Soldato
It's the 'current CPU that wont allow the new GPU to show more than half of it's potential performance' that made me laugh.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Help me to choose a right CPU
- Thread starter acsiny
- Start date
It's the 'current CPU that wont allow the new GPU to show more than half of it's potential performance' that made me laugh.
Reading such twaddle just makes you want to shoot yourself in the face. Blanket statements without knowing for example what resolution is being used are totally not useful.
2 issues with this... actually 3...
1) 16k to 25k is a fair chunk more than half.
2) Firestrike isnt strictly a real life gaming scenario and the results are built with cpu tests also.
3) Where in the op does it say "Hi I'm using a 1080ti.." those same results with say a 1060 might be very different. What you have done there is show that if using a wildly unbalanced system, that there will be bottlenecks.
4. The gpu scores are almost identical (margin of error. 4k lol really failed in trying to demonstrate the cpu would hold back the gpu by half its capability.
Like you say real gaming will though.
I'm so sorry replying late, been down town to check out some case fans for the new build.
BIG THANKS to all of you replying so swiftly and with many relevant opinions, suggestions and advice. They are all very useful and constructive especially for those that resonate in my mind. Truly appreciate!!
It's been 3 months since I started researching and updating myself on the latest. My budget is basically dependent on what is good for the next 5 years. More importantly, some components which provides important resources like the motherboard, RAM kits and today's NVMe SSD are prioritized to a slightly bigger portions of the budget. Also, those components which have a longer life span will be allocated with a bit more dollars as well. Contrast to those, expendable items like the case and case fans should be as lowest costs as possible. To me, the concept about a case is just a framed box that contains the whole system and it's pretty much stationery in the sense that it won't be ported from one place to another like in a LAN party that very often. And as you are well aware that case fans wear off pretty fast so I would expect replacement every two years or so. Further to that, getting a cheaper case will make dumping it later less of a waste of money. As to the PSU, it's the most critical part of the whole system and I intend to spend on something which has 10 years or at least 7 years warranty. Coolers is essential and I wish to get a decent AIO LCS something which assembles the H60 that has a life span of 5 years or so would be sufficient. In 5 years time, the whole rig should be quite outdated assuming most of the caps are melted down and either the Intel or the AMD chipset would have depreciated by so much that the overall productivity is pretty much 30% gone leaving a rather crippled and unstable piece of junk.
But I want to start with the right CPU first. Now you folks have almost convinced me about AMD. I do notice that AMD is getting very popular and positive comments keep popping up here and there, sort of all over the place. Even PS5 is going to deploy AMD Ryzen 3 upper class CPU and the Navi GPU and that I am curious; wanting to know if Navi has anything to do with AMD. I mention PS5 is because that is an implication which basically says future games will most probably follow the 8 core 16 threads architecture. Whether they initiate multi-threading or not (which I have seen 8700K gives no difference in both modes), these games are going to consume more power delivered by 8c16t operations and will be ported to the PC and PCs which are not up to the performance of 8c16t will be left without a chair when the music stops. If that is the trend, then choosing AMD at the present moment is no doubt, the most intelligent choice. The forward and backward compatibility of AMD CPUs and AM4 motherboards are also a great selling point from AMD. These merits are evident in many youtube vidoes that I've watched. However, with AMD systems, there are many issues to get sorted and need to be dealt with. Recently, I spotted an issue related to an AMD based build https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/ryzen-3700x-new-build-problem.3529260/page-2#post-21359291. I want to have a system which is "Good to go" once launched. A good example is like iPhone, it's all ready to go right out of the box. I don't like patching. Same case with Windows. Fixes and Updates every now and then. Back to AMD, playing around with motherboards' BIOS is a daunting experience. Intel offers a more convenient way to overclock and is trouble-free comparing to AMD. I enjoy spending time and effort to build a new system, but once that's done, I really don't want to get down to the nitty-gritty of trouble shooting BIOS issues, CPU issues or motherboard issues. In the above incident, JayzTwoCents discovered flashing the BIOS actually spoiled the original build which is something really irritating. Having said all that, IF a particular model of AMD is both stable and well established, I will certainly consider given their upgradability really is there.
