Ryzen good for gaming?

Is ryzen really good for gaming? i have an i5 4690k and i am looking to upgrade because "muh games" using moar cores is this true or just a meme?

i have a ryzen 5 1600

your core i5 4690k is perfectly fine for gaming, but if you want to upgrade to a better cpu, i'd upgrade to a 4790k. either way, the 4690k is perfectly fine for games today

Why would you upgrade from that for gaming?

a 4690k is better for gaming than ryzen in 99% of games simply due to better singlethread performance.

just to shit on amd and post this picture

At stock a 5820K is slower than a 1600 bruh

AMD no game

90% of games produced in the last 2 years will use >4 cores.
To optimize for xbone and penis4 they will need to use 8.

a 4690k isn't really that old. honestly don't upgrade. Upgrade if you have something older than 2600k, any non-ryzen AMD.
If you haven't overclocked, do that.

dont know dont care back to Sup Forums you degenerate nigger

It's better because it stutters less. It also has no integrated graphics bloat which causes some of the stuttering.

ryzen has better minimum and doesnt stutter like stutterlake

>muh degeneracy
back to Sup Forums retard

Kek

Did I fucking stutter bitch?

i switch from poozen 1800x to covfefe lake 8700k. best upgrade i've made. don't get me wrong, poozen has some great value processors (1700 non x and 1600(x) only) but covfefe 8700k is best if you have (save for) the money.

covfefe i5's though are great for gaming and superior, but fall behind poozens 6 cores in multi-threadness since poozen 6 cores have smt and i5's don't. so if you're gonna do a lot of multi poozen 6 cores would be better in that price tier.
>covfefe 8700(k) is comparable and neck to neck competitive in multi-threadness, but far superior in single threaded performance compared to poozen 8 cores. 8700(k) matches poozens 8 cores in multi, but destroys it in single. covfefe can also be overclocked to stay neck and neck with poozen in multi. poozen matches covfefe 8700(k) in multi, but can never match covfefe single threaded performance. even when overclocked. regardless how hard you try.

A stock 5820k is also slower than a 4690k.

Yes, Ryzen is good for gaming. More than good enough for any games you could want to play today.
No, it isn't as good at pushing high framerates at low resolutions as Intel.
You might not even notice the upgrade in games in going from a 4690k to anything Ryzen.

>pushing high framerates at low resolutions
isn't that the GPU's job? what's stopping something like a 1600x with a 1080 running 1080p144 just as well as a 4690k with a 1080?

The lower the resolution, the more CPU bound it becomes to push very high framerates.
Long story short, the GPU spends less time rendering each frame so the CPU has to work harder to keep up. Since game still rely heavily on single thread performance, situations like 1080p at 144Hz are better for Intel due to the higher clock speeds.

A 1600X may have the IPC to match a 4690k, but the 4690k can be overclocked relatively easily to run at least at 4.6 GHz while you'd be lucky to see 4.1 GHz on the 1600X.

I read that whole thing and still have no fucking idea what you're saying

>4690k can be overclocked relatively easily to run at least at 4.6 GHz
can confirm

The cpu is pumping our instructions to the GPU. On low resolutions the GPU can complete it's task quicker than the cpu can feed the GPU. On high resolutions, more demand is put on GPU and the opposite happens if you have a powertful enough cpu.

its a new copypasta

>1800x
Retard with too much money confirmed. No one in their right mind would buy that for gaming.

Correction: No one in their right mind would buy it for anything. 1800X is a useless CPU as long as 1700 exists.

fair points. now just a general question, if you will. I just sunk some cash into a 144hz monitor with g-sync, and I'm running a rig with a 1600x and a 1070. given I'm playing lighter games like overmeme and tf2, would I be able to hit 1080/144 with this rig, or did I just play myself?

wait for february when zen pinnacle ridge comes out. it will likely be equal or superior to coffee

That’s like saying the 7700K is useless when the 7700 exists.

you missed

R5 1600 is slower/equal than i7 2600k(for gaming),shit gets even crazier when you OC.
Ryzen is just FX with brilliant marketing.
Another thing, about mobos and intel jewing on slots,
you really use intel cpus for 5-7 years(if you are smart with your buy) if you would ever use amd cpu for 7 years, you would change mbo at least twice.
Something is happening but realistically, gains are so miniscule, we could count them purely as optimizations.
Remember,people, 3.8ghz 4/4 core were mainstream in 2010.
Hyperthread is meme

amd btfo

You missed, but no that's not at all comparable since the 1700 is just as overclockable as the 1800X is.

When you look at 7700 vs 7700k, one cannot be overclocked while the other can, meaning the is a legitimate difference in performance between the two of them.

