- Jul 24, 2013
- 867
- 12
- 81
should i wait for upcoming intel cpu for gaming pc or go with 9th generation when they are on discount? i play mainly games only like battlefield series and metro series
Any sort of ETA on that? Looking to upgrade my 2x R5 1600 and 1x R5 3600 rigs to R7 3700X CPUs, if/when prices drop to nearly $250 or less on thatOnce Vermeer launches, everything Matisse will go down in price.
Maybe you got me wrong or didn't see my first post here. I said, IF he really wants to buy Intel for whatever reason, then he should definitely wait. The benefit in not buying an EOL product is always upgradeability. LGA1200 could be the first intel platform in many years where you could actually drop in a new CPU later. Do I think that either Comet or Rocket Lake be any more competitive with AMD? No. But wanting Intel is not a crime and since OP didn't want to convince anyone that its superior to AMD, after telling him my opinion about being better off buying AMD, I can give him my word of advice with good heart on the Intel side. For me, when sticking to Intel, LGA1200 is definitely a better option than to get CFL now and stare at tech news with regret for 3 years.What benefit would a gamer get from going LGA1200?
Any sort of ETA on that? Looking to upgrade my 2x R5 1600 and 1x R5 3600 rigs to R7 3700X CPUs, if/when prices drop to nearly $250 or less on that
CPU. (Already hitting $283-284 @ Newegg, maybe I should snag some soon... well, if I didn't need my money to pay rent and continue my "bunkering" due to "Human Malware".)
Any sort of ETA on that?
Maybe you got me wrong or didn't see my first post here. I said, IF he really wants to buy Intel for whatever reason, then he should definitely wait. The benefit in not buying an EOL product is always upgradeability. LGA1200 could be the first intel platform in many years where you could actually drop in a new CPU later.
thanks all for valuable replies i can wait 6 months for intel and i NEED intel only i would love to go with i7 10th generation and from my old pc i will use only asus gtx 1660ti 6gb i have
When and where have I ever stated otherwise?Rocket Lake may or may not work in boards released this year. I'm assuming it'll be LGA1200, but remember, just because the pincount is the same, doesn't mean CPUs will be compatible.
If you wouldn't mind, would appreciate it if applicable reviews could be provided? Just taking the simple route of comparing Anandtech Bench results for the i5-9600k vs i7-8700k (almost same frequencies, 6C/6T vs 6C/12T) shows effectively no difference. Obviously the i5-9400F performance would be a bit lower in cases due to frequency, but I haven't found much evidence that it's behind due to lack of cores/threads. Same can't be said for 4C/4T, and even 4C/8T are showing signs of falling a bit behind.6c/6t is not a great investment here in 2020. The i5 6 and 7 series are aging poorly. Don't fall into the same trap those buyers did. MOAR CORES!1! is not just a meme, it is a fact. There are already games where a 9400F struggles with frame times and stuttering, it will only get worse.
The AT Bench is lacking to be honest. And do not make the mistake people that bought the i5 6 &7 series made i.e trusting some bar graphs from the time period when they launched.The OP mentioned AAA MP gaming, and while a quad or hex core can play the vast majority of games great, the one mentioned, is not one of those. FarCry 5 is tough on them too. There are others titles that cause quad and hex to struggle too.If you wouldn't mind, would appreciate it if applicable reviews could be provided? Just taking the simple route of comparing Anandtech Bench results for the i5-9600k vs i7-8700k (almost same frequencies, 6C/6T vs 6C/12T) shows effectively no difference. Obviously the i5-9400F performance would be a bit lower in cases due to frequency, but I haven't found much evidence that it's behind due to lack of cores/threads. Same can't be said for 4C/4T, and even 4C/8T are showing signs of falling a bit behind.
Just as there were games pushing quad cores then, to indicate where things were going. There are games now doing the same exact thing. Do what you want, but no way I would go less than 8C/8T right now
When and where have I ever stated otherwise?
The AT Bench is lacking to be honest. And do not make the mistake people that bought the i5 6 &7 series made i.e trusting some bar graphs from the time period when they launched.The OP mentioned AAA MP gaming, and while a quad or hex core can play the vast majority of games great, the one mentioned, is not one of those. FarCry 5 is tough on them too. There are others titles that cause quad and hex to struggle too.
