly) and if there's a lot of fps drops that becomes noticeable so a good CPU is also important in my case.
2019-06-26 13:55
His argument still stands its basically a 2 core improvement for 400€ which is completly dumb. If u upgrade at all get something with hyperthreading so you will have 8 cores 16 threads instead of 8 cores 8 threads. Btw your 8600k can probably also clock to 4,9-5ghz
2019-06-26 16:45
#173
 | 
Finland M0nzaa 
He already stated his does around 4,75 Ghz, could probs get more if he delilled, but thats a whole new can of worms with warranty etc :()
2019-06-27 14:03
- No my 8600k cannot clock to 4.9GHz, I already run it at around 1.325 - 1.33v something which is about the max people typically do on highend aircoolers. Temp is fine though as I've got shitload of fans. Some samples does 5GHz at like 1.28v or so, as I said dud overclocker which is also why I want to upgrade. Maybe delidding could let me push it to 4.8GHz at 1.34v or so perhaps but the voltage is already running out of hands, it's not worth it - Actual cores >>>>> virtual threads. You only get a small portion of the performance benefit of virthal thread compared to an actual core in software which can take advantage of additional threads/cores. - I've got 16GB RAM, to have a benefit of more threads I'd need more RAM which I'm not planning to upgrade at this point (I like these nicely clocking Samsung B-die RAM) - Hyperthreading can actually cause negative performance in rare cases, including games, I like to know that I always get maximum performance. - There's a recent Hyperthreading security bug found out that needs patching which does harm performance if so, it only affects HT enabled CPUs (you can turn it off obviously but then what's the point) - The 9700K can be had for 389€ here but there's been announced a 10-15% reduction in price already by Intel (due Ryzen 3000 series) which will take place soon and I won't jump on the 9700K before it can be had for 350€ or less and obviously I'd sell my old 8600K for maybe around 150€ they look to be going second hand which would be a 200€ upgrade.
2019-06-28 13:00
10% FPS increase between 8600k and 9600k ? Refresh btw
2019-06-27 10:28
#23
 | 
United States gingaaCS 
Does anyone know when the intel prices are going to drop?
2019-06-26 15:27
#29
 | 
Moldova a_good_guy 
probably when the new generation will appear
2019-06-26 16:27
Neither. Wait for Ryzen benchmarks and then compare it to Intel after price drop.
2019-06-26 13:44
Ryzen best, intel for golddiggers
2019-06-26 13:45
#151
 | 
Finland xore1 
ruski logic
2019-06-27 10:32
Don't be an incel, go for AMD
2019-06-26 13:49
+1
2019-06-26 17:03
is Ryzen 7 2700X nice? asking for a friend
2019-06-26 13:53
#161
 | 
Denmark sNju 
It's fine, but you'd have to be retarded to buy anything new right now. AMD's 7nm CPU's launching in 2 weeks, and they're showing insane performance, beating Intel in everything.
2019-06-27 13:45
#174
 | 
Finland M0nzaa 
very much true, i would also bet a lot of stores want to get rid of their 2XXX stock once 3XXX comes out and u can probably get the older generation stuff on sale then. So in the 250€ range the pick could be 2700X or 3600X depending on if u want more cores or more single core performance :()
2019-06-27 14:05
thx!
2019-06-27 17:48
#25
 | 
Germany GiiGa88 
ryzen, i hope you are not serious with your intel shit
2019-06-26 16:16
Get the Ryzen
2019-06-26 16:17
+1 Ryzen is fun! HUGE amount of cores and threads for such a low price.. The processor ends up using less power and saves energy, operating at such low usage.
2019-06-27 14:28
Ryzen is great, and I'll probably get a Zen 2 CPU if they're as good as AMD's benchmarks show, but current Ryzen CPUs are less efficient than people think (at least when comparing core-for-core against Intel). techreport.com/r.x/2018_10_19_Intel_s_Co.. gamersnexus.net/images/media/2018/cpus/2.. Zen 2 CPUs tho will overtake Intel in terms of efficiency.
2019-06-27 18:26
Yep.. But my ryzen 1800x, considering multi-core operation, was better cost benefit than any intel processor when i bought it.. I edit a lot of 4k videos that i make during my trips. It so important to have the 16 threads. it's similar performance with i7 9700 but costs 100 dollars less.
2019-06-27 19:39
#27
 | 
Finland whiskey_csgo 
If the benchmarks are correct, AMD is going past Intel on single core performance in 3000-series and the multi core perf is out of the sky of course. Wait for AMD, check the benchmarks and reviews and then do your decision. Now is not a good time to buy hardware
2019-06-26 16:18
Exactly.. I have have a ryzen 1800x and im happy with it, but i`m so in love with the ryzen 3000 series that im considering changing the processor to a ryzen 3000 series cause it's a real tech advance, cause its having more performance with less power (TDP) at every new gen. Intel was basically growing up the GHZ and calling it NEW.
2019-06-27 14:33
I7-8700K the best Intel Processor in normal price boiiiii.
2019-06-26 16:22
If your life is only CS maybe.
2019-06-27 14:33
Not only. I have it with GTX 1080 Ti and i play games like ETS2, ATS, GTA V, GTA SA, GRID 2, NFS, Portal 1/2, Battle Royal games and some other, so? Is this CS only? Also I make some work on it tho.
2019-06-27 15:24
yeah, but this is more like single-core performance relation, the i7 gets more fps but at the same time the i7 has more cpu usage, very equivalent to it's performance. And costs around 140 dollars more. 8700k is an awesome processor for games and also for work, but the cost-benefit is not there.
2019-06-27 19:44
#30
 | 
Russia GutturalSlug 
intel for games ryzon for work
2019-06-26 16:27
Intel for games, Ryzen for everything*
2019-06-26 17:46
#76
 | 
Russia GutturalSlug 
hahaha nice j0ke bruh
2019-06-26 19:29
#94
 | 
Iceland fatboislim 
Ryzen 3000 for everything*
2019-06-26 21:34
Exactly.
2019-06-27 14:33
Ryzen 5 2600 is beast
2019-07-18 01:17
#163
 | 
Denmark sNju 
Ryzen 3000 series will be the best for everything. Single- and multicore performance. Intel looks absolutely destroyed.
2019-06-27 13:45
intel
2019-06-26 16:29
#33
 | 
Bulgaria NeonAssasin 
ryzen
2019-06-26 16:31
#34
 | 
Indonesia mrowkpio 
SHINTEL IN 2K19 OMEGALUL
2019-06-26 16:32
#35
 | 
United States jay_320 
I'm getting ready to get a new motherboard and CPU as well. I'm waiting for benchmarks. Some leaked benchmarks seem to indicate that AMD is going to pass Intel in single threaded performance. Some like the recently leaked Cinebench scores indicate that AMD core for core is a better multi-threaded performer but then loses in single threaded score. The thing is whether I buy a 3900x or a 9900k I'm going to overclock either to hell and back.. That's going to make a pretty large difference. If they have similar IPC and the 9900k does 5.1ghz on pretty much any chip but the 3900x is capped at like 4.6 or 4.7 on even golden chips then Intel will still be the better gaming platform. In my own use case I would still choose the 12 core model just for PCI 4.0 and a future GPU/SSD upgrade down the line. However someone who just wants the best of the best in terms of single threaded performance (I.E. your 1280x960 CSGO player) the 9900k/eighth generation Intel chips are going to be better.
2019-06-26 16:33
#43
 | 
United States jay_320 
So was this done on ambient cooling? Because Zen and Zen+ don't indicate that clock speeds like this are possible. Will wait for reviews. As should everyone else. Also Skylake isn't Intel's fastest arch and isn't that relevant to someone who's main use case is gaming. If AMD is within 5-10% single threaded overclocked on ambient then I will happily buy the 12 core and put it under water on that Gigabyte Master board.
2019-06-26 17:01
#167
 | 
Denmark sNju 
There's not a single unbiased expert saying Intel anymore. Literally everyone agrees that Ryzen 3000 series looks like it will be an absolute Intel-killer. Ps. how is anything done on ambient cooling? Either that can be understood as no cooler at all, or every single cooler in the world without something like an A/C pumping cold air straight into the intake fans.
2019-06-27 13:48
#185
 | 
United States jay_320 
Actually I've seen no proof that AMD has won the single threaded title clock for clock. I hope they do. Ambient Cooling is water cooling or air cooling. I.E. Above ambient. If you can hit 5.2hz on 16 cores all core on ambient temps then they have a killer chip and probably will beat Intel. Non-Ambient cooling is LN2 or dry ice. Or Phase Change. Or something as simple as a water chiller. Which brings me to an entirely different point. If 5.2ghz all core is LN2 numbers then it's not that impressive. If it's chiller numbers then it's pretty decent.
2019-06-27 15:28
#186
 | 
Denmark sNju 
There's plenty of official benchmarks out from AMD, that clearly shows that they are doing amazing in single threaded stuff aswell. And remember last time Intel fucked up with playing dirty in their official benchmarks, AMD would NEVER do anything to risk ruining their Zen 2 launch. They've been below Intel for over a decade, and have literally no reason to try and cheat their way to making their benchmarks look better than they actually are. I assumed you knew that everything that is out officially right now, is done on AMD stock coolers, and as far as I remember, the Intel comparisons were done on a 120mm AIO. Makes no sense for anyone to post LN2 numbers, when there's not even a BIOS or X570 boards out yet. That's why it made no freakin sense to call it "on ambient". Literally not a single person in the world uses "non-ambient" cooling for anything other than posting numbers. So why even talk about it?