But 1700 and 1800X ? With the 1800X, you get a higher (stock) clock speed and XFR. It isn't better binned than the 1700, and you aren't guaranteed a "golden" chip by shelling out for an 1800X. All you're paying for is literally a software feature that has been shown to do nothing that you can't do yourself and higher stock clock speed. Meanwhile, a 1700 will clock just as high as an 1800X will, you just have to do it manually.
Is that convenience worth 40-50 USD ? Not really. If you really want XFR, you can buy a 1700X instead for just 10 USD more than the price of a 1700.

IF the 1800X had been a guaranteed golden chip to skip the silicon lottery, there would be a point to its pricetag. But it isn't. It's the exact same CPU as you get when buying a 1700X, and the only real difference between 1800X and 1700 is the lack of XFR on the 1700. There's no reason to ever buy an 1800X for any reason other than to say you bought an 1800X.

>"muh games" using moar cores is this true or just a meme?
Depends on the game

considering I have 1600 and Gtx780 and playing on over 100fps, yea?

I like how this retard shitting up literally every cpu thread. Really makes you think.

It's almost 3x bigger! AMD rekt.

Unless you have a pretty high end GPU (1080 or better), you won't see any real gaming improvements from upgrading a 4690k.

>at stock
>K-series CPU
Who gives a shit about stock.

oh hey, it's you again. You consider moving out of your parents house yet? They really, really don't like you still living there.

Literally only game my 4670k has problem with atm is BF1 in conquest mode. Shit maxes it out so much it even drops down to 30fps sometimes. Everything else works fine tho.

what is the purpose of 1800x anyway ? is it more durable than 1700x ?

durable?

You will certainly have better minimums with Ryzen.

Averages will depend if the game is well threaded.

are the semiconductors plated with extra layer of special metal that helps with preformance or shit like this ?

i'm asking because i don't know

I actually have that chip and used it for 3 years , have it and the mobo in my closet
I upgraded to a ryzen 1600 because it ocerclocked the fuck out of it for years and found out my pump broke a few months back so my pc was on 90c the entire night , as I woke up it was essentially too late my pc stuttered like a mother fucker but normal web browsing was okay

Long story short the ryzen is better at 1440p from my experience than the 4690k

If you only game at 1080 I wouldn't upgrade yet but soon

1440p? Get a ryzen

I overclocked my i5 to hell*

Mobos for Ryzen have terrible BIOS and terrible RAM compatibility. You'd be lucky if the RAM you bought worked at the speed you want them to work, or work at all actually. There are also chances you'd need to RMA your board after trying to BIOS "update". That's the biggest hurdle with Ryzen and all the AMD shills seem to always want to avoid talking about this big issue. Don't get me started on RAM prices at the moment too (because if there wasn't a difference in price between 2133 and 3200 before, there certainly is one as I'm typing this).

Also for some reason since Ryzen's launch everyone needs minimum 12 threads to do anything on their PC, you'll often hear things like "i-if you want to listen to music as you play you need Ryzen!" and other shitty arguments like this, while in the end having pages opened as you play and such only depends on the RAM and doesn't have anything to do with cores and threads 99% of the time. Oh yeah everyone is a streamer pro too nowadays right?
Don't get me started on how people are sheep and like to follow the hate train against Intel (which is probably justified but still). "W-we're the people! I-it's a red revolution!"

Regarding gaming it's not black and white and heavily depends on the games you play. Most reviewers always benchmarks the same optimized games like Crysis that honestly no one really plays anymore. Ryzen doesn't have better frametime, inform yourself better. Some games like MMOs definitely run better on Intel and games aren't magically going to start using 12 threads tomorrow.
You should also ignore the people talking about how AMD is going to continue supporting AM4 until 2020. Let's be real, there are infinitely more chances for your budget board to be dead by then than you putting a new CPU on it. It only really applies to people buying expensive X370 boards (and this is not a guarantee either) - but in that case you're not in a budget mindset at all, so don't come telling me how AMD is less $$$.

No.

1800X has no purpose, it's just a 1700X clocked slightly higher out of the box. There's no difference in binning either, 1800X isn't a surefire way to skip the silicon lottery. If that was the case, there would be a justifiable reason to buy an 1800X.
While we're at it, 1700X is just a 1700 with XFR, which doesn't do anything that you can't do manually.

The 1700 generally doesn't overclock to 4ghz as easily as the 1800x does. That said practically every 1700 will do 3.8ghz, 3.9ghz is doable on a lot of chips but it gets funny when you are using high speed ram that isn't B-die.

Still for the price difference a loss of 200mhz on average means nothing. Plus AGESA is still being updated which is primarily memory focused which skews overclocks.

My own 1700 won't do 3.9ghz anymore after the last few bios updates (but they also let me run my ram at 3200mhz and slightly tighter timings than stock so i'll take it).

