Why no love for the Ryzen line in build of the month?

[mrgreenthump]

7600K is the best value you can get for WoW.

For WoW.. It certainly isn't best "value". It is probably the highest performing without going overboard though.

[Lathais]

That's unfortunate but that's the goal. Considering the amount of people who would see those builds you cannot afford to have anything that would cause any potential issues in them.



Those people shouldnt be accounted for, they are an extremely small category.



There is a subforum for that. If you're looking to customize the build for your specific needs you can always do that there. Yes, builds of the month cannot be recommended but I very much doubt that there is a single user on this forum who would stand in to improve it, it's a daunting task.

Also, I dont get what would people do with it. There are no cookie cutter midrange builds right now, it very much depends on specific usecase, but for WoW those builds are pretty close to optimal: there is no point of getting anything AMD or a 7700K for WoW (WoW doesnt really benefit from HT either). Yes, case and cooler selections are odd, but those are there because people know those products, and would buy those without a question.



7600K is the best value you can get for WoW.

No. The best value for WoW only is a G4560. There is no arguing that. 7600k might be the best performing, but its price destroys it's value.

[Kagthul]

Its not only about the streamers, its about futureproofing your rig as well. People dont really buy a new pc that often, so you want to make sure that the stuff they buy wont suddenly become outdated 1-2 years later. The focus is shifting towards more cores, and the game industry will follow soon enough.

Been hearing that for over a decade now. Still hasn't materialized. Still isn't materializing. There are what.. four or five major games that make use of more than 2-3 cores seriously? And all of those still produce well over 60fps at high/ultra settings even on a G4560.

A 6 core Ryzen is more than good enough for WoW while being 20% +/- behind a 7600k, but at the same time you futureproof your rig for upcoming technology. Just take those 8k youtube vids that completely wrecks any 4 core as a worst case scenario example.

... considering sub-1% of PC users are using 4k monitors, 8k is utterly, totally absurdly irrelevant. No one is going there any time soon. And you can get native decode on those with a GPU.

I just feel that its silly to recommend a new pc build based on whats best at this very moment instead of thinking ahead, especially now that the market is shifting towards more cores. With Coffee Lake closing in, they got the perfect opportunity to make some decent changes to the BOTM page that could add more diversity for all gamers and not just WoW players.

It's a WoW fansite.

There are plenty of other sites that have builds for "regular gamers" (not that i like the BOTM builds).

As for recommending whats best at the moment vs future proofing... thats a matter of budget. You have to recommend builds that fit what the person needs, not what you think they need.

[Deleted]

Been hearing that for over a decade now. Still hasn't materialized. Still isn't materializing. There are what.. four or five major games that make use of more than 2-3 cores seriously? And all of those still produce well over 60fps at high/ultra settings even on a G4560.



... considering sub-1% of PC users are using 4k monitors, 8k is utterly, totally absurdly irrelevant. No one is going there any time soon. And you can get native decode on those with a GPU.



It's a WoW fansite.

There are plenty of other sites that have builds for "regular gamers" (not that i like the BOTM builds).

As for recommending whats best at the moment vs future proofing... thats a matter of budget. You have to recommend builds that fit what the person needs, not what you think they need.

Do you have any proof for your assertions? I dont agree with any of it. 4K will be the norm when the PS5 comes in a few years.

Also to anyone surfing this page, don't think about buying the G4560 or an i3. Its just bad advice at this stage. Even if you love intel a lot(like loads), wait for the new i3 with 4 cores, 8 threads coming very soon.

[Kagthul]

Do you have any proof for your assertions? I dont agree with any of it. 4K will be the norm when the PS5 comes in a few years.

.... the Steam Hardware Survey. People using higher resolutions than 1080p are sub 5%, and the vast majority of those are 1440p. Less than 1% run 4K.

as for thinking 4k is going to be the norm in a few years.... lolwut? For every 4K TV sold these days, 10+ 1080p sets are sold. (Consumer Electronics Assosciation sales figures). Hell, almost a third of TVs sold are still 720p, ffs.

The manufacturers are -desperately- trying to convince people that "4K is the future!!!1!1!1!!" because they (more precisely, thheir shareholders) became accustomed to the vastly inflated sales figures that came from the 'great transition' from CRTs to flat screens. In a desperate bid to try to keep sales at those (frankly, utterly unrealistic) levels, they are trying to convince the buying public that they have to replace their TVs AGAIN for 4K (just like they tried with 3D).

