i7-8086k @5.0 GHZ vs 3600X/3700X which is better for gaming?

[DesiPower]

I am currently using delided 8086k slightly overclocked to run at 5ghz all cores, temperature generally does not exceed 70. Assuming I were to upgrade to Ryzen 3000 series, maybe looking at 3700X @3.6 ghz, max boost 4.4 Ghz, which is significantly lower than 5.0 GHZ, but 3700X does offer more cores. Doesn't games benefit more from clock speed than the number of cores? At stock speed, with 7nm architecture and soldered lid, I am sure Ryzen will run cooler, but to push it to 5Ghz will the temperature be manageable with air or AIO water cooler? What do you guys think, is it more of a downgrade than a upgrade? I would like to try out Ryzen 3000, just for the heck of it, but not if I am losing performance. 3800X has maxboost of 4.7 which is closer to 8086k might be easier to push 3800X to 5 GHZ but its a 120W TDP to beging with, seems to be a power hog and might run hotter. I googled 3800X/3700X at 5ghz all cores, but could not find any useful reliable info, anyone has any other info?

 

[Elfear]

Depends on what type of gaming you do and what background processes you leave open. In general, it would probably be more of a lateral move in terms of gaming performance. We'll have to wait for reviews to see the true comparison but all info received so far indicates Ryzen 2 and Coffee Lake should be within a few percentage points of each other in gaming performance. There are a handful of games that benefit from the higher core count but most won't. If you stream while gaming, the Ryzen would probably be a worthwhile upgrade.

As for overclocking, we have a few rumors that Ryzen 2 will be better than Ryzen 1/1+ but nothing solid so far. Have to wait til reviewers get their grubby mitts on them.

 

[ElFenix]

no one knows yet. wait a month.

 

[Adul]

We can only speculate at this point. I think it will depend on the games you play, some will see the benefit of more cores will others will prefer more single core performance. So if AMD there on per core performance, you can see anywhere from a lateral movement to increased performance depending on the game.

 

[aigomorla]

i would like to see a game where 5ghz is actually important, noticeable and qualifies as "Better" gaming performance.
Id also like to see which game where more then 6 cores is actually shown a noticeable improvement.

What do i think.
I think you'd benifit more from a 2TB SSD to dump your games on then a processor / platform swap, as games are getting obnoxiously large storage wise, and having a large SSD with a hugh cache buffer will probably net you the best solution in gaming if you already do not have a monster class GPU.

 

[Furious_Styles]

There's very few games that would benefit from more than 6 cores. You would just be wasting your money by buying a new mobo and cpu.

 

[PotatoWithEarsOnSide]

Where do you get 120w TDP on the 3800X?
Irrespective of that, it'll likely be using much less power than your 8086K at 5GHz.

Ryzen is likely to be a sidegrade for you. It isn't really targeted at consumers in your position. For the most part it is targeted at 2nd to 5th gen Intel owners, though 6th and 7th would find it an upgrade too.

 

[Indus]

I am currently using delided 8086k slightly overclocked to run at 5ghz all cores, temperature generally does not exceed 70. Assuming I were to upgrade to Ryzen 3000 series, maybe looking at 3700X @3.6 ghz, max boost 4.4 Ghz, which is significantly lower than 5.0 GHZ, but 3700X does offer more cores. Doesn't games benefit more from clock speed than the number of cores? At stock speed, with 7nm architecture and soldered lid, I am sure Ryzen will run cooler, but to push it to 5Ghz will the temperature be manageable with air or AIO water cooler? What do you guys think, is it more of a downgrade than a upgrade? I would like to try out Ryzen 3000, just for the heck of it, but not if I am losing performance. 3800X has maxboost of 4.7 which is closer to 8086k might be easier to push 3800X to 5 GHZ but its a 120W TDP to beging with, seems to be a power hog and might run hotter. I googled 3800X/3700X at 5ghz all cores, but could not find any useful reliable info, anyone has any other info?