>gaming
Grow up

Is this from the same guy that showed Ryzen beating a 7700K @GHz in gaming
Cool story bro

>is Ryzen worth it
If you don't want to blow up your house with shintel, then get Ryzen.

(you)

>Grow up
>says the weeb

o i laffin

Anime is for mature adults while video games are for immature children and men who refuse to grow up

...

BIOS and RAM compability has gotten better since its launch days. I recently got a B350-F Strix, updated to the latest BIOS, and got 3200MHz in one try by autotweaking its settings. Inb4 AMD shill.

Anything from 4xxx and up is pointless to upgrade.

im running a 1700x with dual 970 with perfect 144fps
both those games dont come anywhere near using even half of my cpu so your 1600x and 1070 should do it

believe it or not the 1950x is a workstation cpu

falling for the intel meme

>1800X has no purpose
This nigger doesn't overclock! Point and laugh, ladies!

I'm a simple man. Is ryzen 5 1400 a good upgrade from a really old cpu, so that later I can buy a gpu so that I can play the games I can't play now?

for gaymen, yes. go to /pcbg/, this thread is full of shintel meme men

kill yourself
or get out of your parents house and get a job

you give him too much credit
hes more like pic related

Believe it or not, 1fps is a laughable difference.

Why the fuck did this retard spend 600$ to replace his cpu instead of replacing his vega with a 1080TI?

>buy 3200MHZ CL14 Load XMP profile everything works.

Wow that was sure hard.

talk about being biased

Thats what Intel shills make you (that is to say, retarded).

You should see some of the auto OC ram profiles the crosshair hars buried deep in the bios. It has a few profiles tuned by The Stilt including a 400mhz overclock profile that pull 1.9v for the ram alone.

aids bait

What to consider changing to RYZEN if your only work flow is gaming dont get ryzen, if your only work flow is CAD or other graphing or plotting software dont get ryzen. If you spend most your time creating and monitoring VMS or with software that benefits from the cores get a ryzen.

Last bit of advice dont just look at the coat of the ryzen you need to also consider you need to get 3000mhz+ ram for the ryzen to not run like shit. If you put 2400mhz ram with the ryzen its basically like having an i3 in the system in the case of the ryzen 5.

>inb4 Intel shill
I own 2 ryzen 7s and 1 threadripper.

i hate intel sometimes
how comes my laptop i5 has HT, but not the desktop variant (both coffee)

Your laptop coffee has less cores and because Intel's arch is really "narrow" hyper threading isn't worth as much as physical cores. Take note that IBM and AMD's implementation of their cores - particularly IBM - means their versions of SMT (which is what hyperthreading is) are better. IBM in particular is designed entirely around being hidemari sketch wide to maintain throughput - fitting for the environment they are deployed in.

>AMD SMT is better than Intel Hyperthreading.

lol'd , that shit isn't even implemented or supported in most shit yet.

Stick to Intel/Nvidia if you want non paper launches with actual drivers imo.

Are you retarded? (Rhetorical question, the answer is yes). The 1800x for example only has 8 physical cores but presents 8 threads to the OS because of SMT. The 1950x only has 16 physical cores but 32 threads.

>supported in most shit yet.

Not only is SMT unknown to your OS in general terms (i.e it sees N number of threads no matter how they get there) it has been supported by windows for a decade at this point because of Intel. The only way to tune for AMD's SMT is to feed more instructions at a time as each zen core can handle more than what Intel can at a given time (i.e AMD can handle 5 complex vs Intel's 1 complex and 3 simple). Contrary to what the retards on Sup Forums believe zen has a higher IPC than coffee lake in all but AVX2 (lol AVX512 on consumer platforms) if you feed it so.

Source: agner fog. If you can't read his analysis and understand it you need to fuck off back to Sup Forums.

>The 1800x for example only has 8 physical cores but presents 16 threads to the OS because of SMT.

Fix'd. Note to self: lay off the rum.

Why are these threads allowed on Sup Forums?

>1 frame per second of a difference
Good meme user, but the ones that made this comparison is retarded enough to air on LinusTechTips.

Ryzen is good for gaming in the sense that you can cheaply get a high thread/core count CPU that allows to keep shit running in the background and not fuck your 99% frametimes.

If you do literally nothing on your box but game (or are the kind of sperg who shuts down everything before playing one) and want the absolute best frame rates, some high-clock Skylake/Kabylake will be the fastest.

