What (WoW) computer would you prefer - POLL

[Evildeffy]

According to this article it's not all of them. Also, Intel is not doing tick-tack-toe anymore, so no architectural improvements over Skylake, only node improvements.

Yes ... that doesn't change anything in my statement to yours where you stated it's a HEDT derivative where it's not.
Coffee Lake is a refinement of Kaby Lake (repeating myself here) and therefore it CANNOT be from a HEDT family of processors.

According your very article it states that all Coffee Lake-S products (the mainstream DT processors, like the 7700K from Kaby Lake) will be part of the Z370 first and later Z390 chipset update, so yes ... all Coffee Lake products.

Doesnt mean anything, Ryzen 7 1700 is 65W while 1700X and 1800X are both 95W TDP. AMD just slapped a Tdie offset onto the latter two.

There's a big difference between Ryzen and Intel in their 14nm efficiency lithography.
AMD's Ryzen is simply more power efficient, there's no denying that at all.
But it depends upon how much power you're pushing through the chips and what speeds you're giving them to maintain that TDP.
Intel is going from a 91W TDP from the 7700K Kaby Lake to 95W TDP 8700K Coffee Lake with, so far leaked, absurd Turbo speeds.

It would mean that Intel has found a way to improve their Kaby Lake uArch to such a point as to get another 60%+ power efficiency out of them if they can stick to their TDP or straight up lie about their TDP rating.
My guess is the latter as improving power efficiency by 60% on the same uArch and same lithography isn't happening, even for a giant such as Intel.

That still doesn't change the fact that there's no different power circuitry as all the basics are powering it as it should be within the same envelope and the same pinout system, it's still LGA1151 and prototyping was done on Z270 boards... there's no difference.

Holding back what? Motherboard by allowing the usage 2 channel memory controller equipped CPUs on a 4 channel motherboard? CPU by installing it to a LGA2066 substrate? Yes, LGA2066 boards work with both FIVR equipped chips and chips that dont have it, but that doesnt mean Z270 boards can work with FIVR. I mean it's probably not a system logic level problem, but you have to make a new board for sure.

Holding back Z270 support from the Coffee Lake CPUs, I would've thought that'd be obvious in my statements, Coffee Lake will not have FIVR.. they made that mistake with Ivy Bridge IIRC and they dumped it almost immediately.
Adding a FIVR makes the CPU considerably hotter and inefficient vs. mobo controlled.

AMD does it, why wouldnt Intel do it aswell? Intel could absolutely fit a 6core into 100W TDP range with 7700K-like clocks by slapping some solder under the lid, but I guess it's not their way.

Because their Skylake/Kaby Lake process simply isn't near the same level of efficiency even if they soldered it.
The leap of improvement would be huge, one of which is normally accredited only to lithography jumps.

We're not getting any here and Skylake is technically more power efficient than Kaby Lake.

Solder will not "save" them here on that TDP rating.

[Barnabas]

If you have 1200 usd to spend you can get nicer builds than in the op. The issue right now is the price of new gpus are insane so it blows up your budget quite easily.

[Denpepe]

It's not because some clueless ASrock cs rep says it wont be compatible that it actually wont be, there are rumours salso floating around coffee lake will work with Z270 boards and maybe even some Z170, time will tell.

[Thunderball]

Yes ... that doesn't change anything in my statement to yours where you stated it's a HEDT derivative where it's not.
Coffee Lake is a refinement of Kaby Lake (repeating myself here) and therefore it CANNOT be from a HEDT family of processors.

According your very article it states that all Coffee Lake-S products (the mainstream DT processors, like the 7700K from Kaby Lake) will be part of the Z370 first and later Z390 chipset update, so yes ... all Coffee Lake products.

Yes, it's a node refinement, but not a new uarch. That article states no such thing, it just states which chips will be released with each chipset. Furthermore, it looks like Z370 is the direct refresh of the Z270 with the high possibility of chips launching with it working with Z270, where Z390 is a completely new chipset which will support a processor family that possibly brings some architectural improvements.

There's a big difference between Ryzen and Intel in their 14nm efficiency lithography.
AMD's Ryzen is simply more power efficient, there's no denying that at all.
But it depends upon how much power you're pushing through the chips and what speeds you're giving them to maintain that TDP.
Intel is going from a 91W TDP from the 7700K Kaby Lake to 95W TDP 8700K Coffee Lake with, so far leaked, absurd Turbo speeds.

