@HH, where can i get the settings used for the Deus Ex Mankind Divided video? im curious to see how my current rig performs
I'm in the same situation. a) All in all I prefer to wait for next Intel generation which is rumored to be 6 cores mainstream. b) Wait for more 1700 reviews, user overclocks, more BIOS and windows updates, maybe some developers gonna release something too - so, decide to pick 1700 or not. c) Grab a 6800k too. d) VEGA released in May, and it's not long enough to wait too. (not about CPU, but anyway)
It would be great if you could make few more charts: Performance/Watt (Until this week Intel was proud at it). Performance/$$$ Does any 1 knows when can we see how 89$ B350 MB performs/can it hold 3.8~4.0 Ghz OC on 1700? if we must ger 250$+ X370 for OC above 3.8GHZ it's not so good IMO.
If we accept that both parts of the video were treated equally in encoding, then it should be just fine for comparing. If stutter ends up being visible in 30fps YouTube videos, (and reported from places like the TechReport), then yeah. I still believe that the Creator's Update and newer GPU drivers will make a big difference.
The thing is you can induce stutter with high frame rates being compressed to 30 FPS. I've seen it myself. This is why FCAT is more telling than a YouTube video.
At least your 4770k is powerful enough compared to my old 2500k hehe. Fps drops in FH3 = crash = loss. I would wait for the 1600x, but I have enough of waiting for new CPUs. Bought a 6800k today with the asus x99 a ii, will try it. Hopefully I'll get 4.2ghz at good temperatures. If the cpu lottery is a completely fail, I will return it, bought a return-guarantee,and then wait for good availability for AM4 boards and then buy a Ryzen 1700(x) or even wait for 1600x..
I am obviously not comparing it to FCAT The differences in framerate in the video weren't so huge either, and there are a lot of people who report this at this point. It's not as if it doesn't make any sense. I honestly want to see a rerun of the reviews once the Creator's Update is out. We haven't had a truly new CPU for so long, that we have forgotten how it is.
Thank you HH. I think we can assume there's allot of horse power not being used that could improve the results, no? Sorry. Yup, I expect in the future for this processor to kick ass. Isn't DX12 supposed to be better for draw calls and CPU performance? Reviewers fault but Ryzen was supposed to be at disadvantage then! Thanks, always interesting to compare. My 2500k never let me down either
Can I suggest new Benchmarking method? Few month ago I upgraded my old I7 -860@4Ghz to brand new i3 6100 because I saw it performed as good as i5 and almost as good as i7 in benchmarks (i3/i5/i7 skylake reviews) and it offered better performanc then my i7 860 while saving power and less hit (used water cooling and high Vcore to get 4.0GHZ) But in real life this cpu is crap! in real life you don't play like in benchmarking style, in real life you use other programs running in background like Discord/skype/Game recording and then you see the real difference between 2C/4T~4C/8T! Yes I see over 100FPS with RX 470 @1080P but actual game is not smooth, you can feel fps drop for milliseconds when other program needs cpu power, even Relive is too heavy for this I3 6100, so even tho in benchmarks I3 6100 2c/4t cpu performed very good -in real life it's very bad and waste of money. So - I wish we could see gaming benchmarks @ real life scenario, using other programs/game recording while gaming to show the performance impact of 2C/4C/8C while gaming.
Main issue with an i3 is the lowest framerates are too low. Average framerate is solid. People (and web reviews) just don't use that low FPS metric enough, too busy looking at average framerates and the i3 performs very good there. They're quite competent for the price but if you hate occasional slow-downs while gaming, an i3 will disappoint. I still have an i7 860 as well an i3 2120 in use (my son's 2 rigs). The old i7 is still a solid performer with new games.
Just cant see the 1700x or 1800x worth the extra over the 1700. Especially since OC'ing doesnt seem worth the effort, power/heat for the small gains. 1700 vs 1800x @ 1440p and 4k and other benches: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oL7HxQFsc5Y
You bought 2c/4t cpu when you knew you will record games, use skype, whatever during gaming. Congrats dude!
To accept this as a true step forward and entirely new architecture, I would like to see its performance with Skyrim, where every quad and eight core AMD's cpu gives less fps even than Intel's dual cores lol...it would be a decisive info for me, HH can I have it please?
You talk about how this architecture is new and a possible step forward, then want a game tested that does not use more than one core? Skyrim is a bad game to use as a measuring stick. It's almost as bad a testing with any assassin's creed game.