2019-06-27 16:01
#192
 | 
United States jay_320 
I don't trust AMD numbers or Intel numbers. You are a silly person if you do. Pre-release cinebench or geekbench runs like the one listed above are OFTEN done on non-ambient cooling and if you've been part of the hardware community for longer then a year you'd know that. There are plenty of Engineering samples out in the wild. Buildzoid has been doing X570 VRM analysis for a month now. The 16 core isn't launching for six months where you think the guy who did this run got the chip??? lol wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-16-core-5-2ghz-cp.. Spawned the entire conversation dude. You people have got to be more skeptical or Intel, Nvidia and AMD are going to keep screwing you. 9900k reigns supreme as the overpriced chip of choice for gamers until independent verification on AIO/Air proves otherwise. Overclocked. For me anyway. You can buy or pre-order whatever you want. But you are insane if you pre-order hardware. Another set of engineering samples for you to persure. Does not beat coffee lake single threaded. But it's close enough I'd buy the 12 core. If it's true. wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-5-3600-zen-2-7nm-..
2019-06-27 16:32
#193
 | 
Denmark sNju 
You've always been able to trust AMD or Intel numbers, and they've always been true, but obviously showing stuff that favors their own chips. Like Intel using optimized games, AMD using Vulcan games etc. And the one time one of the companies tried manipulating the test results by not giving both sides equal parts, it was a fucking outrage in the hardware community. Longer than a year? I assembled my first PC from scratch in '99 i think, when the first Athlon was released. Been an enthusiast since. I have plenty of knowledge, and probably spent more hours on hardware than 99% of people out there. If you look closely, I said official reviews. So I don't know why you talk about a leaked chip. And it's been confirmed that X570 won't add much (if any) performance, compared to current chipsets. But there's no official BIOS out that would support the Zen 2 stuff, so why even look at leaked stuff? AMD's top chip beats the 9900K for under half the price. You think Intels alleged 15% price drop or AMD not being honest in their benchmarks would change that? Again, AMD has nothing to lose by showing lower numbers than Intel. They even showed that with the first two Ryzen CPU's.
2019-06-27 16:40
#194
 | 
United States jay_320 
I think AMD is going to obviously be shaking up PC hardware with Zen 2. Even more then they already have with Zen 1 and Zen +. Do I think they will take the single threaded crown? Actually no I don't. Which is all I was really saying when someone posted 5.2ghz numbers against skylake-x. Which for CSGO specifically means Intel will be the better chip in terms of raw FPS at low resolution. For me and I assume for you however if they can get to with 5% clock for clock and overclock to similar levels then a higher core count AMD CPU is clearly the better buy. However with the corresponding motherboard price increases AMD is clearly going to take advantage of their increased standing. In other words I don't think this is going to be a 64FX/2500k type of chip that completely changes the game. I think it's going to be good maybe even great set of tech. Just don't think we're going to see a change in the way we look at and buy hardware. Part of that is there's just not much innovation left in silicon. At 7nm there's not even that many die shrinks left. And Intel as much as they've had issues shrinking to 10nm has a much denser chip so they'll likely regain the crown when 10nm gets up and running. So good potentially great chip. Not 2500k/64FX/P3 etc etc etc
2019-06-27 16:58
Go for Zen 2.Dont buy intel products till they get their shit together.
2019-06-26 16:50
zen 2 (ryzen 3000) for sure. better tech, better price/performance, probably better raw performance as well running a 2700x in my system, at the time the 8700k was available for the same price but i decided to go with amd because i can upgrade to the ryzen 3000 series without changing mainboards. 3600 is beats my 2700x easily so i'm very excited to see amd's upcoming top model perform. will i upgrade tho? no. running csgo on 2,560 x 1,440, highest smoke and texture settings, 16x texture filtering at more than 200 fps AT ALL TIMES, mostly between 250 and 300 fps. shitting on 4:3 low res nerds
2019-06-26 16:54
Still running a r7 1700 and waiting for ryzen 3k
2019-06-27 17:53
wait for r5 3600
2019-06-26 17:26
#52
kennyS | 
United States n0xx_cs 
ryzen all day
2019-06-26 17:37
Intel dropping prices but wait for ryzen 5 3600 release it's a monster
2019-06-26 17:39
New AMD's, thats a nobrainer. For oc watch the 3700x.
2019-06-26 17:44
#55
 | 
United Kingdom trtr098 
Wait for Ryzen 3000 to hit the shelves If the memory latency turns out to be not so bad then 3950X if it can overclock to 4.8GHz all core otherwise 9900KS especially with 10% price cut rumoured
2019-06-26 17:42
#57
Twistzz | 
Poland 984620 
>intel >classy y e e t
2019-06-26 17:46
If I were you I'd go for a Ryzen processor. Ik will outperform Intel easily and upgradeability is great.
2019-06-26 17:46
Lmfao, go for Ryzen 3000, easy choice. Don't go over brand, check the benchmarks and other stuff before buying stuff like that, moreover Intel has dropped the ball in various departments, whereas AMD has been getting better and better.
2019-06-26 17:49
All current desktop Intel CPUs are probably going to turn into pumpkin after 7 July.
2019-06-26 17:50
The 3900x stock has already been shown to give more fps in csgo than the 9900K on stock. We dont know how much can the 3900x oc or how many fps does the 3950x give in csgo , we have to wait. If you're asking on HLTV chances are that CS is the main game you play so obviously Ryzen. At the end of the day though , the 9900K will still give more FPS in most AAA titles of 2019 , before it was 90% of the titles , now it'd probably be more like...55-60% of the titles.
2019-06-26 17:57
Please point to the benchmarks that you base those claims on. We will all know on 7/7, but until then it seems suspect what you're saying.
2019-06-26 19:46
2019-06-26 19:50
Thx. Interesting. Nor much between these two, in fact of the benchmarks shown the biggest gap is with CS:GO where the AMD looks like 6-7% ahead only that is then 429 FPS so I'd say both are plenty fast. I myself is also looking for what is to happen over the summer and early fall, if the numbers do come out like suggested and prices as well then the AMD will be my choice. It will be basically same performance in games as Intel, possibly better performance in multi core, using less power=less noise and the price will be lower. And then there is the whole safety aspect, where if one does patch Windows with to block those Intel hardware safety issues then Intel is suddenly like 3-9% slower or maybe more. techcrunch.com/2019/05/14/zombieload-fla.. Regardless of who comes out on top, it is great that finally there is some real competition going on as it will lower prices and a faster rate of development. Intel has been milking us all for years and it is time that is stopped.
2019-06-26 21:24
I think the most compelling aspect of the Zen2's is that the next gen consoles will be built on them , so the 8 cores will be actually put to work this time around , remember 8th gen is Bulldozer FX based which aren't real octa cores , they're 8 modules of half a core each basically , and with amd having 12 physical real cores with 24 threads and all the ipc improvements at the 500$ mark, i honestly think that the 3900x is the best deal in cpus since the 2500K , i think the 3800x is a terrible deal but the worst deal of all in cpus is probably the 9700k even though the 9900k is overpriced af. There is a big size difference between AMD , Nvidia and Intel , AMD and Nvidia have a size difference like lets say , a lion to a Tiger , but both amd and nvidia compared to Intel have a size difference like ant to elephant , intel is huuuugeeee , i think they will release dedicated gpu's before fixing the prices in their cpus.
2019-06-27 01:47
#170
 | 
Denmark sNju 
Intel already failed once in the dedicated GPU space. They're probably not even close to an actual product that can compete. i.redd.it/oc2hsxckqxw21.png Look how much the first Ryzen launch actually changed the market share. And with Ryzen 2, they not only have a good budget product, but an actual superior product in every single market segment. Even AMD's laptop CPU's looks like they're going to be amazing. And they will be able to really dominate the laptop segment with a solid 7nm CPU/GPU laptop. Things are looking really bad for Intel, and really good for consumers. I think we will see big price battles and increased investments into developing new products and especially optimizing games from all 3 brands. Great time for us consumers!
2019-06-27 13:57
The big question is if x86 CPU's are gonna be around for long. Not saying it will happen tomorrow, but there is a shift going on that sees thing move towards ARM and on the same time less and less PC's are being sold. Still right about now is great, finally Intel have again real competition and when the world realizes that Intel is no longer the only "choice" then it can only mean more performance per $ and faster improvements. And we might see the same with GPU's, it may be that before long AMD brings something that sets a new standard in not only efficiency but also in outright performance,
2019-06-27 17:54
#209
 | 
Denmark sNju 
Nothing indicates that this is happening, or will happen soon. Both console and PC sales went up the last +5 years. The last few years have seen a huge increase in required performance from PC's, both because of VR and raytracing. If anything will threaten PC's it will be Project xCloud and Stadia, and others like it. But that's not really threatening hardware sales, just moving them elsewhere.
2019-06-27 23:37
PC sales is much more than gaming. The rate of replacement on office PC's and really non-gaming/non-workstation PC's is slowing down, many private people are moving from laptops to tablets only those aren't replaced as often either. Not sure where you have those numbers saying PC sales has been going up? statista.com/statistics/272595/global-sh..
2019-06-28 00:51
#322
 | 
Denmark sNju 
My bad, I meant gaming PC sales went up. Are we talking about gaming or your parents using Word a few times each month? Gaming right? google.com/amp/s/www.techspot.com/amp/ne.. google.com/amp/s/amp.tweaktown.com/%3fur.. google.com/amp/s/www.pcworld.com/article..
2019-06-29 02:30
Well the subject started out being CPU's. And the same ones are used in all the computers, it is just different variants at times, like at work my machine may have a Xeon CPU and the laptop a mobile version of a Core i7, but they are both just variants of what is in my gaming PC. So the total PC sale matters, not just gaming PC's - the PC world article you linked even talks about gaming and business PC's and that then really only leaves out non-gaming home PC's and special purpose ones.
