Need guidance [processor]

[Deleted]

Need some help with processors

since the info about the intel leak, even tho i dont really know 100% what i means.
Is it still worth going for intel after this? or is AMD the choice now? Cause i've been looking on a 8700k

Thanks for the help.

[pansertjald]

Yes Intel is still the go to CPU for gaming. The Bug will not effect gaming at all

The I7 8700k is still king of gaming

[Vash The Stampede]

The situation with Intel isn't over. We don't know yet the full extent of the problems. Remember the whole Spectre and Meltdown thing was under NDA, until a patch for the Linux kernel brought this out to light. And Intels fixes have been half ass so far. I would not buy an Intel CPU right now, at least not for a few months. AMD might not be entirely innocent either as they've been rather quiet about Intel's fiasco. You would think that AMD would capitalize on Intel's unfortunate situation, but so far I haven't seen them do so. Which tells me they might have some issues they aren't telling everyone just yet.

As for the i7 8700K, I would not buy either way. Just because the Ryzen 7 1700 is just far more cheaper and has 2 extra cores. Intel is still faster in WoW, but not newer games. At least with newer games that have been properly patched.

[Deleted]

Intel had a secret deal with the NSA so they can freely enter your computer without u knowing it. Their processors were built that way. Very dirty.

AMD never had that.

Even if Intel is better for gaming (a couple percentages, u almost wont notice any difference) just go for AMD.

Teach those fuckers a lesson.

My advice is wait for the new Ryzen processors which will come out soon.

[Deleted]

Thanks for the replys

[nocturnus]

Need some help with processors

since the info about the intel leak, even tho i dont really know 100% what i means.
Is it still worth going for intel after this? or is AMD the choice now? Cause i've been looking on a 8700k

Thanks for the help.

As the reviews of respectable sites have shown, the 8700k is virtually unmatched in games. The i5 variant is a good option as well. Both brands were affected by the leaks [already patched], so that shouldn’t really affect your choice.

Go for it!

[chazus]

Intel had a secret deal with the NSA so they can freely enter your computer without u knowing it. Their processors were built that way. Very dirty.

Do you have a (reliable) source on this?

AMD never had that.

Yes, it did (if we're talking about the spectre/meltdown stuff)

[Twoddle]

As the reviews of respectable sites have shown, the 8700k is virtually unmatched in games. The i5 variant is a good option as well.

What's changed on the i5 vs i7 front with regards to gaming? Last year everyone was saying the i7 is not worth buying for gaming because of the small gains or even losses and that the i7 is only worth it if you're streaming and video editing and other stuff but not gaming specifically.

[nocturnus]

What's changed on the i5 vs i7 front with regards to gaming? Last year everyone was saying the i7 is not worth buying for gaming because of the small gains or even losses and that the i7 is only worth it if you're streaming and video editing and other stuff but not gaming specifically.

Those fairy tales have been debunked more than once, so I won't go into that [again].

The i5 8600k has 6 cores, compared to the i7 7700k 4 cores and 8 threads, so essentially you'll be getting i7 quality performance for an i5 price. Bang for buck, the 8600k is an amazing CPU.

[Coldkil]

What's changed on the i5 vs i7 front with regards to gaming? Last year everyone was saying the i7 is not worth buying for gaming because of the small gains or even losses and that the i7 is only worth it if you're streaming and video editing and other stuff but not gaming specifically.

The difference between i5 and i7 has always been higher base/turbo clocks and HT in favor of i7. Leaving aside H which brings nothing on the table specifically for gaming (and one can argue that the small resources spent to manage HT which is then not used are wasted), higher base clock makes the i7 the winner generally - but we're only talking about base clock.

Given a) everyone interested buys the K versions of the CPUs and b) OC is tremendously easy with modern mobo/bios available, there's no valid reason not to dab even lightly into overclocking your CPU. And then the base clock difference disappears completely.

Then you can look at the money, and basically you have an i5 that can reach the same power of an i7 for smaller price - the choice is easy at this point.

Until you REALLY need the HT for multitasking or specific software that goes beyond gaming, there's no reason to buy an i7. Always went with i5 and never regretted it - they do wonders.

[Alantor]

Is there any issue if you go for AMD cpu + Nvidia gpu? Is there any advantage for getting Radeon?