Problem is almost no one is buying. Theres no reason to, because theres hardly any 4K content. Hell, were FINALLY at the point where TV networks are actually broadcasting in 1080p instead of 720p upscaled to 1080i !

And, with the prevalence of Streaming on the rise, 4k content is even LESS likely to be viable, because US ISPs are implementing hard data caps (Comcast just dropped a 1TB cap on my previously unlimited service out of the blue. Just doing gaming/downloading the occasional game via Steam, and using Sling TV for streaming (set to the 720p preset for data consumption), i regularly hit 800-900GB of data. Streaming in 4K would blow my data cap in a week!) making that foolish.

Companies are certainly pushing 4K, but few people are buying. Hell, Sony's own data on the PS4 Pro shiws that single-digit percentages of consoles are hooked up to 4K TVs.

[mrgreenthump]

4k is certainly the future, but the infrastructure just isn't there yet. But it's slowly coming.. Prices need to drop though, but it should get better once it comes the new stardard for more content.

As for the other 1080p resolutions, they will always be marginal(much like 720p), because there just isn't much content outside of gaming that supports them. Content creators certainly won't use anything below 4k anymore, so you only get gamers buying gaming monitors/panels, which means the monitors are expensive for no real reason and people won't buy them.

[Kagthul]

Content creators certainly won't use anything below 4k anymore,

.....

wut?

Name a major content creation company that is creating TV in 4k Regularly.

Oh, yeah. There are none.

It's only happening in the theater space, and not even a lot there.

Almost no one creates content in 4k.

Im not saying it's not 'the future' - it is.

But it's the future in 5+ years. Or more.

Uptake is going to be marginal until there's actually content that people want in 4k.

[mrgreenthump]

.....

wut?

Use =/ make.

So, yeah.

[Deleted]

4K is well past its early adopter stage. It is the new standard. The numbers are not going to go into reverse no matter how much you wish it so.

PC's may be lagging well behind. But that is the industry's problem. Difficult to invest on the PC side when a 1080 ti struggles and monitors(with rubbish PQ) cost more than a large 4K TV. The PS4 and the Pro are that much more accessible if you care about controller gaming.

But back on topic. The intel cpu high pricing for half the performance are in mainstream news websites. I am reading articles that recommend Ryzen across the board. The issue here isnt performance its that Intel has a monopoly and can do whatever they like. Its just amusing seeing people trying to justify very expensive Intel K chips (that are about to be replaced) right now for all the wrong reasons.

[Lathais]

4K is well past its early adopter stage. It is the new standard. The numbers are not going to go into reverse no matter how much you wish it so.

Considering I know 4 different people who have purchased TVs in the past few months, if 4K were the new standard you'd figure at least one of them would have bought a 4K TV right? Well, you'd be wrong. They all bought 1080p TVs. Yeah, that's just anecdotal, but like Kagthul said, for every one 4K display sold there are 10 1080p displays sold. That doesn't sound like a new standard to me. It sounds like something that failed to take over after the early adopter stage. It sounds to me like you are the one who thinks the numbers are reversed and they are not going to reverse no matter how much you say they are.

[pansertjald]

Considering I know 4 different people who have purchased TVs in the past few months, if 4K were the new standard you'd figure at least one of them would have bought a 4K TV right? Well, you'd be wrong. They all bought 1080p TVs. Yeah, that's just anecdotal, but like Kagthul said, for every one 4K display sold there are 10 1080p displays sold. That doesn't sound like a new standard to me. It sounds like something that failed to take over after the early adopter stage. It sounds to me like you are the one who thinks the numbers are reversed and they are not going to reverse no matter how much you say they are.

I really think that depends on the country you come from. Here in Denmark it would be REALLY stupid not to by a 4K tv. You can get a 49" LG 4K tv for 474$ wich is really cheap for at tv here in Denmark and if you up it to 590$ you get one with HDR. So i would say that 7 out 10 people here in Denmark buys 4K screens, Because they are just as cheap now as 1080p screens.