2019-06-29 03:10
#328
 | 
Denmark sNju 
Majority of the CPU's mentioned in this thread has been primarily for gaming. AMD even markets most of their new Ryzen chips as Gaming CPU's. It's not like you buy an X or K model for 99% of Business PC's.
2019-06-29 03:33
if u have money, ofc intel
2019-06-26 18:00
Not really so straight forward.
2019-06-26 21:25
Intel architecture better gor gaming, its obviously
2019-06-26 21:32
#82 Was better seems more correct. Now it is even in single core only with Intel costing more and AMD likely better in multi-core.
2019-06-26 21:36
#100
 | 
Iceland fatboislim 
not anymore
2019-06-26 21:38
lol 7nm Ryzen can't beat Intel 14nm in games, just w8 tests and u will see :)
2019-06-26 21:41
#158
 | 
Iceland fatboislim 
even intel is worried, the trash talk says it all. but we don't have to wait for long, it's only a week now.
2019-06-27 13:39
I know what I will buy if AMD is on par with Intel, with lower prices, lower power usage and better multi.core performance. The fast Intel chips are crazy expensive for what they bring, not sure I get why anyone is cheering for Intel.
2019-06-27 17:57
#228
 | 
World ZMDR 
it'll be close enough to make it negligible and the price will be a LOT cheaper
2019-06-28 09:08
you cant compare nm anymore, intel and amd dont report actual node size anymore, its just a marketing number.
2019-06-28 12:05
#70
 | 
Germany istheGOAT 
amd bestet
2019-06-26 19:13
for CS GO probably Intel, higher Max Clockspeed, higher Single Core Performance
2019-06-26 19:20
Lots looks like AMD will take that crown or get very very close for half the price or less.
2019-06-26 19:45
thats what ppl said with ryzen 1 and it wasnt true at all and they said it with ryzen 2 and again intel had better price performance on i5 models unless you were willing to settle for a non overclockable low clock speed ryzen model that you would probably need to replace very soon. why should that suddenly change
2019-06-28 12:05
Because with Ryzen 3 AMD has moved to a more advanced chip production methods than Intel is capable of, it means chips that are cheaper to produce and more efficient electrically both things that help AMD match/surpass Intel. Unless Intel pulls something out of a hat then Intel is stuck having to make their CPU's less efficiently and in a way that makes for greater electric resistance meaning more heat, so as opposed to many previous launches from AMD it is not like Intel can just pull out their next version from storage and launch something that steals AMD's thunder. Look at how Intel is making an overclocking tool available, that is their only move to try and cling on to the title only since when is chip factories measuring them self on overclocking. downloadcenter.intel.com/download/24075/.. The AMD chips are released on the 7/7 except for the fasted one announced which I think is set for September, so soon we will see tests and reviews everywhere and then we will see what is what.
2019-06-28 18:05
amd nm doesnt equal intel nm and both are using node size as a marketing tool now, reporting arbitrary measurements that get the numbers they want instead of actual node size. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_nanometer This article needs attention from an expert on the subject. The specific problem is: 7 nm Samsung/TSMC is equivalent to 10 nm Intel thus treating in different articles is marketing and not a real difference. amd probably wont be more electrically efficient than intel at the same clock speed, they simply lack the budget. and if they could afford to do that, you wouldnt be able to buy their cpus because they would be more expensive than intel. what they can do and have been doing is clocking their cpus lower to save power.
2019-06-28 21:20
intel isnt stuck making less efficient cpus, their "14nm" process is currently more efficient than their "10nm" process which is equivalent to TSMC (AMD) "7nm". if their "10nm" was better, they would move to that node. but none of those numbers are actually true. they just copied the made up numbers from 10 years old roadmaps. whenever there are simple numbers that tell you some useful information, marketing assholes will twist it for short term profit, eroding trust in the whole sector. amd admitting they cant actually produce 7nm would lead to a dip in their stock value. if they just pretend that they are on 7nm it keeps going up. btw quantum tunneling effects start to apply at and under 10nm, just to give you an idea of how impossible those numbers currently are. a chip with actual 10 or 7nm gates would randomly error multiple times every second due to quantum effects.
2019-06-28 21:20
#102
 | 
Iceland fatboislim 
no
2019-06-26 21:39
Ryzen
2019-06-26 19:20
Wait for the reviews on the AMD CPU's, they will come July 7th and lots points to them being faster than Intel, loads cheaper, use less power and with motherboards that are ahead in tech as well.
2019-06-26 19:44
Ryzen.
2019-06-26 19:48
I'd say Ryzen 5 3600 would be the cheapest choice that likely will get you more that i5 9400F. X570 motherboards are overpriced as fuck, so you will need to go for some crap like Asus X470-Pro.
2019-06-26 21:26
#237
 | 
World ZMDR 
even cheap b450 boards can easily handle an overclocked 3600, its a very efficient chip
2019-06-28 09:19
By "handle" I personally mean "function with no VRM overheat so the motherboard will work several years without burning to ashes". And you mean only that it can run it, for how long - you don't care, and if you're ready to buy a new motherboard every year or two it's ok then, but since you're going for a cheap one I highly doubt you have the money to spend that often. I want things to work years, you just want them work, that's the difference. If you want your motherboard to OC 3600 to its max frequency possible and you expect the games you play may load it to 100% you want to buy a motherboard with a good enough power system, for 6/12 OC under 100% load you want something like X470-Pro, for 8/16 OC under 100% load you want X470 Taichi. But if you're 100% sure none of your games will EVER load your overclocked CPU to its full potential - sure buy whatever motherboard, but once there's such a game and you overclock your CPU - your cheap motherboard will start dying under high VRM temperatures.
2019-06-28 09:32
#242
 | 
World ZMDR 
There are B450 boards with vrms and mosfets that can handle even a 2700X, which consumes a lot more power than a 3600. Obviously by cheap I don't mean a terrible board with no heatsink an awful vrm setup. I mean something cheap but decent like the MSI B450 Gaming Plus. I do want them to work for years. Check AHOC YT channel he's done quite a few VRM analysis videos on B450 boards. Some are awful (gigabyte boards) and some are quite good. But even those awful boards can be salvaged by having constant airflow over the vrms.
2019-06-28 10:14
blind ryzen fanboys xDDD
2019-06-26 21:26
#104
 | 
Iceland fatboislim 
and you are?
2019-06-26 21:39
Nothing? This ryzen hype is so retarded, because every time amd shows that they have 0.000001% better single threaded /multi threaded performance every fanboy goes nuts, and at the end they fail miserably and still can't surpass intel which is still recycling the same shit since 1990 and even in this way beating AMD with every generation
2019-06-26 22:12
#156
 | 
Iceland fatboislim 
the hype has allways been with price/perfrormance for amd. this time the hype is around amd going ahead and keeping low prices.
2019-06-27 13:35
#183
 | 
World DygL 
hes a peanut brain don't mind him
2019-06-27 15:24
you are either baiting or just retarded
2019-07-01 11:56
#88
Hobbit | 
Poland N1cc0 
Intel better for games 2Head
2019-06-26 21:26
ofc ryzen best choice for price-quality,but if u have money buy Intel, coz its better for gaming
2019-06-26 21:34
#98
 | 
Brazil Mirekz 
OP is talking about the new ryzen, the new ryzen will have the same or even better single thread performance than the intel current gen.
2019-06-26 21:38
w8 for tests, and im sure 7nm Ryzen will lose to Intel 14nm in games.
2019-06-26 21:39
#106
 | 
Brazil Mirekz 
nah, zen 2 is goin to have better IPC, i think that ryzen's will be better until intel release their new 10nm cpus, and that's coming from an "intel fanboy" the only AMD CPU that i ever had was a phenom and it was an age ago.
2019-06-26 21:43
in my pc AMD processor man, im not a intel fan. Intel for max FPS man.
2019-06-26 21:44
#114
 | 
Brazil Mirekz 
dude, that's true for the current generation, but the new ryzens will have way better single core performance than the current 2xxx ryzen
2019-06-26 21:45
we will see
2019-06-26 21:46
#118
 | 
Brazil Mirekz 
yea dude goin from 12nm to 7nm is a big deal
2019-06-26 21:47
#97
 | 
Brazil Mirekz 
i'm waiting to get the 3700x, i have a 7700k on my desktop and a 7700hq on my laptop and i have problems with temperature with both. imo you should get the new ryzen and a mobo that comes with the PCIE 4.0 so you're future proof and you can also get the new 4.0 ssds that gonna have a speed of 5000 mbs.
2019-06-26 21:37
#236
 | 
World ZMDR 
you're not gonna say that when you see the price of those new motherboards.... pcie 3 is good enough for another couple of years if you run single gpus. just go x470/b450 + ryzen
2019-06-28 09:18
if u play 144hz ryzen can do the job, but if want to play on 240hz monitor, intel is the answer.
2019-06-26 21:38
All I can tell you is that I bought an i7 9700KF 1 month ago and have it combined with a gtx 1060. I get 450-600 fps on faceit 5vs5 1024 all low, and on the fps benchmark map i get 485 fps average. Do with your money what you want, but if you buy your pc mainly for csgo go for intel.
2019-06-26 21:41
did u overclocked? what mobo u have?
2019-06-26 21:45
Asus ROG Z390-F with Corsair hydro series h100x cooler. And no i haven't overclocked it yet, it has a turbo boost to 4.9ghz so oc'ing it is kinda unnecessary imo
2019-06-26 21:47
hmm nice
2019-06-26 21:47
LOL i7 + GTX 1060 to play in 1024 on low
2019-07-03 17:10
yeah i will upgrade to a rtx 2070 later this year
2019-07-03 17:14
why get i7 and 2070 to play on all low and 1024?
