So I need to upgrade from my old i3 and I'm considering an i5, can't decide between the 8400 or the 8600k though...

So I need to upgrade from my old i3 and I'm considering an i5, can't decide between the 8400 or the 8600k though, does anyone here have any of the two? I don't do any heavy work on my PC, I just really want it for better performance in games desu.

Attached: 71FVG05LzRL._SY355_.jpg (355x355, 32K)

>intel
Enjoy your 30% performance hit and NSA root kit.

wait for zen 2

You're literally going to get no benefit from an i3 to an i5

Also remember intel is super gimped right now because of meltdown bug.

those things are bad, why would he enjoy them? idiot

AMDrones shills are really fast these days

Attached: 1518361962661.jpg (246x261, 45K)

It's easier to post quickly when you don't have a processor crippled by meltdown patches.

>You're literally going to get no benefit from an i3 to an i5
Really? I have a 4130 and it's like 5 years old.

Wait for AMD's new CPUs, they should come out pretty soon.

It's easier to post quickly when you can't do anything else with your PC because of the shit CPU

Pretty much, gaymes and 90% of things out there get virtually 0% in terms of performance improvement because most software can't use more than 2 CPU threads efficiently.

In fact 4-8 physical core chips are still widely for VMs.

>meltdown now causes misdirects
that bad huh?

Wait for the new Ryzen CPUs so you can compare. Then ask - it's what it's there for.

>crippled
over exaggeration of the year

If you have anything less than a 1080 you don't need a new CPU.

just to be clear, you do understand you have to get a new motherboard and DDR4 ram right?

Far from it

Attached: 1515019866982.png (916x358, 52K)

>8600k @ 4.8ghz at a comfy 1.300v
So nice, so snappy , you will be happy.
Fuck amd slowfags
Enjoy your 4.0ghz max you threadlets

Attached: 00al.gif (480x270, 2.25M)

Wrong.
Benchmarks prove cpus matter for fps and high speed like Intel 8th gen is top tier.
Modern games and next gen currently use
>6cores

WRONG. MOST games cannot handle more than 2 cpu threads efficiently (ie maxing them out), the few that can are rare.

At best an i7 8t4c might give you 5-10% of a performance improvement over an i3 4t2c processor. 4x the price for 10% max performance improvement, are you fuckimf retarded?

OP this guy is a fucking moron. If you aren't doing a ton of overclocking, go for the lesser and save some dollarinos

He's legit 100% literally correct though. i3s are high binned chips that couldn't make it as i7s. A jump to an i5 would be pathetic, like 1 more fps.

Zen 2 not only doesn't have the 30% meltdown performance hit but is on 7nm lithography so turbos in the 5GHz range or higher is expected along with increased IPC over current zen will fucking shit all over intel's i3s AND i7s.

>So nice, so snappy

Is there actually a difference in responsiveness between Ryzen at 4GHz and CoffeeLake at 4.8GHz?

indeed there is

Attached: 86312.png (650x337, 28K)

Attached: 1413913323099.jpg (1000x1000, 293K)

Ah, the power of Intel's market segmentation shenanigans. Unlike its bigger i5 brethren, the 7400 doesn't feature TSX-NI, an instruction that helps with multi-threaded tasks.

>I have never played RTS, the post.

The only thing one of you said that I agree with is AMD offers good core counts for good money. Waiting for R5 2600. 1600 was basically equivalent to i7-6800k which fucked over HOI4 over 100 fps easily anyway.

>being this retarded
Seek the bullet

A Coffee Lake i3 8100 is okay as well if you're really looking out for you wallet, it's a true quad core now. Otherwise the i5 8400 is good as well if you're not overclocking. Don't pull the trigger yet though, wait for cheaper mobos to hit the market.

prove him wrong then you braindead faggot, if moar coars did anything ryzen would be punishing intel processors right now.

I'm , and as I said before the R5 1600 is almost equal to i7-6800k, which absolutely kills it on HOI4. So I would get similar frames for like half the cost. And R5 2600 is even going to be better for same price.

So yes, AMD is punishing Intel, in the value department.

Just check some benchmarks dude, not rocket surgery.
Also this

Attached: perfrel_1920_1080.png (500x1090, 45K)

>Buying any of the current and next generation Intel processors when Spectre/Meltdown patches are ruining their performance

This.