But for Computer monitors 4K is still far far away from being something you should aim for

[Kagthul]

I really think that depends on the country you come from. Here in Denmark it would be REALLY stupid not to by a 4K tv. You can get a 49" LG 4K tv for 474$ wich is really cheap for at tv here in Denmark and if you up it to 590$ you get one with HDR. So i would say that 7 out 10 people here in Denmark buys 4K screens, Because they are just as cheap now as 1080p screens.

But for Computer monitors 4K is still far far away from being something you should aim for

Ill look for records, but i highly doubt 4k has that kind of adoption even in Europe. Just because they are available doesn't mean theyre being bought.

It's not even about cost here in the US. I can go to Micro Center right now and get a Vizio 4K TV for about ~400$ US on sale (and Micro Center always has SOME brand on sale for around that price). Or i could go to Wal-mart and get a Sceptre 4k (which actually gets OK reviews considering how cheap it is) for like 299$.

I wouldn't buy it, though.

There's no content to watch on it, and i dont want to deal with upscaling issues. A good HDR 1080p set that is the same size, and actually has a decent number of HDMI ports is about 100$ cheaper (than the Vizio, about the same price as the Sceptre) and will do me just fine for the next 5-8 years.

[pansertjald]

Ill look for records, but i highly doubt 4k has that kind of adoption even in Europe. Just because they are available doesn't mean theyre being bought.

It's not even about cost here in the US. I can go to Micro Center right now and get a Vizio 4K TV for about ~400$ US on sale (and Micro Center always has SOME brand on sale for around that price). Or i could go to Wal-mart and get a Sceptre 4k (which actually gets OK reviews considering how cheap it is) for like 299$.

I wouldn't buy it, though.

There's no content to watch on it, and i dont want to deal with upscaling issues. A good HDR 1080p set that is the same size, and actually has a decent number of HDMI ports is about 100$ cheaper (than the Vizio, about the same price as the Sceptre) and will do me just fine for the next 5-8 years.

Here in Denmar it's Samsung, LG, Phillips, Sony and Panasonic that are the best sellers and they keep lowering the prices because of the competition on the market. There are only 5 mill. people in Denmark so to sell alot of tv's they have to lower the prices all the time.

I have a 4K tv from Samsung UE55MU7005TXXC, wich i got on sall for 1200$. There is not alot of content for 4K, but at that prices it was stupid not to get it, when i had to get a new tv

[Kagthul]

Best numbers i can find are from last year, with the EU having about a 19% penetration of UHD TVs, most of that being from the early-adopter rush in 2014. Predictions say that by late 2019/2020, that might be as high as 35%, if sales continue to climb (which they have not, in 2017, they havent fallen, either, but have been fairly flat).

Similar figures for the US - about 15-20%, almost all from the early adopter rush, with flat sales of 4K TVs since. Predictions as high as 35% (most say 30%) by 2020 - when the very first broadcast 4k content will be available - the 2020 Olympics.

- - - Updated - - -

when i had to get a new tv

And there's also the rub.

Most people in the US just got new TVs within the last 5-10 years because of the big switch from CRTs to flat panels. Very few people are in a rush (particularly given the economy) to throw away a perfectly good TV and b uy a new one that has no content to watch on it.

I'm not.

My 4 year old Vizio 42" 1080p TV is just fine.

[pansertjald]

Best numbers i can find are from last year, with the EU having about a 19% penetration of UHD TVs, most of that being from the early-adopter rush in 2014. Predictions say that by late 2019/2020, that might be as high as 35%, if sales continue to climb (which they have not, in 2017, they havent fallen, either, but have been fairly flat).

Similar figures for the US - about 15-20%, almost all from the early adopter rush, with flat sales of 4K TVs since. Predictions as high as 35% (most say 30%) by 2020 - when the very first broadcast 4k content will be available - the 2020 Olympics.

- - - Updated - - -



And there's also the rub.

Most people in the US just got new TVs within the last 5-10 years because of the big switch from CRTs to flat panels. Very few people are in a rush (particularly given the economy) to throw away a perfectly good TV and b uy a new one that has no content to watch on it.

I'm not.

My 4 year old Vizio 42" 1080p TV is just fine.

With all the 4K tv sale here in Denmark right now i think it will go up by alot. Right now we have 3 really big Store chains here in Denmark all fighting for the consumer, so the prices keeps getting lower and lower, but the services allso keeps getting worse and worse, so thats the down side to low prices on 4K tv's and they are allso selling 4K tv's with 2-3 4K films included for free