2019-07-03 20:20
because i play other games aswell
2019-07-03 20:20
#107
 | 
United Kingdom c0n_ 
Intel you noob
2019-06-26 21:43
I'd rather AMD Ryzen.
2019-06-26 21:43
#113
 | 
Brazil chococaine 
team red
2019-06-26 21:45
Ryzen 3900x
2019-06-26 23:16
Regardless of specs optimization for Intel is still here to at least 2020, for gaming I would still go for intel to squeeze every possible FPS from GPU
2019-06-26 23:36
Intel better for games. AMD in 2019 cant get 7700k.
2019-06-27 08:09
#229
 | 
World ZMDR 
7700K is not nearly as smooth as ryzen in modern AAA games. 4 cores just doesn't cut it. 8700K is definitely better though (for now).
2019-06-28 09:17
I'll buy the 3600. Should be enough to be a heavy upgrade from by i5-3450 xD
2019-06-27 08:22
#141
 | 
Bulgaria zikinu 
Ryzen is wrecking the competition now. Get a ryzen.
2019-06-27 09:31
#142
 | 
Sweden Bakkmann 
Ryzzzzen
2019-06-27 09:34
would wait till september to buy the Ryzen 9 3950X then
2019-06-27 10:27
#155
 | 
Brazil cadik 
AMD OMEGALUL
2019-06-27 12:06
#160
 | 
Finland M0nzaa 
Get the 3700X or the 3600X, since u already have an AM4 motherboard the upgrade is ez pz, the single core IPC uplift with the new architecture is 15% compared to 2XXX ryzens, they even had CS GO fps as +33% gain in their demo at computex :()
2019-06-27 13:43
hahahaha delusional AMD fanboys. Expecting something revolutionary on the same 3 yo chipset LMAO. It will the same as Ryzen 1 the so called 'intel killer' .... right haha
2019-06-27 13:46
#168
 | 
Finland M0nzaa 
im completely sane, im not saying it will beat an overclocked 9900K, but theres already leaked benchmarks showing the final product matching the 9XXX intels in single core synthetics. I switched back over to intel when the sandy bridge stuff came out back in 2011 and switched back to amd with the 2600X, and i do gotta say not having to switch out ur motherboard for every new gen launch is a nice to have :()
2019-06-27 13:53
leaked benchmarks = manipulated benchmarks that amd leaked on purpose.
2019-06-28 12:01
yea like additional ONE pin will change anything like intel did just to force people buy new motherboards.
2019-06-28 09:02
them only adding 1 pin in total doesnt mean that the functions of all the other pins have not been changed intel changed much more than 1 pin between 1155 and 1156. coincidentally the total number of pins stayed almost the same.
2019-06-28 12:03
There were situations when intel forced users to move from ddr3 to ddr4 then some chineese motherboards could work with ddr3 and new processor. AMD can hold sockets way longer. So there is suspicion that intel make new sockets to milk more money.
2019-06-28 14:19
of course they are milking it for money, thats what a market leader does.
2019-06-28 14:50
#232
 | 
World ZMDR 
wait and see :) i don't see them completely beating intel but they'll only be 2-5% behind, which is nothing. Especially when they're half price.
2019-06-28 09:15
most ryzen models are more expensive than their intel counterparts.
2019-06-28 12:03
#290
 | 
World ZMDR 
Only the locked Intel parts are cheaper, at least in AUS and the US, and even those are only $10 cheaper and lack SMT/HT. Their K models on the other hand are ridiculously overpriced.
2019-06-28 12:35
CPU Overclocking in 2019 has to be one of the most overrated things out there. Decent cooler + intel Turbo boost 2.0 is sufficient for modern gaming
2019-06-29 14:32
#338
 | 
World ZMDR 
CPU overclocking is a quick and easy way of getting free performance. Assuming you don't use a stupid amount of voltage there is no negative for doing so. Its useful if you play CPU intensive games like CSGO or do content creation.
2019-06-29 15:13
Intel sheep talking about delusional LOL
2019-07-03 17:12
fuck you NA brain. I already thanked AMD for Intel progress, but facts speak for themselves. Intel remains the best fps pusher for stupid good Graphics Cards
2019-07-03 21:00
Intel only. AMD is for poor people.
2019-06-27 13:46
#233
 | 
World ZMDR 
AMD only. Intel is for poor people.
2019-06-28 09:16
#166
 | 
Europe Instabait 
As always ryzen looks good in syntetic benchmark, but probably in avarge game intel will be better.
2019-06-27 13:47
negative
2019-06-28 09:06
#234
 | 
World ZMDR 
the difference will be negligible, especially when you consider price
2019-06-28 09:16
#253
 | 
Europe Instabait 
In CSGO difference might be noticeable ass fuck ... and dont say about fps difference ... more like some intternal lag or micro stuttering wich was prove already in the past with AMD CPU ... But you can continue to be naive that you can cheat the system and but better for cheaper or same price ... Anyway good luck mens.
2019-06-28 11:01
#257
 | 
World ZMDR 
According to Zen 2 benchmarks seen so far AMD is actually faster in CSGO... but we will have to see in 1 week. And no, there was never any prove of lag or micro stuttering. I have both Intel and AMD systems and both play the same.
2019-06-28 11:03
#316
 | 
Europe Instabait 
It was, but not noticeable for silvers and glod novas.
2019-06-28 22:09
#331
 | 
World ZMDR 
There is no difference whether you're silver 1 or lvl 10 faceit. 0.1% and 1% lows are the same, so is the total input latency of the system. Ryzen as an architecture has higher latency than intel's ringbus but that does not add input lag, instead it results in less avg fps. That has been (supposedly) addressed in Ryzen 3000 by doubling the L3 cache.
2019-06-29 12:01
#332
 | 
Europe Instabait 
Its it fun to be always in oposit site?
2019-06-29 12:09
#339
 | 
World ZMDR 
Is it fun to not be able to construct a proper sentence?
2019-06-29 15:14
#348
 | 
Europe Instabait 
Not really ... but still better than deffending ryzen :D [;
2019-06-30 17:28
#355
 | 
World ZMDR 
Defend whatever is the better product. I wouldn't defend AMD's "high end" GPUs for example they are garbage.
2019-07-01 09:13
Intel is the best ever man
2019-06-27 13:56
ryzen
2019-06-27 13:58
Just wait for the benchmarks.. I don't think amd is gonna rek intel with their extra cores and lower clocks, but I'm happy to be wrong.
2019-06-27 14:01
intel said that their 14++++++++++ is better than 10nm intel on paper. any i5 overclocked will destroy amd lineup in gaming.
2019-06-27 14:28
any i5 ? ahhaha do you really know , what you talking about actually ?
2019-06-27 14:36
have you got any proof that any amd cpu can get more fps than an overclocked i5 8600k in CS no, you dont
2019-06-28 10:13
#231
 | 
World ZMDR 
in csgo yes, but modern AAA games stutter on 6 threads.
2019-06-28 09:13
no, they dont they stutter on 4, but only the really high end games.
2019-06-28 10:14
#244
 | 
World ZMDR 
Nope check Gamers Nexus' review of the 8600K. He explains it with frame time charts.
2019-06-28 10:14
ehhh, amd fanboy
2019-06-28 10:15
#246
 | 
World ZMDR 
nope, fanboying a business is retarded. i speak for value.
2019-06-28 10:16
#247
 | 
World ZMDR 
and analyze the facts presented in that video before resorting to name calling
2019-06-28 10:16
i wont believe him, no matter what he says. games arent optimized for more than 6 cores.
2019-06-28 10:20
#249
 | 
World ZMDR 
"i wont believe no matter what he says" So you're admitting that you're just closed minded and stubborn. Some are optimized for 4, some for 6 and recently for 8+. Obviously 80% of games will still run fine on a 6 core, but quite a few AAA games won't. Like BFV and FC5. The 8700K doesn't have this problem because it has hyperthreading.
2019-06-28 10:25
im not stubborn. its a fact that 6 cores are enough. this amd fanboy is just bullshitting because he is getting paid the bucks.
2019-06-28 10:33
#254
 | 
World ZMDR 
Its not a fact, its false. Also its hilarious because GN was recently bashed for being an Intel/Nvidia fanboy after he called out AMD for misleading marketing. Hes far from an AMD fanboy.
2019-06-28 11:02
i tell you this. an i5 at 4.5-4.8ghz is more than good enough for gaming. yes, you can buy dogshit 6c/12t 2600x and have more threads, but its still a lot worse. the only good example you gave me was bf with 64 players, but people who play this have usually high end pc with i7.
2019-06-28 11:05
#262
 | 
World ZMDR 
I gave you bf and far cry, and im sure theres plenty more. I don't recommend 2600x, i recommend you spend more for 8700k. non-hyperthreaded cpus are a short lived flop.
2019-06-28 11:06
so, where is your argument? any i5 is good enough for most people and i7 for high end users. where is amd? it has no place in gaming.
2019-06-28 11:08
#266
 | 
World ZMDR 
It has a place in the budget segment where the 9600k is still significantly more expensive than 2600 and is not worth the premium as its not a future proof product thanks to not having HT. By the end of next week it'll have a place in every segment with Zen 2.
2019-06-28 11:11
i5 8400 is better than 2600
2019-06-28 11:11
#268
 | 
World ZMDR 
out of the box slightly yes, overclocked no. and this is ignoring the new games that use more than 6 threads
2019-06-28 11:14
shit overclock with amd cpus. wont get it anywhere over 3.9. the i5 has better ipc and the other 6 threads dont make a difference.