By the time hardware fixes are in, Zen 2 (Ryzen 3) would have been released. 7nm next year ain't bad desu.

Have some oc desu sempai

Attached: Screenshot_20180312-101256.png (1198x1283, 441K)

>tfw intel literally released a 5GHz housefire because they were shitting their pants over R7s
>now they need to release 6GHz nuclear reactors because of meltdown
it just keeps getting better and better

Attached: 1515030911695.jpg (1848x1152, 130K)

I highly doubt GTA V would be using TSX, and even if it would, I still doubt it would make that big a difference. It's much more likely just the difference in clock speed.

Not the mention the 7400 indeed does support TSX.

Top kek

>turbos in the 5GHz range
You are delusional my friend

>1800x worse than 1600x
wow

14nm to 7nm is a huge fucking jump and the only reason zen was binned at 4 GHz max was to make the chips cheaper than intel counterparts. Now AMD can undervolt the shit out of 5GHz lottery chips and sell them for some nice coin and there's nothing intel can do to stop them.

A shame that Intel can't bribe the laws of physics

He's right though. Although i'm pretty sure he's getting Ryzen 2 and Zen 2 confused. (Zen 2 is going to be Ryzen 3 and will come out next year)

>the absolute state of intel macacos in this thread

Attached: 1520358777245.png (253x239, 84K)

>full hd
What's this, 2008?

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 114K)

We have fucking 4K res displays on phones by now and 8K computer monitors and you dare post 1080p benchmarks?

Why not go full intell shill and post the 240p benchmarks?

Attached: 1520551508256.jpg (512x498, 30K)

>AMD fanboys STILL aggressively shilling
>still ignoring the benchmarks which show Intel CPUs still blow AMD out of the water in the vast majority of software including games
Talk about brand loyalty.

Gaymes can only efficiently use 2 cpu cores which is why intel wins, their i3s have more IPC than their i5s which AMD is competing with. However any software that can use all 8-cores on the R7s outperforms any desktop intel processor in existence (ie cinebench, 10-bit HEVC).

Overall though intel is still the goto if you don't ever use software that can efficiently use more than 2 cpu threads.

>cinebench
AMD can outperform Intel in a BENCHMARKING software? Whoa...so this is...the power...

It's a benchmark you retard. It's not about showing 1080p performances. It's for showing the difference in CPUs.

Which measures multi-core performance which translates to high fps in encoding 10-bit HEVC video or other things that can efficiently use more than 2 cpu threads for those who deem it important.

t. brainless macaco gaymur

That's still massively retarded when most 1080 owners have 1440p or 4K res monitors.

If you want an actual cpu test then why not cinebench?

I agree that if you're encoding videos regularly, Ryzen is the way to go. Doesn't stop the AMD fanboys aggressively shilling Ryzen to everyone and citing the non-existent 30% performance hit across everything.

I agree with that though AMD could compete with single thread performance if zen 2 delivers enough of an IPC increase and higher clocks. Only time will tell but intel hasn't really improved since haswell.

Samsung/GloFlo 14nm was made to be most efficient at 3ghz clocks. GloFlo 7nm is based on IBM tech and is explicitly targeting 5ghz for peak efficiency.
Nothing in the Zen architectural design stops 5ghz operation, it is process limited.

Ryzen 1 and 2 are like Nehalem and Westmere

Attached: 2B2C6BC400000578-3187870-image-a-9_1438947564403.jpg (634x951, 139K)

>IBM once again telling the laws of physics to fuck off

Zen: speed demon edition when?

Zen 2 with IBM operating at high speeds, that I can agree to find likely. But Ryzen 2 won't be that much faster than current ryzen. Some people said 4.6 max OC. Maybe for golden chips.

>threadlets
>when everything but the Ryzen 3 has more threads

the amdfriends in this thread are delusional
>wait until ryzen2 (at least a year away)
>i3 has higher ipc than i5 (what even)
>muh 30% (not even close bby)

i'll also compile a list of cheapish cpus for gaymen
2200g low tier
2400g mid tier
8600k high tier
if you go higher you should play at 240p
t.r5 1600 @2.4ghz, everything just werks

Thats why I said Westmere, I called it months ago that top turbo would be 4.4ghz, official is 4.35ghz

i3 does have higher IPC than i5 per core due to less scheduling and data transfer overload

It's just in the sub 1% range

Attached: z7gub14d03k01.jpg (600x580, 71K)