Some of you has pointed out an upgrade to a better GPU is a great idea also. That is something I have not really realized so far. But here are my worries, RX 5500 is coming up and it is using PICe 4.0 and that is only available on X570 at the present moment. And my current system only supports PCIe 2.0, even I get an RX 590, it's not going to be fully utilized. So just upgrading the GPU is nonetheless a choice but it would be like baking a half-done cake. To make it clearer, do I get a 2060 now and dump it when RX 5500 comes out or get a RX 590 and wait for the RX 5500? Whichever way, that intermittent solution is going to be wasted. That's why I said in the beginning the budget is dependent on what is good.
I read through all of you folks responses and come up with an idea, which I don't know if it is good nor not: get a 1600X or i3 8100 and their compatible motherboards, put the best 1660 Ti in it, hook them up with a new 850W PSU, plug in some nice RAM kits and a lightning fast NVMe SSD, wrap it up with a very cheap case with 5 sides mesh(if there is one) and call that a day. I did watch a video where an 1600X coupled with a 2080 which makes Assassin Creed Odyssey running with 90+ FPS! Some of you are right on that, the CPU is less contributing in modern games than the GPU is. But on second thought, a slower CPU will cause longer loading time, is that correct?
Your opinions, suggestions and advices...
BIG THANKS to all of you replying so swiftly and with many relevant opinions, suggestions and advice. They are all very useful and constructive especially for those that resonate in my mind. Truly appreciate!!
It's been 3 months since I started researching and updating myself on the latest. My budget is basically dependent on what is good for the next 5 years. More importantly, some components which provides important resources like the motherboard, RAM kits and today's NVMe SSD are prioritized to a slightly bigger portions of the budget. Also, those components which have a longer life span will be allocated with a bit more dollars as well. Contrast to those, expendable items like the case and case fans should be as lowest costs as possible. To me, the concept about a case is just a framed box that contains the whole system and it's pretty much stationery in the sense that it won't be ported from one place to another like in a LAN party that very often. And as you are well aware that case fans wear off pretty fast so I would expect replacement every two years or so. Further to that, getting a cheaper case will make dumping it later less of a waste of money. As to the PSU, it's the most critical part of the whole system and I intend to spend on something which has 10 years or at least 7 years warranty. Coolers is essential and I wish to get a decent AIO LCS something which assembles the H60 that has a life span of 5 years or so would be sufficient. In 5 years time, the whole rig should be quite outdated assuming most of the caps are melted down and either the Intel or the AMD chipset would have depreciated by so much that the overall productivity is pretty much 30% gone leaving a rather crippled and unstable piece of junk.
But I want to start with the right CPU first. Now you folks have almost convinced me about AMD. I do notice that AMD is getting very popular and positive comments keep popping up here and there, sort of all over the place. Even PS5 is going to deploy AMD Ryzen 3 upper class CPU and the Navi GPU and that I am curious; wanting to know if Navi has anything to do with AMD. I mention PS5 is because that is an implication which basically says future games will most probably follow the 8 core 16 threads architecture. Whether they initiate multi-threading or not (which I have seen 8700K gives no difference in both modes), these games are going to consume more power delivered by 8c16t operations and will be ported to the PC and PCs which are not up to the performance of 8c16t will be left without a chair when the music stops. If that is the trend, then choosing AMD at the present moment is no doubt, the most intelligent choice. The forward and backward compatibility of AMD CPUs and AM4 motherboards are also a great selling point from AMD. These merits are evident in many youtube vidoes that I've watched. However, with AMD systems, there are many issues to get sorted and need to be dealt with. Recently, I spotted an issue related to an AMD based build https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/ryzen-3700x-new-build-problem.3529260/page-2#post-21359291. I want to have a system which is "Good to go" once launched. A good example is like iPhone, it's all ready to go right out of the box. I don't like patching. Same case with Windows. Fixes and Updates every now and then. Back to AMD, playing around with motherboards' BIOS is a daunting experience. Intel offers a more convenient way to overclock and is trouble-free comparing to AMD. I enjoy spending time and effort to build a new system, but once that's done, I really don't want to get down to the nitty-gritty of trouble shooting BIOS issues, CPU issues or motherboard issues. In the above incident, JayzTwoCents discovered flashing the BIOS actually spoiled the original build which is something really irritating. Having said all that, IF a particular model of AMD is both stable and well established, I will certainly consider given their upgradability really is there.