[Vash The Stampede]

As the reviews of respectable sites have shown, the 8700k is virtually unmatched in games. The i5 variant is a good option as well. Both brands were affected by the leaks [already patched], so that shouldn’t really affect your choice.

Go for it!

As AdoredTV has recently shown, those "respectable" websites aren't what they seem. This is sounding a lot like fake news, except everyone gets to choose what they consider real or fake.

Those fairy tales have been debunked more than once, so I won't go into that [again].

The i5 8600k has 6 cores, compared to the i7 7700k 4 cores and 8 threads, so essentially you'll be getting i7 quality performance for an i5 price. Bang for buck, the 8600k is an amazing CPU.

Nothing has been debunked. Games today are still not benefiting much from having multiple threads. Things have improved but a 6 core 6 thread CPU is more than enough to deal with games today. Hyper-Threading technology still has no real benefits to gaming. Both CPU's can be overclocked, so nothing special there.

Is there any issue if you go for AMD cpu + Nvidia gpu? Is there any advantage for getting Radeon?

No real advantage for getting a AMD GPU + CPU.

[nocturnus]

As AdoredTV has recently shown, those "respectable" websites aren't what they seem. This is sounding a lot like fake news, except everyone gets to choose what they consider real or fake.


Nothing has been debunked. Games today are still not benefiting much from having multiple threads. Things have improved but a 6 core 6 thread CPU is more than enough to deal with games today. Hyper-Threading technology still has no real benefits to gaming. Both CPU's can be overclocked, so nothing special there.


No real advantage for getting a AMD GPU + CPU.

I'm not going to start another discussion with you; we all know you're headstrong and lack objectivity. This subject has been broached many times and proof that games actually do benefit from more cores and hyperthreading was posted as well. Is enough to warrant buying an i7? Probably not, but I don't see anyone claiming the contrary.

Anyway, believe whatever you want, I doubt anyone cares.

[Vash The Stampede]

I'm not going to start another discussion with you; we all know you're headstrong and lack objectivity. This subject has been broached many times and proof that games actually do benefit from more cores and hyperthreading was posted as well. Is enough to warrant buying an i7? Probably not, but I don't see anyone claiming the contrary.

Anyway, believe whatever you want, I doubt anyone cares.

If what you say is true then Ryzen CPU's would be the strongest at gaming as their SMT performance is greater than Intels HT. But we know that not to be the case. Games today do make use of up to 6 cores, but not 12 threads. The problem with you is that no matter what I link to show benchmark results, you will pick whatever you consider to be "respectable".

[nocturnus]

If what you say is true then Ryzen CPU's would be the strongest at gaming as their SMT performance is greater than Intels HT. But we know that not to be the case. Games today do make use of up to 6 cores, but not 12 threads. The problem with you is that no matter what I link to show benchmark results, you will pick whatever you consider to be "respectable".

As long as you fail to read what I actually wrote, you'll never understand. So how about you just drop it and go about your way believing whatever it is you believe

[Twoddle]

Depends on the game surely. Heroes of the Storm is running full blast on a single core, the others cores basically sit idle. Programmingwise Everything output to DirectX has to be marshalled to a single thread, so again depends on the game and what you can get it to do in the background.

[nocturnus]

Depends on the game surely. Heroes of the Storm is running full blast on a single core, the others cores basically sit idle. Programmingwise Everything output to DirectX has to be marshalled to a single thread, so again depends on the game and what you can get it to do in the background.

Of course some games benefit more than others, but that's the whole point, no one ever claimed the contrary. Anyway, we're flogging a dead horse here. Topics broaching this subject a plenty.

[Kazer]

Ryzen all the way - the additional cores are the future and games patched to utilize them are better. Also better for productivity tasks. Even if Intel is king for gaming now by a small margin they will not be in the future.

[Kagthul]

Ryzen all the way - the additional cores are the future and games patched to utilize them are better. Also better for productivity tasks. Even if Intel is king for gaming now by a small margin they will not be in the future.

It isnt a small margin, though, and were still a ways away from games taking significant advantage of more than four threads - because developers code for what people have, and half the market is still using dual cores.

[chazus]

Ryzen all the way - the additional cores are the future and games patched to utilize them are better. Also better for productivity tasks. Even if Intel is king for gaming now by a small margin they will not be in the future.

That's sort of silly reasoning. Any 'future' you're talking about is beyond the lifetime of any current gen CPU.