It would mean that Intel has found a way to improve their Kaby Lake uArch to such a point as to get another 60%+ power efficiency out of them if they can stick to their TDP or straight up lie about their TDP rating.
My guess is the latter as improving power efficiency by 60% on the same uArch and same lithography isn't happening, even for a giant such as Intel.

That still doesn't change the fact that there's no different power circuitry as all the basics are powering it as it should be within the same envelope and the same pinout system, it's still LGA1151 and prototyping was done on Z270 boards... there's no difference.

I dont care about efficiency here, it's irrelevant. You doubted that you can actually keep hotter chips in a specific TDP range so I'm giving you a very recent example.

What's absurd about the Turbo 3.0 speeds? Threadripper pushes 4.2 GHz XFR, it's hot, but it's fine. Ryzen 7 1700 saves 30W of TDP by dropping base clocks (exactly what Intel is doing here). They dont need to improve anything as TDP ratings have very little to do with actual peak thermals or overclocked thermals even.

Also, we dont know that they used actual production Z270 boards, we only know that they used a Z270 chipset, which doesnt mean anything.

Holding back Z270 support from the Coffee Lake CPUs, I would've thought that'd be obvious in my statements, Coffee Lake will not have FIVR.. they made that mistake with Ivy Bridge IIRC and they dumped it almost immediately.
Adding a FIVR makes the CPU considerably hotter and inefficient vs. mobo controlled.

We dont know that yet, all we know is that: 1) 6 core parts wont work on Z270 (we dont know if it's artificial or did the boards require actual changes to support 6 cores); 2) Some Coffee Lake-S chips will run on Z270, so let's wait for the lineup detailed.

FIVR has some pros and cons but there is nothing inherently wrong with it. Intel have been using FIVR with their HEDT chips for a long time already. They had problems with FIVR on Haswell so they ditched it with Skylake, but even back then some sources already stated that Intel will return to that tech later.

Because their Skylake/Kaby Lake process simply isn't near the same level of efficiency even if they soldered it.
The leap of improvement would be huge, one of which is normally accredited only to lithography jumps.

We're not getting any here and Skylake is technically more power efficient than Kaby Lake.

Solder will not "save" them here on that TDP rating.

Yes, they wont run cooler in peak loads (heat dissipated is still the same) but the heat itself would be dissipated faster, allowing for a lower TDP rating (which is typical operation, not maximum load).

[Lathais]

Wow, your really on today aren't you. I don't remember Z270 being the same price as Z170. I remember people buying Z170s still because they were chepaer then having issues when the did not have a CPU with which to flash the BIOS so it would work with their new CPU. Maybe I'm wrong, but I specifically remember that exact scenario playing out multiple times. People still bought Z170 because they were cheaper, not the same price as Z270. This is also STILL the case as the cheapest Z170 you can get is $67.99. The cheapest Z270 I see is $99.99.

Funny, when I click that link, the cheapest I see is $100. Even if it is $85:
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/sfc...erboard-ab350m
That's only $60.

No, I won't see it, because I'll have V-Sync on and they'll both be 30 FPS to me at that point. That's also if, and it's a pretty big if, it's really 20% behind. It's not really that far behind at all, so even if you like seeing screen tearing the difference will not be that much.

[Evildeffy]

Yes, it's a node refinement, but not a new uarch. That article states no such thing, it just states which chips will be released with each chipset. Furthermore, it looks like Z370 is the direct refresh of the Z270 with the high possibility of chips launching with it working with Z270, where Z390 is a completely new chipset which will support a processor family that possibly brings some architectural improvements.

Are you aware of what you've stated previously and now changing to agree with my statement? Because you're now exclaiming some strange things to what you were prior.

Your article states, in the roadmap and text, that Z370 is a Kaby Lake PCH Refresh (that's what the R stands for), granted it does not DIRECTLY state it's not backwards compatible but I think ASRock with this tweet pretty much confirmed it for you:
Coffee Lake CPUs not compatible with Z270 boards

I dont care about efficiency here, it's irrelevant. You doubted that you can actually keep hotter chips in a specific TDP range so I'm giving you a very recent example.