Well a Ryzen 3800X @ stock matched a 9900k (supposedly at stock).. we'll have to wait for the results when they are out.

IMO the true advantage of intel is at 1080p or has been so far. When you start gaming at 1440p the advantage becomes 5% if that which is why I've been really happy with my Ryzen setup.

But honestly, given that you have a good enough CPU.. unless you have a lot of money burning a hole in your hand.. everything will be at best a SIDEgrade rather than an UPgrade.

We'll know more for sure in a month especially regarding how well they overclock.

Probably the cheapest upgrade for you is to get a 9900KS (5.0 ghz all core 8 core CPU) assuming you can just put it in your motherboard and it supports it.

 

[Arkaign]

Agree with others that it's a wait and see situation. Even deeper, it depends on what type of gamer you are.

I have seen a number of people who insist on 4k/60 non-VRR gaming. Which is .. something, I guess. In those cases, I don't think it much matters between Ryzen 5 1600, Core i5-8400, etc, all the way to 3900X/9900KF. You're going to be screaming at your 2080ti or Titan RTX to please keep up, lol.

However, at 1440 in 16:9 and 21:9 + 100/120/144Hz, THAT is where the extra CPU juice pays off IF you have the GPU to also show gains. In my case, 1080ti Aorus with 8086k OC, I choose to scale graphical options and AA down a bit (especially shadows, which I never notice that much in motion), in order to maintain very high framerates. This is why after testing back and forth I use the 8086k over the 2700X box, it just has that extra 10-20% to work with.

Honestly I think best case is that it's something of a wash. Which would be honestly a gigantic achievement. Because gaming was THE reason to go Intel for the longest time now. The Ryzen 1000 and 2000 series were already either equal or better, sometimes by a notable margin, in basically everything else. But honestly gaming was a pretty sizable gap there.

In many cases, this was never going to be that noticeable, such as my example above of the 4k/60 folks. Similarly true of someone running 1050ti / RX570 / 1660 @ 1080p. Just not going to see the difference between the CPUs with that level of GPU bottleneck. Still, I always like to think of the future, and people tend to keep a mobo/CPU much longer than a GPU if they're a gamer, so if say by 2022 you have your i5-8600k box and a Ryzen 5-2600X box, and both are max OC, and you can get ~2080ti performance for $199 and that's your next GPU, then indeed, the 8600k @ 5Ghz will probably be better than a max OC 2600X. Ryzen 3000 series SHOULD change this to : basically equal, while superior in most other things.

But we are definitely not the prime candidates for such things at present. As cool as it is, it's more of a sidegrade in all probability for edge cases like ours. Though if we were building in July 2019, of course the 3800/3900 look a lot more compelling I think.

 

[scannall]

Eh, save your money or invest in a better video card. What you have now is fine.

 

[moonbogg]

Honestly I expect OP's chip to still be faster in basically every game compared to any new Ryzen OC'd or not. 3 premises for my conclusion: Clocks, latency & optimization. I expect IPC to be basically on par or close enough, but IPC doesn't exist in a metaphorical vacuum and doesn't always translate directly to game performance.

Furthermore, I'm not confident that the new Ryzens will even handily beat my 4.2ghz Broadwell 6 core chip in gaming. Everything else, sure. But gaming? I'm skeptical. The gaming performance deficit was absolutely massive in many titles between coffee lake and Ryzen. Moving to a new node with basically the same chip shouldn't be expected to produce a performance miracle.

 

[Markfw]

Honestly I expect OP's chip to still be faster in basically every game compared to any new Ryzen OC'd or not. 3 premises for my conclusion: Clocks, latency & optimization. I expect IPC to be basically on par or close enough, but IPC doesn't exist in a metaphorical vacuum and doesn't always translate directly to game performance.