2019-06-28 11:15
#307
 | 
World ZMDR 
You really have no clue do you. My 2600 can reach 4.2ghz on its tiny stock cooler, but I keep it at 4.15 for lower temps in summer. With decent cooling you can hold 4.3ghz. Yes, the i5 has better ipc but no, the other 6 threads do make a difference in some games.
2019-06-28 15:15
hyperthreading isnt really useful in most games though, only gives big % increase in benchmarks and workstation operations and some games that are specifically optimized for it. intel and amd have different hardware and software implementations for multi thread on single core so game devs usually optimize for 1 of the 2 and not both if they bother at all.
2019-06-28 12:00
#308
 | 
World ZMDR 
Hyperthreading doesn't seem to have much of an effect on 8+ core CPUs, but on 6 cores they iron out micro stutters in some of the latest AAA games. Of course, the majority of games will run fine but there are games that benefit from the added thread count.
2019-06-28 15:18
#184
 | 
Ukraine ksay 
wait for new Ryzen ffs if benchmarks are true then it will shit all over Intel for it's price don't listen to incel fangays
2019-06-27 15:27
intels are always better for csgo
2019-06-27 16:02
#189
 | 
Brazil HotScarlet 
go for a ryzen
2019-06-27 16:14
#201
 | 
Brazil vhoks 
AMD > Shintel That's the truth atm unless for whomever has heaps of money to get an 9900K and spend another shitton of money on a custom cooling system for it. But whomever is set on getting an Ryzen 5 3600/3600X should get an B450 ASAP because after the launch date they will all sold out in a blink of an eye and the B550 will be released month after, while the X570 will be pricy as fuck.
2019-06-27 18:18
intel i5 has better price performance than every ryzen except 1 or 2 models and they are only more efficient in massively parallell benchmarks that do not resemble how inefficient most multi core implementations are youre looking at intels high end for which the pricing is supposed to not make sense. just like with apple phones, ppl want to pay 1000+ for a cpu just so they can have one that poor people cannot afford. for them higher price is not a downside, its a bonus.
2019-06-28 11:58
#310
 | 
Brazil vhoks 
LMFAO are you really going as far as saying that Intel is better for budget gaming at 2019, when Intel is having severe shortages on their CPU production lines and causing it's prices to inflate? i5 has better price performance my ass dude. Yes, Ryzen 1000 and 2000 have worse single-core, but they hold their own fine on games, while still having a lot of room for using many other applications at the same time, while i5 does not which I wouldn't say is worth for 10 FPS more, at most, while over 60 FPS already. And parallel processing is not just productivity stuff like blender and OBS, DX12 and Vulkan have a lot of multicore tools and with AMD taking over both the desktop CPU and console market, the tendency is for single-core influence over games to decrease from now on. I'm a AMD fan man, but don't get me wrong, I like my money even more and hope that Intel gets it's shit together quick because Zen2 will WRECK the Coffee Lake lineup.
2019-06-28 17:50
what do you do on your pc that can actually use 8 or 16 cores? im a programmer. we have servers at work for heavy duty stuff. i dont need more than 4 cores at home. i would love to live in a world where more cores = better for home and garden use but i dont think i do. maybe in 10, 20 years.
2019-06-28 21:11
#330
 | 
Brazil vhoks 
You must have never seen yet Battlefield V and video encoding benchmarks (streaming) then... it's been 2 years since Ryzen 1000's release and there's already mainstream demands that are fully using 8C/16C, and there's gonna be more of then quickly. And of course more than 8 cores for mainstream is a luxury, until Zen2 it's HEDT and server exclusive.
2019-06-29 03:59
how many people stream? not a lot. i dont. and bf5 is trash
2019-06-29 13:28
#346
 | 
Brazil vhoks 
Not that many stream, but nowadays almost any ppl can get started without knowing that shit-ton of technical configurations involved on video encoding and transmission, so of course the hardware market will embrace streamers that are looking to make money with high quality transmissions, as it's already doing. By the way, nobody cares if you don't like BFV or don't stream, lol. You're free to stick with Intel and your habits and preferences, its your life. Just don't say bullshit like "Intel is still better than AMD in 2019" and cite your consumer profile like it defines what's good or not and then expect to have your opinion respected.
2019-06-29 20:59
unless you do specifically one of those 2 things you mentioned, Intel is better. What you mentioned is literally the ONLY use case where ryzen makes sense. BF5 is the only game ive heard ppl mention that actually uses 8 cores. name 1 more game besides BF5 that can use that many cores. preferably one thats actually original and fun to play. that has not been made by EA, Ubisoft, or Activision. their games are literally all trash. blatant cashgrabs. instead of buying a ryzen and BF5, you can not buy BF5 and get an intel cpu. you can have more fun, by staring at a fucking wall, instead of playing BF5. and also you will get a better cpu for less money, all at the same time! win win situation.
2019-06-30 11:23
#349
 | 
Brazil vhoks 
Dude, we're talking about CPUs, whether a game is good or not and you don't do this and that, both things have absolutely nothing to do with the conversation. If a game sells, that what matters for AMD and Intel. AMD raised the bar on core count and cache amount, and Intel followed through because developers quickly embraced these resources. Ryzen is better at streaming and SOME games, but also at cryptography, blender. The only thing Intel are uncontested better at are Adobe software, because their closed-source codes gimp AMD, yet their licenses are expensive af. You don't even realize that indie developers hardly make multi-threaded games because they're usually too simple, and when not, there's the lack the developers and budget to do so. But you still insist on me to cite multi-threaded indie games for the sake of your argument that Intel is better than Ryzen and things will continue this way. Alienware's co-founder is now Chief Gaming Officer for AMD, but noooooo wayy superappelflap is mistaken, right? You're either being delusional or a liar.
2019-06-30 17:41
you cant name another game that uses 8 cores. its okay. i cant either. as soon as they do come out intel will start selling 8 core cpus for a decent enough price. right about when the next generation of consoles come out. in a couple years. alienware is one of the trashiest companies that ever existed. selling crap that is more overpriced and overdesigned than apple. they are PC retailers trying to pretend that they can stick GPUs in PCIE slots better than other manufacturers. i mean come on. the only thing they do themselves is design the cases. im not sure what your point is there. if anything, amd hiring someone that worked for alienware is fucking embarrassing. those ppl only know marketing and nothing else. are you like 15 years old? didnt your parents teach you advertising is bullshit? amd didnt raise the bar, they can barely keep up with intel. which makes sense because intel has like 10x the R&D budget. they are doing well considering the circumstances. but i still cant recommend their products to anyone who is building a pc for gaming. intel is better for less money. youre either a moron who likes alienware for some reason, or i triggered you pretty badly. i'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume the latter. and btw "Chief Gaming Officer" just sounds sad. as if thats a real job title lmao. i could make up a better one.
2019-06-30 21:38
#352
 | 
Brazil vhoks 
"Intel is better for less money"... LOL of course you triggered me saying nonsensical bullshit like this. Intel has JUST announced they're dropping pricing on their desk CPU's to compete with Zen2 , lmfao. And no, Intel is doing AWFULLY considering they're stuck on Skylake archtecture for 4 YEARS even though they were at the time leading by miles away and they still have more employees on a single development team than AMD has of total workforce. I9 9900K is indeed a monster but costs and heats just as an LGA2066, it can't make most of it's 5Ghz performance without a high-end cooling system at a controlled room temperature, while a stock 2700X games fine with it's out-of-the-box cooler. Go search opinions of any trustworthy hardware reviewer what they say about AMD vs Intel for budget gaming in 2019, NO ONE will recommend Intel over Ryzen, just say it has a little better cost per performance at some games. I agree too that Alienware is fancy overpriced stuff, but it's companies like then that create trends which fuels the gamer market and generates revenue for AMD and Intel to improve their products. This debate here is the best marketing we, simpleton nerds who just sit in front of the pc minding their own business, can do and we're just looking like morons for the average gamer, including everyone else that are reading this. Say what you think and feel, but what I'm bringing up are just facts shaped by the perception of hundreds of millions of people and the technical situation of the desktop CPU market. And now that DX12 and Vulkan will be the norm and multi-threading being the future, Intel's situation is grim with IceLake looking to be mobile exclusive. And yes, I can name games that efficiently use 6 cores and over. I just thought you were smart enough to do your own search because you're no novice on this topic, but since you said yourself you can't do it, here it goes: Shadow of the Tomb Raider, TC The Division 2, AC Odyssey, Hitman 2, yada yada yada The list goes on and will go increase fast with new-gen consoles equipped with Ryzen+Na'Vi APUs. And before you bring up the excuse "Intel has 6 cores CPU's too", they charge a LOT more for double the threads and overclocking, while AMD offers it all starting from the 2600 up to the 2700X ALONG with a decent out-of-the-box cooler. A budget gamer can pay for a R5 1600 to play CPU bounded games, but not for a i7. The same goes for whomever is short on money and still wants good performance on multi-threading, yet you say AMD didn't raise the bar on the market with Ryzen. You work with IT and techie stuff, but this doesn't make you better than anyone at this matter if you don't get your ideas straight. Go search for better info sources or read news with an open mind instead of detracting stuff and people you don't like or don't agree with just for the sake of your own ego.
2019-06-30 22:58
it doesnt matter what amd offers when their single core performance is too bad and their clock speeds are too low on cheap models, and their expensive models cost more than intels at the same clock speed. its just more expensive my advice for budget gaming is: dont fucking buy a gaming pc on a small budget. save more money and buy a good pc that will last a long time. i have had amd cpus. they all had to be replaced after 2-3 years. i have an intel cpu now from 2011 that still runs new games. amd is more expensive. reviewers, by the way, are literally getting paid to bullshit you. working in IT is exactly why i am better at this stuff. its my job. im telling you how it is. you can listen to me or not, i dont care, im not your father. its not my money youre wasting on shit hardware.