Tech Spot/Hardware Unboxed has shown 6c/6t struggling in BF V, and while fast ram helped, there were still stuttering issues. I have seen other reviewers, Tech Deals comes to mind immediately, that have shown even the 9700K being fully worked with no more overhead available. He pointed out that as new games designed for more than 8 threads hit, it will be riding the struggle bus.
Slight aside regarding future proofing. For those who enjoy computer hardware and building their own systems, the merits of a system which will last for 3 years are questionable.
With this kind of a mindset, I am done with this thread. No open-mindedness here......thanks all for valuable replies i can wait 6 months for intel and i NEED intel only i would love to go with i7 10th generation and from my old pc i will use only asus gtx 1660ti 6gb i have
OP's not new though.I noticed we get a lot of new or newer members, where after starting threads and asking for advice, only Intel will fit the bill for their edge case usage. Things that make you go Hmmm?
With this kind of a mindset, I am done with this thread. No open-mindedness here......
Look up benches that measure min fps or 99th percentile as well. You'll be amazed, how the tables have turned in just a couple of years.If you wouldn't mind, would appreciate it if applicable reviews could be provided? Just taking the simple route of comparing Anandtech Bench results for the i5-9600k vs i7-8700k (almost same frequencies, 6C/6T vs 6C/12T) shows effectively no difference. Obviously the i5-9400F performance would be a bit lower in cases due to frequency, but I haven't found much evidence that it's behind due to lack of cores/threads. Same can't be said for 4C/4T, and even 4C/8T are showing signs of falling a bit behind.
With this kind of a mindset, I am done with this thread. No open-mindedness here......
I noticed we get a lot of new or newer members, where after starting threads and asking for advice, only Intel will fit the bill for their edge case usage. Things that make you go Hmmm?
My point is, why be so closed minded ? Back in the day... I read those, but they made no sense, no logic was there, just emotionalism. I hate that. We are talking about computers. Logic should reign. He can buy whatever he wants, not my problem, but thats why I said I am done. No sense in beating a dead horse. He got advice, and ignored it. So be it. I should not even have replied, but just wanted to make sure that my meaning was clear. He doesn;t want my help or advice ? fine, goodbye.To be fair, back in the day, we used to have threads in this very forum where people were asking about AMD hardware for a specific use case, only for the thread to be trolled by the then-usual-suspects that were trying to convince them to buy Intel instead. There was some counter-trolling where AMD diehards would enter budget Intel threads to try to sway people to AMD hardware ("It's such a great deal! Look how cheap it is! Just undervooooolt"). It was really tiresome watching people fight conversion wars.
If the guy legitimately wants to buy Intel hardware then so be it. That's why I haven't recommended him any AMD hardware, despite AMD hardware being objectively better now for most things and likely better in everything once Vermeer comes out. In the timespan mentioned by the OP, Vermeer would be the obvious choice (barring shortages of product).
If all you're running is a 1660 Ti, you're not going to see any benefit from anything new front Intel.thanks all for valuable replies i can wait 6 months for intel and i NEED intel only i would love to go with i7 10th generation and from my old pc i will use only asus gtx 1660ti 6gb i have
My point is, why be so closed minded ?
Thanks for the detailed response, much appreciated. Checking the TechSpot BFV numbers I definitely see the correlation you're talking about between core/thread count and the 1% low minimum frame rates. eg, the i7-7700k, Ryzen 5 3500X, and i5-9400F all show comparable average of 140 and minimum around 80, whereas the 6C/12T or greater with comparable average of 140 are around 100 minimum.
I'll definitely agree that future games will move the target thread number upwards, in particular thanks to the next generation consoles providing more than 8T. It's likely the case that the behavior will be similar for most games in the next year or two for CPUs below the 'design' thread count: competitive average FPS, but falling behind on minimum. Definitely makes the Ryzen 5 2600 at the same $120 price as an i5-9400F a good choice if playing games that target 8T or more.
Slight aside regarding future proofing. For those who enjoy computer hardware and building their own systems, the merits of a system which will last for 3 years are questionable. A $300 CPU + $100 motherboard today costs more than a $120 CPU + $100 motherboard today that's sold for $120 in 1.5 years and replaced with the next generation $120 CPU + $100 motherboard. Similar argument works to some extent as you go up higher on the product stack, but more value tends to be lost. Point being that there's a good reason for building to current needs plus 10-25% rather than going overboard with something that may be needed in 2-3 years, but provides no benefit currently.
Edit: Going back and looking at the supposed configurations for comet lake it would appear that Intel's aware of the need for the additional threads as the entire lineup looks to be enabling SMT.