Got a R7 1700
Used to have it overclocked to 3.6Ghz, but I'm just running the standard 3.2Ghz (undervolted) now, because there really is no point, already have far more CPU power than I need for muh games

Unused cores are useless...games still benefit single core performance

AC:origins says otherwise. Off the top of my head the fastest cpu for that game is a 1950x because it keeps a higher all core turbo than a 7980XE. Not that gains are linear but the game sure as fuck favours threads over clockspeed (bearing in mind zen is basically broadwell in IPC for muh untuned vidya purposes).

yeah i think like 20% of games have some of multithred usage in others 2 cores do most of the work...

>2012 experiences

Most modern games (read: 2014 or newer) will use 4 threads effectively with even newer titles fully saturating said 4 threads and demanding more. Firaxis are at the forefront of cpu utilisation though id vida the latest idtech engine are at the forefront of compute pipelines for gpu rendering (which is tied to effecient cpu scheduling).

This meme of 4 threads is plenty" is championed by i5 corelets who know no better. The same group are both 1) underage B@ Sup Forums users and 2) a scary percentage of Sup Forums users. Increased thread usage in vbidya is why even the lackluster IPC of bulldozer means vishera based chips can hang with Ivy bridge in vidya.

So, should i jump the gun on an i7 8700k? or r7 1700?

That decision is entirely down to your usage case. The 1700 is often considerably cheaper than the 8700k (but equally behind in performance) but overclocks 1700x/1800x perofrmance. The 8700k is the undisputed king of corelets right now but is on a dead-end socket and is not easy to cool when overclocked due to many factors. I'm inclined to say 1700 if you are likely to upgrade in the next 24-36 months due to the continued support of AM4 but if you plan to keep your cpu forever the 8700k is possibly the better move.

Remember: a 10-15% frequency bump on zen2 would effectively eliminate Intel's frequency advantage and zen's higher IPC (outside of AVX2) could easily result in higher performance. Remember also that icelake is 2020 at earliest and Intel's own roadmaps admit that 10nm is going to have IPC regressions vs 14nm - i'd wager on ice lake being mobile first with desktop versions (if they exist) to follow in 2021/2022.

You're too late

If you buy a Ryzen now you'll get buyer's remorse since Ryzen 2 is early next year

If you buy a Coffee Lake now you'll get buyer's remorse since Coffee Lake is just a placeholder for Coffee Lake-S

In that case it's better to wait for Matisse CPU's.
I know man i think i'll wait then.

@63654314
Nice pasta

>4690k
>Gaymen
>Ryzen

Don't bother

AMD BTFO!

This post is what's wrong with the current hardware community. You're seriously retarded if you believe someone buying a 8700k today would regret it. That shit will last them 6 years if not more. "HURR I ALWAYS HAVE TO HAVE THE BEST THING FOR FUTURE PROOFING!", retard, learn to use your time better.
And you're not better for agreeing.

>all these poor fags who are not loved by anyone

covfefe 8700(k) is comparable and neck to neck competitive in multi-threadness, but far superior in single threaded performance compared to poozen 8 cores. 8700(k) matches poozens 8 cores in multi, but destroys it in single. covfefe can also be overclocked to stay neck and neck with poozen in multi. poozen matches covfefe 8700(k) in multi, but can never match covfefe single threaded performance. even when overclocked. regardless how hard you try.
>in english:
>coffee lake i7 8700(k) is comparable and neck to neck competitive in multi-threadness
>but it's far superior in single threaded performance compared to ryzen r7 8 cores.
>i7 8700(k) matches ryzens r7 8 cores in multi-threaded scenarios, but destroys it in single-threaded.
>8700k can also be overclocked to stay neck and neck with ryzen in multi-threaded scenarios.
>while ryzen may match i7 8700(k) in multi-threaded, it can **never** match the 8700k in single threaded performance. even when ryzen r7 is overclocked heavily. regardless how hard you try.
>due to that, the 8700(k) is the overall better processor. that includes the locked 8700 non k against all ryzen r7 8 cores
covfefe i5's though are great for gaming and superior, but fall behind poozens 6 cores in multi-threadness since poozen 6 cores have smt and i5's don't. so if you're gonna do a lot of multi poozen 6 cores would be better in that price tier.
>in english:
>coffee lake i5's are great for gaming and superior in single threaded performance
>but they fall behind in multi-threaded scenerios against ryzen r5 6 cores.
>all because the i5's lack hyperthreading (smt)
>ryzen may be slower in single, but the extra 6 threads thanks to smt give it that **slight** edge in multi-threaded workloads
>so if all you care about is gaming coffee lake i5's are better. but if you want the best all around, ryzen r5 6 cores are better in this price and performance tier.

Modern games are shit.
But having a CPU with high clock rate helps with emulation, that is where the good games are.

>emulation
>good games are
>look ma', i'm a hispster faggot

Go back to your call of assassin lootboxes crush turbo.

>backwards compatability goy?
>Why would you want legacy support?
>you'll be hearing from my lawyers over this emulation!