2019-07-01 09:35
#371
 | 
Poland Marvelm 
Dude, as much as I always agreed with you on the cheating in pro scene, you're talking a lot of bullshit in this thread. Games are not just CSGO that uses 1 or 2 cores and only cares about clocks. With Ryzen 3 IPC which should be very much comparable to Intels, more than likely there are a better choice than Intel on every pricepoint except maybe the 9900k, which is hard to beat. 3600 will most likely beat any Intel chip @200$ (unless you care about whether you have 490 or 510 FPS in a CSGO benchmark), Ryzen already was way better than Intel at 1% min FPS and it will only get better, not to mention Intels shitty policies and security problems that might even get worse in the future.
2019-07-01 11:12
IPC of ryzen is comparable but cheap models have low clock speed and the expensive ones are more expensive than intel i5
2019-07-01 16:16
#390
 | 
Brazil vhoks 
Do you even realize that what you're blatantly lying or purely delusional saying that Intel's high-end is less expensive than AMD's high-end? A search on any shop speaks for itself, numbers simply don't lie, unlike you. No wonder Intel is lowering their prices, albeit too late as Zen2 comes in this Sunday. By the way, of course most Ryzen have lower frequencies than it's Intel Core counterparts as a tradeoff to having more cores and threads while making up in IPC accounting all threads, otherwise they would be a fucking furnace known as i9 9900K. Also, they're all overclockable unlike the Core Ks that cost around 20% more than non-Ks. You even came up with the elitist excuse of "don't buy a PC to play games if you're not wealthy to buy Intel's overpriced shit", while most of the desktop CPU sales comes from entry and mid-range ones destined for whomever can't buy a high-end rig even if they save money, or simply don't need one. I don't even have to say anything more because you're already making a fool of yourself on your moronic IT work pedestal, which I think it's pretty funny lol.
2019-07-01 18:02
to get the same single core performance as an i5 with ryzen, you need to spend more money. same goes for i7. single core performance is still very important. multi core performance on >4 cores is not that important yet. i hope it will be in a few years, then i will have a reason to buy a new cpu.
2019-07-01 18:43
has better price performance???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? delusional for i5 you can buy ryzen 7.....
2019-07-18 16:37
exactly, the i5 is way better
2019-07-18 19:45
Ryzen 3600 >I7 9900K
2019-06-27 19:46
Wait for INDEPENDENT BENCHMARKS IN GAMES YOU PLAY and then make a choice based off those numbers and the price-points. The mark should mean nothing unless you have a motherboard that already supports a cpu you want.
2019-06-28 00:59
#230
 | 
World ZMDR 
1) Wait for 7th of July 2) Watch benchmarks 3) Decide Ryzen or Intel with an open mind (for what you want to do) I personally will go Ryzen as I'm tired of Intel's price gouging. They're finally doing a price cut of 15% and thats proof of how much they've ripped you off.
2019-06-28 09:12
just wait until they stop disabling hyperthreading for no reason on 99% of their product line, now thats a fucking ripoff.
2019-06-28 11:55
#239
 | 
Brazil PedroZNL 
For games, Intel over AMD ever
2019-06-28 09:36
#250
 | 
World ZMDR 
for now, not forever.
2019-06-28 10:27
#256
 | 
Pakistan ostraka 
It's been true ever since Core 2 Duos came out.
2019-06-28 11:03
#260
 | 
World ZMDR 
yeah im not denying that. but the athlon64 days will be back with zen2.
2019-06-28 11:05
#261
 | 
Pakistan ostraka 
I hope so. My Ryzen 1600 is really due for an upgrade.
2019-06-28 11:06
buy intel i5 9600K or i7 9700K with good cooler (small closed loop water or scythe mugen) overclock to at least 4.5ghz turn off multi core processing in csgo options profit
2019-06-28 11:04
#263
 | 
World ZMDR 
turn off???
2019-06-28 11:07
yes, multi core processing adds input lag, and worst of all, an inconsistent amount of input lag, that depends on which core is rendering the frame on which you click. instead of implementing proper multi core, valve were really lazy and programmed it like this: 1. game receives info for the next tick 2. game interpolates an amount of steps in between the current and next tick equal to amount of cores that it is using 3. each core renders a different frame based on this interpolated data. the later frames will thus be based on old data without taking into account the input you give during these interpolated steps 4. these frames are put on screen sequentially 5. input you give during the tick is only shown on the first frame after the start of the next tick, when new interped data is rendered, which could be on the next frame, max. 3 frames later on 4 core cpu, or max. 7 frames later if you have an 8 core cpu with multi core off, rendering path is shorter: 1. game receives info for a tick 2. game starts rendering a frame on single core based on this tick which is displayed when it is done 3. if the next tick hasnt been received yet, only now the game interpolates data for a frame in between ticks. (for example on 128tick if you have 256fps you will get one interpolated frame in between every tick) 3. input is processed before the first frame based on the next tick is rendered. basically its the difference between having asynchronous and synchronous rendering. single core doesnt remove all input lag. you can still have an interpolated frame where data you input may not have been processed yet. but it is consistent that you will have an amount of these interped frames in between ticks dependent on your framerate. with multi core enabled every time you shoot you have to get lucky RNG that you click just before the next key frame is rendered, instead of clicking just after, when you have to wait through multiple interped frames just to get to the next tick. input lag on average is higher, and the variance in input lag is also higher. it just makes the game run worse while artificially inflating your fps counter.
2019-06-28 11:30
oh and this last issue with interped frames and input lag on single core could be completely removed by valve by changing one line of code to set tickrate at something at least as high as the fps that one could get on a good pc, like 512 or 1024 tick, but they are more interested in casuals who only run the game at 40fps than the actual diehard fans so that wont happen. whereas on multi core, no matter how high you set the tickrate, with this implementation, you will always have interpolated frames based on old data and your input will be delayed until the next key frame.
2019-06-28 11:52
however to run csgo on one core in 2019 you need like a consistent 4.5ghz or higher, preferably 5ghz. i am on 4.2ghz and my fps drops too low sometimes to the point where i know im missing shots because of the framedrop. when there are multiple enemies on screen and everyone is shooting and grenades are going off. still beats having huge input lag though. multi core rendering off and cl_forcepreload 0 massively reduce input lag.
2019-06-28 11:54
#291
 | 
World ZMDR 
whats the story behind cl_forcepreload 0? I've heard mixed views about using 0 or 1.
2019-06-28 12:38
oc to 4.5 ghz?????? u know 9600k turbo boost is 4.7 ghz and 9700k turbo boost is 4.9 ghz. thats completely downgrade
2019-06-28 11:07
that turbo boost is on 1 core, and it turns off if cpu gets hot. you have to turn off all turbo, speedstep, etc, and then you can manually overclock to at least 4.5 on all cores. for only 1 core you can probably go higher, but youll need to figure out which of your cores is the best one and figure out how to make sure cs runs on that core. easier to just OC them all.
2019-06-28 11:13
dude u know nothing about overclocking here you go : 9700k at stock mode : all cores are 4.6 ghz 1 core turbo goes 4.9ghz. i mean really go watch some videos in youtube, so going to 4.5ghz is not overclock thats downclock.
2019-06-28 12:49
1151 socket • Octa (8) core @ 3,6GHz-4,9GHz
2019-06-28 12:52
you need to turn off turbo boost and speedstep to make sure that that cpu doesnt randomly decide it has some empty cpu cycles and can clock back to save power and then OC to the normal all core boost freq which isssss....drumroll please.....about 4.5ghz
2019-06-28 12:54
yes u should turn off mce and adjust voltages and frequency manually, and with i7 9700k u can ezily hit 4.9 ghz all cores ezily ( even 5ghz is ez) more than that depends on silicon lottery.
2019-06-28 12:57
yeah if you can go higher with higher voltage its nice but its not guaranteed. if you have a bad chip you might not get far over the all core boost.
2019-06-28 13:03
#273
 | 
Europe 777x 
bold opinion: intel <-> apple amd <-> samsung
2019-06-28 11:24
Samsung is like Apple of android phones. So that means Intel = AMD?
2019-06-28 11:55
#279
 | 
Bulgaria vanrad11 
haha no
2019-06-28 11:56
#281
 | 
Europe 777x 
0/8
2019-06-28 11:56
with the exception that samsung consistently makes objectively the best flag ship smartphones and apple doesn't.
2019-07-01 12:14
#278
 | 
Bulgaria vanrad11 
Intel is the best and will still the best forever. AMD are good for 1st one year. After that they are shit.
2019-06-28 11:56
#292
 | 
World ZMDR 
Funny you say that. People that bought the i5 7600K back in 2017 are running modern games like crap while 1600X owners run em like butter ( youtube.com/watch?v=97sDKvMHd8c).) Intel will always have less longevity until they stop selling low thread count CPUs.
2019-06-28 12:41
+1 intel fanboys are so retarded and have no clue about anything lmao they would always buy overpriced 14nm cpus
2019-06-29 02:45
Buy mac pro
2019-06-28 22:30
#324
 | 
Sweden st4rkiNNgo 
what the hell are you guys talking .... csgo runs even on a i5 trash pc... important is the 144hz monitor... with my i7 7700k with watercooler iam raping everyone in every country...
2019-06-29 02:40
wow watchout, we have a rapist here
2019-06-29 15:32
no one is asking how silver are you, the guy just need an advice for upgrade
2019-06-29 15:33
flag checks out
2019-07-01 17:03
14nm in 2019 xD^^
2019-06-29 02:42
Ryzen 3000, just because Intel is really vulnerable and overpriced. Pick the new ryzen 5 3600 6/12 and u will never buy a new CPU in a looooong time.