You should as TDP is not related to just temperatures, which you seem to think it is.
You can't make the 7700K a 65W part simply by soldering them f.ex.

So yes it's HIGHLY relevant.

What's absurd about the Turbo 3.0 speeds? Threadripper pushes 4.2 GHz XFR, it's hot, but it's fine. Ryzen 7 1700 saves 30W of TDP by dropping base clocks (exactly what Intel is doing here). They dont need to improve anything as TDP ratings have very little to do with actual peak thermals or overclocked thermals even.

And yet you state something entirely different above.
The clocks are fine and believable, it is irrevocably a Kaby Lake "refinement"... but I'm referring to the fact of going beyond the amount of power draw that they're rated for.
Kaby Lake's 7700K draws around 88 - 92W of power on full stock load, which is in it's TDP rating.
Skylake-X's 7900X can draw up to 220W of power on full stock load (AVX) which is considerably beyond it's TDP rating. (not a power virus either)

Their TDP rating would mean that they refined the Kaby Lake CPU so much (napkin math ~60%) that they can offer almost the same clock speeds, 50% more cores in the same power envelope as their previous generation 77700K all whilst remaining on the same lithography and same uArch process... you don't see the "not happening" bit with this?

Also, we dont know that they used actual production Z270 boards, we only know that they used a Z270 chipset, which doesnt mean anything.

I didn't say that, I stated they used Z270 boards to prototype test the Coffee Lake CPUs which means it CAN be made compatible but is chosen NOT to.

We dont know that yet, all we know is that: 1) 6 core parts wont work on Z270 (we dont know if it's artificial or did the boards require actual changes to support 6 cores); 2) Some Coffee Lake-S chips will run on Z270, so let's wait for the lineup detailed.

1: We already know it's Coffee Lake in it's entirety thanks to ASRock and we know it's artificial due to using Z270 boards for prototype testing... same thing with X79/X99 LGA2011 sockets.
2: Source for this? Everything I've seen so far disputes that instantly.

FIVR has some pros and cons but there is nothing inherently wrong with it. Intel have been using FIVR with their HEDT chips for a long time already. They had problems with FIVR on Haswell so they ditched it with Skylake, but even back then some sources already stated that Intel will return to that tech later.

Never said it was a "wrong" technology, only said it makes the chips hotter and consume more power.
That's why they dropped it, much like AMD and their HWS in their GPUs except AMD keeps it onboard.

Yes, they wont run cooler in peak loads (heat dissipated is still the same) but the heat itself would be dissipated faster, allowing for a lower TDP rating (which is typical operation, not maximum load).

You're missing my point... even if soldered it will not lower the amount close enough to significantly reduce TDP.
The rating will remain pretty close to the 85W mark regardless, it will not make up the gap of going from 4C8T 91W to 6C12T 95W.

[Deleted]

Yo guys....wtf happened to the OP?

Moremana looks around..."he was a here a while ago."

Thanks for your concer. I've decided to go with the mid range build since it seems to be more apt for the future, not just for wow but also in other areas.

[moremana]

Thanks for your concer. I've decided to go with the mid range build since it seems to be more apt for the future, not just for wow but also in other areas.

Congratulations!

Its a good build for what you are doing. The only thing I would add is a SSD for a boot drive and use the mechanical one for storage, once you have one you will never go back to a mechanical.

[Enfilade]

Congratulations!

Its a good build for what you are doing. The only thing I would add is a SSD for a boot drive and use the mechanical one for storage, once you have one you will never go back to a mechanical.

How do you figure? A Pentium at half the cost will run WoW exponentially better than any Ryzen, due to WoW being single-core demanding.

[moremana]

How do you figure? A Pentium at half the cost will run WoW exponentially better than any Ryzen, due to WoW being single-core demanding.

lol, where did I say it was better at running wow than a say g4560?

Thats right I didnt!

[Enfilade]

lol, where did I say it was better at running wow than a say g4560?

Thats right I didnt!

"It's a good build for what you are doing."

There's no circumstance, for WoW, where an AMD CPU would be better than Intel. He could have saved a ton of money by building around a Pentium, AND would have had better performance.

[moremana]

"It's a good build for what you are doing."