Furthermore, I'm not confident that the new Ryzens will even handily beat my 4.2ghz Broadwell 6 core chip in gaming. Everything else, sure. But gaming? I'm skeptical. The gaming performance deficit was absolutely massive in many titles between coffee lake and Ryzen. Moving to a new node with basically the same chip shouldn't be expected to produce a performance miracle.

I think you missed the point of Ryzen 2. Its NOT the same chip, the chiplets and the IO chip are an all new design. Clockspeed is up. IPC is up, latency is supposed to be a lot better , but that will not be confirmed until benchmarks come out.

That said, its hard to say how much better it will be than his 8086k

 

[Mopetar]

We also don't know how well it will OC either. It's entirely possible that AMD has kept the clocks on the low side to hit a particular TDP budget or allow for a greater number of chiplets to be put into a particular product bin. That points to potentially good overclock ability with a little bit of silicon lottery luck involved.

The alternative is that AMD has already pushed the chips about as far as they will go and much as was the case with Polaris and Vega you'll actually get more mileage out of undervolting them than anything else.

Personally I won't be surprised to see chips that can hit 4.7 GHz with a good cooling solution and motherboard. That probably gets close to a 5 GHz 8086K in some titles, but I'm not sure if it would be strictly better. Unless you really need the extra cores for some reason, you'll probably get a sidegrade at best.

 

[Markfw]

OMG, I just looked at newegg. The 8086k is $889 ! If it was me, I would sell the 8086k and the motherboard, and get one the new AMD chips, thats an insane price. You could get the $500 3900x, and the best $600 motherboard and probably be ahead on money when you are done ! Or even a $300 AM4 motherboard.....

Speaking of insane prices, I was able to snag a 2990wx 32 core processor on ebay for $900. Almost the same price as that Intel hex core. Now I can only do about 3800 on water, but I have more than 5 times the cores !

 

[Thunder 57]

OMG, I just looked at newegg. The 8086k is $889 ! If it was me, I would sell the 8086k and the motherboard, and get one the new AMD chips, thats an insane price. You could get the $500 3900x, and the best $600 motherboard and probably be ahead on money when you are done ! Or even a $300 AM4 motherboard.....

Speaking of insane prices, I was able to snag a 2990wx 32 core processor on ebay for $900. Almost the same price as that Intel hex core. Now I can only do about 3800 on water, but I have more than 5 times the cores !

Here are more realistic prices for what one might get for an 8086k, completed ebay sales. I've always been surprised by how wildly these things can vary.

 

[Markfw]

Here are more realistic prices for what one might get for an 8086k, completed ebay sales. I've always been surprised by how wildly these things can vary.

OK, I guess I should have known to look there after the deals I have been getting on threadrippers. So about $350-400 you think ebay ? Still pretty high for a hex core, but in a month they are going to drop like a rock I predict. My Xeon 2683v3's are 14 core, and they are only fetching $250. Intel is in the dumper I would say.

Well, then forget my post.

 

[DesiPower]

Thanks guys for all the input and insights, glad to see AT still alive and kicking! As I suspected, it would be sidegrade at best. I think I will stick with my 8086K unless 3700X or 3800X start showing huge gains over 8700k/8086k. Also unlike Intel, AMD's drops it price a lot, or lets vendors drop price, so maybe reevaluate around the end of the year.

BTW, quick side note, I am using Asrock Z370 Taichi, this is my 2nd Taichi, awesome boards, great bang for the buck!

 

[Arkaign]

OK, I guess I should have known to look there after the deals I have been getting on threadrippers. So about $350-400 you think ebay ? Still pretty high for a hex core, but in a month they are going to drop like a rock I predict. My Xeon 2683v3's are 14 core, and they are only fetching $250. Intel is in the dumper I would say.

Well, then forget my post.

A lot of it is the halo effect. Top of the socket/series is often a bit inflated beyond what makes sense.

Core 2 Quad 9775 sells for $130+, despite being slower than the slowest Ryzen/i3 in modern lineups. Hell it's probably slower than Pentium Gold lol

Phenom II X6 1100 sell for $110-$125, same thing.