2019-06-29 03:48
#333
 | 
Norway snik1 
hold ur money for R3.
2019-06-29 12:18
AMD Is shit and overheats
2019-06-29 15:33
#344
 | 
Denmark Ulver 
Intel if you care about supporting a monopoly with lots of security holes in their architecture and a weak multicore performance. As well as a shady business tactic such as threatening reviewers and manufacturers if they support AMD. "anandtech.com/Show/Index/3203?cPage=2&al.. AMD sues Intel by Anand Lal Shimpi on June 28, 2005 2:03 PM EST (...)here are a couple of other things that I've seen personally: I can't even begin to count the number of times where motherboard manufacturers have told me that they could not: 1) Send an AMD motherboard for review 2) Promote an AMD motherboard 3) Let us take pictures of an AMD motherboard Out of fear of Intel retaliation. Remember the original Athlon days when no motherboard manufacturer would dare make a board for the K7? All of the frightened manufacturers were afraid of them losing their Intel chipset allocation if they supported the K7. The same sort of stuff happened during the i820 days. Intel's first RDRAM based chipset was a complete flop, yet they offered no real SDRAM alternative. VIA did however, and Intel punished those manufacturers who didn't promote their i820 platforms or who too eagerly embraced VIA's solutions. The list goes on and on. " AdoredTV has videos on this topic as well: youtube.com/watch?v=3V8pEsjNa4Q youtube.com/watch?v=-Zp_iXYl4IQ As for security holes, I think the ZombieLoad attack is scary as fuck.
2019-06-29 15:52
Always Intel, amd is trash
2019-06-29 15:47
#351
 | 
Spain ez4Crusher 
Ryzen 3000, no security issues wich causes drop to performance when the fixes are applied, and if the benchmarks are true seems that in performance it's very equal to Intel.
2019-06-30 21:34
#354
gfi | 
United States DiabIo 
Intel sinking ship LUL
2019-07-01 06:48
Go for ryzen im i5-8600k user btw, expensive shit with only 6 threads in 2019 omegalul
2019-07-01 09:20
but better any 274749hreads ryzen crap. six super fast cores are better.
2019-07-01 10:44
Nah it’s not better, with my gtx1070 in some new games my cpu is loaded on 90-100%, it will be such a bottleneck in 1-2 years
2019-07-01 11:00
never heard of this.
2019-07-01 11:02
#367
 | 
Poland Marvelm 
Cause you're uneducated obviously.
2019-07-01 11:03
your pc sucks :)
2019-07-01 11:05
#372
 | 
Poland Marvelm 
Are you fuckin 12? I've read your posts in this thread, you're either a 12 year old or a massive intel fuckin fanboy with claps on your eyes. You don't even know what I have in my PC so how would you know it sucks?
2019-07-01 11:14
i know that an unlocked 6 core intel cpu doesnt bottleneck a 1070 in any game except bf. 5 iq kid. flag checks out.
2019-07-01 11:15
#374
 | 
Poland Marvelm 
Says the guy who literally just said he didn't listen to the best PC reviewer that currently exists in GN. You obviously only ever played CSGO and also every review that says Intel performs worse in anything you will blindly say it's shit, gotcha. Oh, and 'flag checks out', cool kid. Keep asking mommy to buy you Intel, no worries. Signed up 2019-06-14, like I said, 12 year old.
2019-07-01 11:18
intel doesnt perform worse tho, :) go on amd fanboy. yOu neEd 16 tHrEaDs fOr gAmInG. intel has the better architecture even without 10nm. just because poor consumers hero amd throws out shit threads for low cost doesnt make them good or the threads any useful. go buy your 12 threads or 16 threads and run that crap at 40% usage.:)
2019-07-01 11:23
#377
 | 
Poland Marvelm 
Who said you need 16 threads? There are literally dozens of benchmarks out there already with 3600/3600x with shitty RAM outperforming Intel counterparts at single-core performance, which is basicly the only thing Intel had on their side. Are these fake too? Seems like every review on the Internet is fake for you unless it says Intel wins.
2019-07-01 11:24
yes, fake :)
2019-07-01 11:25
#379
 | 
Poland Marvelm 
yes, you're a fuckin imbecile /thread
2019-07-01 11:26
you are a fu king retard. amd wont ever beat the high end intel cpus. i9 9900k still sdestroys anything amd produces :)
2019-07-01 11:29
#381
 | 
Poland Marvelm 
Who said they would beat 9900k in games? I didn't, still possible 9900k remains unbeatable which doesn't matter one bit when their every other processor at every pricepoint gets blown out. You literally said AMD produces stuff for low cost and now you bring the high end into the conversation just to score a point? Losing the arguments, aren't we?
2019-07-01 11:31
my point is amd wins by threads and price. if you would read closely you would see it. i said intel has the best architecture and i will keep buying it because i rather have i5 8600k than 12 ryzen trash threads.
2019-07-01 11:33
#383
 | 
Poland Marvelm 
You literally only call them trash cause you're scared your precious Intel will lose, there is no other reason to call something else trash other than fear. You're a fuckin 12 year old fanboy kid, nothing else, pathetic scum. Every other intelligent person on the planet will wait for reviews, see what is best and buy that, but no, "MY INCEL IS THE BEST, FUCK AMD FOR EXISTING". Jesus, if only the world wouldn't be filled with idiots like you, it would be a better place.
2019-07-01 11:35
#416
 | 
Brazil Vitor_IS 
then his point of u being retarded is correct lol cuz u'd be paying MORE to have: -less performance in games -more cpu usage (80%~100% while playing games) -MUCH worse performance in multi task (and any other thing). -u'd have to buy a cooler cuz the cpu doesn't come with one -6 less threads it makes NO sense
2019-07-17 09:50
cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html what an interesting cpu for 200$ that beats i9 in single core performance (important for games)? :D
2019-07-03 16:51
not going to waste my time with you
2019-07-03 17:03
men((
2019-07-03 17:52
alway intel they have a brand for a reason
2019-07-01 10:43
I'd keep waiting until launch and first reviews and independend benchmarks are out. I'd love to switch to and Ryzen setup, but currently I'd just wait it out and chill my nuggets.
2019-07-01 11:10
#407
 | 
Palestine Baitor69 
Ryzen the best men)))
2019-07-03 20:26
ryzen 9 3900x is officialy the best CPU for csgo youtube.com/watch?v=CGQY9yJqfMs
2019-07-17 09:09
I used this tool when i bought my cpu cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core.. Its a comparison between 3700x and the so much popular 8700k from intel.
2019-07-17 09:23
#414
 | 
Brazil Vitor_IS 
3rd gen ryzen is better than intel in csgo and in a lot of games, the ryzens even beat intel's processors + the ryzens are much better in any other thing besides gaming, like multitask, etc i'd recommend u buying a ryzen 5 3600 (if aren't going to spend that much on the cpu).. it has 6/12 and it's great for gaming (around the same performance as the i7 8700k) and multitask, for 200$ but if u have a ton of money, go for a ryzen 7 3700x or 3800x (or maybe even the r9 3900x.. idk) u'll be so much happier with the new ryzens than u'd with intel u can even watch some benchmarks on yt if u want
2019-07-17 09:35
shut up favela, ryzen dont beat intel in gaming, only in price, even stock intel kicks amd's ass.
2019-07-17 14:29
lul i have ryzen 5 2600 and run cs with 300 fps in every map also all adobe softwares easy peazy
2019-07-17 14:33
so what??? still cant beat intel in gaming.
2019-07-17 14:58
#421
NiKo | 
Finland RichKid 
If you use DC and Chrome at the same time then Ryzen wins.
2019-07-17 21:53
3rd Gen Ryzen beats intel in CS:GO ;)
2019-07-18 08:34
#456
 | 
Poland Franpol1080 
+1 Can confirm that as I have 5 3600
2019-07-19 12:29
#422
 | 
Brazil Vitor_IS 
"favela" lmao, ok u retarded european (and also inter fanboy LOL) u are way too autistic and dumb to read what i wrote there, so: "and in a lot of games, the ryzens even beat intel's processors" in a lot of games (csgo for example), not ALL games. u can simply look at some benchmarks if u're not that much mentally restricted besides gaming, the ryzens are MUCH better than the intel's processors in EVERY single way: value, performance, multi task, single and multi thread, etc. nowadays, if u buy an intel processor thinking that it'll perform better than an amd one, u're just retarded, cuz u'll only get around %5~%9 more fps in some games, other than that, u'll be fucked lol
2019-07-17 23:21
expected from favela 1iq brain, in 95% games, stock 9700k beat 3700x go watch some videos then come talk here fuckign retard, when u overclock intel nothing can beat it, yeah so stfu.
2019-07-17 23:32
#424
 | 
Brazil Vitor_IS 
omfg u actually have autism i even said this: "in a lot of games (csgo for example), not ALL games" n o t a l l g a m e s u fucking retarded fanboy amd can EASILY beat intel in ANY other thing that's not gaming, even overclocked. again, look at benchmarks fucking 0iq autistic european with no education
2019-07-18 01:04
lot of games means above 90% then u are not correct so stfu.
2019-07-18 08:23
#434
 | 
Brazil Vitor_IS 
here we have the king of interpretation dude, seriously, u're clearly wrong, so just shut up
2019-07-18 10:16
New Ryzens still haven't dethroned Intel in single thread performance.
2019-07-18 01:08
#429
 | 
Brazil Vitor_IS 
cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html they're bascially tied
2019-07-18 03:22
fuck the benchmarks go watch some gaming vidoes in youtube where intel stock performance kill AMD in gaming, all youtubers said only good price/perf cpu is r5 3600 other than that, they all lose to intel. nice evidence btw cpubenchmark lmao, expected from favella.
