Search results

In your case I would probably wait until AMD Zen2/Zen3 and Intel Cannonlake processors

I doubt you will manage that with under 2k budget, even if you buy parts from different sources to minimise the cost. To save some cost. M2 SSDs are not worth it, just get a Samsung EVO or something similar. You won't need that 32 GB of RAM, 16 is more than enough unless you plan at running...

I was lazy this time around and paid to get it assembled by OCUK, they offer a "free" Nitro Concepts chair with 1700x and 1800x in their Ryzen configurator: http://imgur.com/FbA3AQP P.S. Is it only me or the IMG tag is broken on this forum? When it comes to your heatsink height problems...

Welcome on my boat two months ago. I was getting increasingly obsessed with Ryzen vs 7700k vs 7820x benchmarks. There is not hiding that 7700k gives the highest gaming performance on the market right now unless you do stuff like recording your gaming for Youtube / streaming in the background. If...

Err, how this makes Rise of The Tomb Raider an AMD title? The benchmark was run with a Geforce card and the game was tragically unoptimised for Ryzen at the start. I don't have deep enough knowledge of programming and compilers to even question if this division between AMD and Intel titles...

I have to agree with the rest, R5 1600 OC'ed to approx 4 GHz is a better choice. i5 are a thing of the past. If you however insist on i5, go for i5-7600K, but only after seeing some Youtube benchmarks.

Actually this is not true. "It might be the same for all CPUs" would be closer to the truth. As the case of Rise of the Tomb Raider and Ryzen shown, there are platform specific optimisation developers can implement when compiling the binary:

I have seen this happen with OC'ed 7700k in Battlefield benchmarks too, for couple of seconds. I wouldn't call Frostbite 3 engine unoptimised, especially in BF. Unless this is really affecting your performance I wouldn't be concerned. It is not like Farcry games go easy on the CPU.

It is, both Ryzen and 7820x were shown to deliver average performance at best:

Personally I would go for 7820x over 7900x. I had no problem with spending extra money on 7820x, however in the case of 7900x the performance to price ratio is even more out of whack when you compare against Ryzen. I simply don't need that extra multicore performance for double price. My...

I don't particularly care about the brand. My old rig was built around 3570k, two before that around AMD CPUs. I didn't want a 4 core CPU this time around, despite OCe'd Intel's 7700k still delivering the highest possible performance in games. You can see in quite a few games that 7700k is...

All depends on you. I decided to take a leap and bought Ryzen 7. My old rig is 3570k. While I don't game as much as I used to I felt recently especially in Battlefield 1 that I get CPU bottlenecked. From reviews and benchmarks I have seen so far Ryzen 1600 and Ryzen 1700(x)/1800(x) don't...

A great review. It shows nice Ryzen performance gains thanks to higher frequency RAM: It looks like my decision to get Ryzen was a sound one. I was extravagant and bought more expensive Ryzen 1800x, yet I still saved 300 quid over Intel 7820x. If Zen2 delivers some amazing performance in...

I'm faced with a similar dilemma. From what I know quad channel ddr4 is mainly more expensive and won't benefit you much. I wouldn't go for 7800x, if anything 7820x, but that is again slightly more expensive. 7820x is faster anywhere between 10 to 20 % than Ryzen 7, however as all new i7 and i9...

It has been almost 4 years since I have built my last rig. This time around I'm planning to be lazy and get OcUK team to build it for me. As we all know this has been interesting couple of months with release of Ryzen and new Intel line-up with i7-7800x/i7-7820x and i9-7900x leading the way. As...