FX 9590, ditto, $110-$150.

Xeon 5690s, $100+.

4790k, $170-$200 (slower than i5 9400f/Ryzen 1600, etc.)

In all of these cases, these processors sell for more $ than the performance you can get with newer models. With the 8086k, it's the halo 8th gen i7, though of course some may not realize that most mobos can flash to support 9xxx!

I think most new buyers of DIY will realize you can get a better deal with a Ryzen 3xxx of course. But to a lot of buyers, swapping that much hardware may be intimidating, so someone with say a locked 8400 i5 might choose an 8086k/8700k/9700k/etc to upgrade to if they wanted more power without a full rebuild :/

 

[Furious_Styles]

A lot of it is the halo effect. Top of the socket/series is often a bit inflated beyond what makes sense.

Core 2 Quad 9775 sells for $130+, despite being slower than the slowest Ryzen/i3 in modern lineups. Hell it's probably slower than Pentium Gold lol

Phenom II X6 1100 sell for $110-$125, same thing.

FX 9590, ditto, $110-$150.

Xeon 5690s, $100+.

4790k, $170-$200 (slower than i5 9400f/Ryzen 1600, etc.)

In all of these cases, these processors sell for more $ than the performance you can get with newer models. With the 8086k, it's the halo 8th gen i7, though of course some may not realize that most mobos can flash to support 9xxx!

I think most new buyers of DIY will realize you can get a better deal with a Ryzen 3xxx of course. But to a lot of buyers, swapping that much hardware may be intimidating, so someone with say a locked 8400 i5 might choose an 8086k/8700k/9700k/etc to upgrade to if they wanted more power without a full rebuild :/

Agreed. Lots of people are still GPU limited most of the time. Excuse me while I load up quake 2 @ 60 fps (wooohooo rtx!!!!)

 

[DrMrLordX]

Both the 9900k and 2700x can already pull higher 1% and .1% frametimes than Intel hexcores in some games, like Battlefield V. Typically you see this effect when the 8700k is in the mix @ stock speeds (and so are the 9900k and 2700x). 8086k is just a higher-binned 8700k though.

 

[Indus]

Also unlike Intel, AMD's drops it price a lot, or lets vendors drop price, so maybe reevaluate around the end of the year.

There's a very good reason for that.

Intel is notorious for you having to buy a new motherboard almost every generation so if your CPU or motherboard dies, you have to buy the same exact part and they are hard to come by especially motherboards.

AMD is where it is a lot better in the long end that AM3/ AM4 CPU's and sockets are interchangeable for 4 years usually, just like AM4 will be usuable from 2017-2020.

 

[Matt390]

Depends on what type of gaming you do and what background processes you leave open. In general, it would probably be more of a lateral move in terms of gaming performance. We'll have to wait for reviews to see the true comparison but all info received so far indicates Ryzen 2 and Coffee Lake should be within a few percentage points of each other in gaming performance. There are a handful of games that benefit from the higher core count but most won't. If you stream while gaming, the Ryzen would probably be a worthwhile upgrade.

As for overclocking, we have a few rumors that Ryzen 2 will be better than Ryzen 1/1+ but nothing solid so far. Have to wait til reviewers get their grubby mitts on them.

Wouldn't it be Ryzen 3?

 

[Charlie22911]

Wouldn't it be Ryzen 3?

No, 3000 series is Zen 2. 2000 series was just a refined version of Zen 1.

 

[Matt390]

No, 3000 series is Zen 2. 2000 series was just a refined version of Zen 1.

Ryzen 3 is Zen 2. Ryzen 2 and 1 were Zen 1

 

[Sealclubber]

Ryzen 3 is Zen 2. Ryzen 2 and 1 were Zen 1

It's a common misconception. Zen 2 is actually the 3000 series. The 2000 series was Zen+ with the 1000 series being Zen.