Some of you has pointed out an upgrade to a better GPU is a great idea also. That is something I have not really realized so far. But here are my worries, RX 5500 is coming up and it is using PICe 4.0 and that is only available on X570 at the present moment. And my current system only supports PCIe 2.0, even I get an RX 590, it's not going to be fully utilized. So just upgrading the GPU is nonetheless a choice but it would be like baking a half-done cake. To make it clearer, do I get a 2060 now and dump it when RX 5500 comes out or get a RX 590 and wait for the RX 5500? Whichever way, that intermittent solution is going to be wasted. That's why I said in the beginning the budget is dependent on what is good.
I read through all of you folks responses and come up with an idea, which I don't know if it is good nor not: get a 1600X or i3 8100 and their compatible motherboards, put the best 1660 Ti in it, hook them up with a new 850W PSU, plug in some nice RAM kits and a lightning fast NVMe SSD, wrap it up with a very cheap case with 5 sides mesh(if there is one) and call that a day. I did watch a video where an 1600X coupled with a 2080 which makes Assassin Creed Odyssey running with 90+ FPS! Some of you are right on that, the CPU is less contributing in modern games than the GPU is. But on second thought, a slower CPU will cause longer loading time, is that correct?
Your opinions, suggestions and advices...
Last edited:
Lol, GPU score is actually higher on the old CPU (granted very small margin). In other news, man shoots himself in foot.
lol, your ignorance shows literally zero understanding of how the 3DMark benchmark works.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2018
- Posts
- 3,395
First of all your system specs are not correct; you've listed an Ivy bridge motherboard with a Haswell CPU, the two do not work together so one of those is wrong. 
As some of the other guys have said, concentrate on your GPU first. You have not mentioned what resolution/frequency you will be gaming at which is key. Get the best GPU you can justify spending on for the particular resolution/frequency you want to game at.
It would also be a good idea to change your CPU/motherboard/RAM around now as good deals can be had for very good hardware that will last you for years.
As some of the other guys have said, concentrate on your GPU first. You have not mentioned what resolution/frequency you will be gaming at which is key. Get the best GPU you can justify spending on for the particular resolution/frequency you want to game at.
It would also be a good idea to change your CPU/motherboard/RAM around now as good deals can be had for very good hardware that will last you for years.
GPU score is calculated from FPS isn’t it? You’ll have to explain to me how a higher GPU score demonstrates that the GPU is being held back.
Soldato
You forgot that Firestrike is pretty old. Check current games how a quad core performs. You buy a CPU to play tomorrow's games also not those who came out 4 years ago. (Firestrike came out 2015)
No I didn’t forget. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not advocating that such an unbalanced system is a good idea. But I’m not making wild claims about performance impact either.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2018
- Posts
- 3,395
Good to have you back.
That is the only way to look at it. More than a few people will be gearing up for Cyberpunk 2077, which will not mimic the way that Firestrike is desgined.
Soldato
Good to have you back.
That is the only way to look at it. More than a few people will be gearing up for Cyberpunk 2077, which will not mimic the way that Firestrike is desgined.
Aha it was you......
Yeah. Even PDX games are coming out with more core usage to do background stuff.
Others might plan to use Intel Embree like WOT does. And here more cores are used to do hybrid Ray Tracing without the need of dedicated ray tracing CPU to do the job.