2019-07-18 16:27
I got R7 2700X, works great with everything i play, tho its a bit overkill for gaming only. If u only game with ur pc, i recommend R5 3600. For multitasking/editing/streaming u should buy R7 3700(X)
2019-07-17 09:43
PFFFT... 3900X will full send it.
2019-07-17 14:30
#426
 | 
Kazakhstan dc7 
nearly every game only uses a single core so buy a cpu based on single core performance if you're using your computer for gaming all the extra cores and threads is typically them trying to appeal to streamers, but ideally you should be using a capture card to do this most smoothly
2019-07-18 01:13
You are right. Buy a 8700k instead of a 3600. They perform the same and 3600 is cheaper
2019-07-18 12:19
And the 3600 is cheaper cause it comes with a cooler unlike the 8700k
2019-07-18 12:19
#455
 | 
Poland Franpol1080 
+1 I have 5 3600, it runs like a fucking terminator 500 fps in csgo
2019-07-19 12:28
Nearly every game only uses a single core? are you living in 2004? Most games utilize between 4 and 8 cores nowadays.
2019-07-19 10:03
More important than that is how many threads games are starting to demand to keep the minimum framerate closer to the average , BF V is prime example , that game WANTS 12 threads or your dips will be annoying af even on a 9700K , an 8700K will get slightly less fps but gameplay will feel smoother.
2019-07-19 11:06
buy ryzen 5
2019-07-18 16:30
9900k is still superior for gaming.
2019-07-19 11:10
Not for CS:GO ;)
2019-07-19 11:55
Ive seen a video on youtube where all Cpu's where clocked at 4GHz and Intel Cpu was still faster, then consider that Intel cpu's can clock 5GHz and beyond where as Amd one's cant get beyond 4,3 GHz and you get a clear winner...
2019-07-19 11:58
#472
NiKo | 
Finland RichKid 
3rd gen Ryzen is different tho.
2019-07-19 17:42
ryzen good but not for csgo
2019-07-19 12:16
even r5 3600x average fps in low settings is 480, 250$ cpu
2019-07-19 12:21
#454
 | 
Poland Franpol1080 
lol what? I have Ryzen 5 3600 for $200 and I have 500fps in a 5v5 matches XD
2019-07-19 12:27
3rd Gen Ryzen beats Intel in CS:GO ;)
2019-07-19 12:35
only xeons 14+ cores
2019-07-19 12:22
90% of the market is intel for a reason, 99% of video games are made for nvidia and intel, don't let spergs on here talk you into buying AMD lol
2019-07-19 12:24
if u have money, ofc go intel (l5-9600k,8700k,9700k), but need to overclock it! If u have small budget, go for ryzen!
2019-07-19 12:25
The 9600k is just wasted money, the R5 3600 is just as fast in games but stomps the intel in applications while beeing cheaper, even if you overclock the 9600k. Also the 9600k only has 6 Threads and already has much worse frametimes in some games compared to a 12 Thread cpu.
2019-07-19 12:54
LUL if u overclock 9600k to 5ghz it will be x2 much better then 3600
2019-07-19 13:29
i had an i5 8600k @5.2 GHz and it still produced worse frametimes compared to my R5 2600 in some games and wasnt much faster in applications. Considering that the R5 3600 is much faster than my R5 2600 it doesnt look good for the i5.
2019-07-19 13:41
what's your memory? and GPU?
2019-07-19 14:13
i ran the 8600k with 4133 16-16-16-28-1T RAM, the R5 2600 with 3533 14-15-14-37-2T, both with a GTX 980 Ti @1530/2100 MHz (roundabout GTX 1080 FE performance) on an Acer Predator XB252Q.
2019-07-19 16:23
I3-8100 , gtx 1060 3GB here - 16:9 1920x or 1600x with low details 200-260fps
2019-07-19 12:40
amd = android intel = IOS always go for IOS no matter what
2019-07-19 12:40
PC Expert here: Ryzen 3000 is good, but its expensive because of the Mainboards which cost minimum 200$ for shit ones. You dont save any money going for Ryzen. On the other Hand Intel still #1 for a Gaming CPU because of the higher Clock Speed. Im not a Intel Fanboi, i have bought lots of AMD GPUs. But if you dont render Videos or want to Stream with the same PC with 1080 or 720/60 its not necessary to have 8 or 10 cores
2019-07-19 12:44
nice PC Expert you are. -Zen2 also runs without problems on B350/B450/X370/X470 Boards, you dont have to buy X570, you only have to ask your vendor for a BIOS Update (some boards even have BIOS flashback) -200$ X570 Boards are not shit, watch buildzoids video -compared to Intels 9th Gen Zen2 is faster in CS:GO and only 5-6% slower in other Games -high clockspeed != high performance, you should know that as a "PC Expert" -higher clockspeed of Intel is not the reason for their higher gamingperformance -why should you buy a cpu with less cores for the same price?
2019-07-19 12:55
#471
NiKo | 
Finland RichKid 
Hahah rekt
2019-07-19 17:38
dude dont spread fake news.. show me the benchmarks where csgo runs faster on zen2. pcworld.com/article/3405567/ryzen-3000-r.. there are plenty other benchs in can link. why would some1 run zen2 on shit old boards? x370 / x470 boards are bad, watch buildzoid ahaha. also you risk damage boards if u run pci-e gen4 because the x370 x470 cooling solutions are shit and you risk overheating. zen2 runs really hot, watch derbauer, r3tard also you need high clocked ram for max performance where as intel is fine with 3200 ram. x570 board use twice as much watt in idle, if you have your pc running 16hrs a day like me this will be noticeable in your electricity bill. theres no room for overclocking too, my 8700k runs at 5ghz ez.
2019-07-20 19:50
ok where to start... CS:GO bench: your link is useless, on 1080p high a GTX 1080 is limiting the CPUs, they even write: "The ancient CS:Go is a game we only needed to break out the GTX 1080 FE for. It’s not like you need more than 300 fps." which of course is bullshit since they test in a gpu limit and you get no information about the actual power of the cpu. I can give you 3 benches for faster Ryzen: 1. youtu.be/-siCaUV154M?t=339 2. youtu.be/CGQY9yJqfMs?t=319 3. youtu.be/z3aEv3EzMyQ?t=28 So LTT, HWUnboxed and PCGH are my examples, what can you give me? Shit old boards? Gods you have no idea what you are talking about. Go inform yourself before you embarass yourself any further. Apart from the cheapest entry level boards you will have absolutely no problem running Zen2 on the VRMs of the old boards, they all consume less than Zen+, only the 3900X consumes 15 Watts more than the 2700X on full load. Damage boards? Again inform yourself, the manufacturers are prohibited from activating PCIe 4.0 on older boards by AMD, ASUS apparently got quite the backlash from AMD for announcing PCIe 4.0 for older boards. And even if PCIe 4.0 gets activated on older Boards, the chipset will not run much hotter from that, you can see that on der8auers video (since you also told me to watch his videos). Zen2 also doesnt run really hot, there is an issue with temperature readings on the six core chips, look at the 8 and 12 core chips, they run much colder although they consume much more. Fast RAM can push performance yes, but the same happens with Intel CPUs, so that argument is bullshit, also Steve from HWUnboxed uses the same RAM for Intel and AMD and AMD still has higher FPS in CS:GO there. So after all, you will have no issues running Zen2 on older boards and you wont have higher Idle power consumption. Also the differential between X470 and X570 is around 8W: 0,008KW * 16h * 365d * 0,30€ = 14€ per year. Not really noticable considering the power consumption while gaming ;) Sorry for my bad english, i am not a native speaker :D
2019-07-20 20:20
for games ofc Intel.
2019-07-19 13:44
#470
NiKo | 
Finland RichKid 
Dude Ryzen 3000 is better
2019-07-19 17:06
yes, 3000 a little bit better than i3 8100) AMD is marketing shit. 2700x loose to i3 8100 in most of games.
2019-07-19 20:31
#475
NiKo | 
Finland RichKid 
Not in multi core. The 3900x with SMT off beats the i9-9900k in gaming.
2019-07-19 21:38
cs gives shit about multi core 5ghz ftw
2019-07-20 11:05
#481
NiKo | 
Finland RichKid 
The 3900x with SMT still beats it. 7nm ftw.
2019-07-20 17:35
ryzen 3000 is best for csgo. EZ
2019-07-19 21:39
btw min 300-500 fps on cheap 8600k & rtx 2070
2019-07-20 11:13
"cheap". Both are overpriced.
2019-07-20 21:23
#480
 | 
Europe zero_hoes 
when i buy a cpu i want the "classiest" fuck off kids
2019-07-20 16:21
#484
NiKo | 
Finland RichKid 
Ryzen 3000 is better
2019-07-20 20:46
if you only wanna play cs go get intel, if you wanna build solid pc for everything get AMD, i got 2700x locked fps to 145 butter smooth, less random lags than i7 7700k , also if you wanna stream games 1080p 60fps AMD kills it and you can also upgrade next zen 3, my brother got i7 7700k @4.8ghz and gtx2080, i feel like i have better exp in cs go. but if you look benchmarks ryzen 3000 done amazing jump vs old 2700x
2019-07-20 20:57
Ryzen 3000 is better for CS:GO than Intel. Its literally one of the very few games where AMD now beats Intel. But that was expected, after all they now have S1mple as brand ambassador ;)
2019-07-20 21:27
#486
World doh 
Ryzen 3000 !!!
2019-07-20 20:57
ryzen is much better specs, go ryzen. Intel people are just fanboys
2019-07-20 21:23
Login or register to add your comment to the discussion.