There's no circumstance, for WoW, where an AMD CPU would be better than Intel. He could have saved a ton of money by building around a Pentium, AND would have had better performance.

That is not a "better" statement, go annoy someone else, it isnt working.

I have a Ryzen system and a 7700k system, unless Im looking at a FPS meter I cant tell the difference, and yes I play at a higher resolution than 1080p.

His system is fine for what he is doing and is suited for a long term investment better than a 2 core chip. I did not say it was better at running wow.

Move along and stop pissing on his parade, hes happy and Im sure hes playing WoW just fine.

[Sorshen]

How do you figure? A Pentium at half the cost will run WoW exponentially better than any Ryzen, due to WoW being single-core demanding.

'exponentially', lol. Blowing things out of proportion in this subforum is hitting new ... lows.

[Enfilade]

'exponentially', lol. Blowing things out of proportion in this subforum is hitting new ... lows.

Intel will always be superior to AMD in the single-core department, which is what WoW happens to be. Is this not widespread information?

Nice bait, though.

[Sorshen]

It is superior. But not exponentially. Get a fucking grip. He'll be fine.

[Lathais]

Intel will always be superior to AMD in the single-core department, which is what WoW happens to be. Is this not widespread information?

Nice bait, though.

Yeah, it's better, but not exponentially better. It's marginally better at this point. So little better in fact, that unless you are staring at an FPS meter, you are not gonna see the difference.

In addition to that, you realize the pentium can not be OCed, but the Ryzens can. An R3 1200 OCed to 3.7 actually benchmarks better on single core performance than the Pentium G4560.

[Zenfoldor]

WoW is of course optimized for Intel and Nvidia. The former being vital to any build associated with the game. You should never build a Ryzen computer just to play WoW, wrong tool for the job. If WoW is your main game, do yourself a favor: Intel/Nvidia.

[Deleted]

WoW is of course optimized for Intel and Nvidia. The former being vital to any build associated with the game. You should never build a Ryzen computer just to play WoW, wrong tool for the job. If WoW is your main game, do yourself a favor: Intel/Nvidia.

I have no experience of running wow on both platforms in the last 6-7 years, and cannot provide reliable metrics for both Ryzen and pentium/i3/i5 in wow. Due to this I remain quiet, as who cares about opinions

In short, if people feel so vociferously about this, provide some facts, not endless lip beating.

[Kagthul]

So little better in fact, that unless you are staring at an FPS meter, you are not gonna see the difference.

Still take exception to this. Different people see different framerate drops differently.

I can tell the moment it isn't 60fps. If i was playing with normal Vsync on, it would be maddening - the jump from 60 to 30 would make me tear my hair out. I play with adaptive Vsync (not Gsync, but nVidias implementation at the driver) where it caps the FPS at your monitor's refresh rate but doesn't cause it to drop immediately to 45/30 when it cant maintain the max, and i notice IMMEDIATELY if it drops even to 55fps or so. Its annoying as all hell. (Gsync monitor is in the cards when there is money for it).

Other people cant even tell the difference between 30 and 60fps at all.... so, your mileage may vary.

In addition to that, you realize the pentium can not be OCed, but the Ryzens can. An R3 1200 OCed to 3.7 actually benchmarks better on single core performance than the Pentium G4560.

Correct, but when we're talking budget building, the Pentium is still a far better deal even than the R3 1200. You can usually walk out the door with a G4560 or G4600 (some places actually have the G4600 available cheaper because of the run on the G4560) AND the motherboard for the price of the R3 alone.

Now, if you've got the extra ~40-60$ of budget to afford the Ryzen... get the Ryzen. It's better in every way than anything Intel offers right up until the i5-K chip and WAY cheaper.

[Zenfoldor]

I have no experience of running wow on both platforms in the last 6-7 years, and cannot provide reliable metrics for both Ryzen and pentium/i3/i5 in wow. Due to this I remain quiet, as who cares about opinions

In short, if people feel so vociferously about this, provide some facts, not endless lip beating.

Honestly, in the absence of benchmarks, people should just assume that Intel is better for Legion in a CPU limited area, due to the higher IPC. I'd love to see a legit bench comparing the two cpus in WoW though. There just aren't any WoW benchmarks for Ryzen that I can find.