(quad cores here are completely crippled to death and even 8700K/9900K are getting beaten by the 3900X due to sheer number of cores)
And also are games like X4 which is using 10 cores (cores not threads) today with the 2.6 patch, with upcoming support to 16 core with 3.0.
That allows for more realistic world, better calculations and ofc true realistic economy this game brought. Such mechanics only MMORPGs with big servers were able to do them like EVE Online which is good example.
Lets consider how better games can be if more things are simulated realistically.
Take GTA as a good example, if you had several other gangs operating fully simulated by the CPU.
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2018
- Posts
- 895
The GPU scores were the result of the gpu's capability during which the cpu hardly have any part. Similarly, the physics score only tested the cpu. The combined score was where the gpu and cpu work together.
Sorry cut-and-past error, it's the 2550K.First of all your system specs are not correct; you've listed an Ivy bridge motherboard with a Haswell CPU, the two do not work together so one of those is wrong.
My LCD is a cheap BenQ and I intend to keep it. So 1080 gaming is really what will suffice my needs.
I think what will future proof me is the motherboard. A good motherboard should allow me to upgrade the CPU later though maybe after the 10 gen release, the 9900K will be vanishing in a year or two.
So I m coming up with the followings:
AMD system:
Ryzen 5 3400G
Asus ROG Strix X570-F Gaming
Wraith Spire stock cooler
Corsair Vengeance LPX (Black) 3000Mhz CS15 2 x 8GB (low profile without RGB)
Please recommend NVMe 1GB stick
Corsair RMx 850W
ASUS Dual GeForce® GTX 1660 Ti OC edition 6GB GDDR6
Please recommend a cheap case
Intel system
Core i3-9100F
Asus ROG Strix B365-F
Corsair H60 (2018) AIO LCS
Corsair Vengeance LPX (Black) 3000Mhz CS15 2 x 8GB (low profile without RGB)
Please recommend NVMe 1GB stick
Corsair RMx 850W
ASUS Dual GeForce® GTX 1660 Ti OC edition 6GB GDDR6
Please recommend a cheap case
Exciting RT algorithm. In fact when I studied at UMIST, I did research the RT algorithm. The image correctness of today's AAA games don't get that right in fact even though the river, water and ocean waves are all modelled but not done correctly.Aha it was you......
Yeah. Even PDX games are coming out with more core usage to do background stuff.
Others might plan to use Intel Embree like WOT does. And here more cores are used to do hybrid Ray Tracing without the need of dedicated ray tracing CPU to do the job.
(quad cores here are completely crippled to death and even 8700K/9900K are getting beaten by the 3900X due to sheer number of cores)
And also are games like X4 which is using 10 cores (cores not threads) today with the 2.6 patch, with upcoming support to 16 core with 3.0.
That allows for more realistic world, better calculations and ofc true realistic economy this game brought. Such mechanics only MMORPGs with big servers were able to do them like EVE Online which is good example.
Lets consider how better games can be if more things are simulated realistically.
Take GTA as a good example, if you had several other gangs operating fully simulated by the CPU.
Interesting that I saw a video on YouTube that an i5-9400F+RX570 can run RT in BF V...I'll check if I can get that video back...
Soldato
No no. Actually these are the missing reflections DICE culled intentionally to make Ray Tracing look better when activated. Dice admitted so.
These reflections exist on all previous games using Frostbite engine, all way to Battlefront 1.
That's the biggest Nvidia anti consumer scam exists atm, yet Nvidia fans try to bury it under the carpet.
The best part, is AMD cards lost almost no performance activating those reflections, while Nvidia cards like the 2070S loses 10% fps.
You don't need the 3400G as you're buying a GPU. The plain 3400 will do fine, though you could use the funds to upgrade to the the 3600.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2018
- Posts
- 3,395
My thoughts exactly. You've selected a good GPU that will do 1080P@60 gaming for a good while to come.