Jump to content
DanielNL

Ryzen 5 performance vs i5-6600k (stock)?

Recommended Posts

DanielNL   

So did anyone buy yet/is anyone planning to buy a Ryzen 5? Does Squad make good use of 6 real cores? Will I get higher fps (Squad obv.) than with my i5-6600k (even if OC, which I couldn't yet as Intel tricked me with my wrong no-OC H170 mainboard) ? :) Would rlly like future games to be optimized for 6-real-cores-CPUs! (Even though some people on the Internet still claim that there will be future AAA games that won't be able to use all 6 cores of a CPU... Wtf u guys)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
moppel   

Squad is greatly bound to Singlecore IPC so no, many cores wont help . I did a test with May 4.4Ghz oced 5820K while back and got allmost identical FPS with 4 deactivated cores then with Full six setup .

These guys are about right there will allways be games that cant make use off these cores , Just look at the nextGen UE 4 Squad uses xD ARMA 3 etc. but these won`t run notible worse then on a quadcore as long clocks are somewhat in the same area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DanielNL   

But Squad could also distribute lot's of stuff (tasks) to 8 cores (for quad-cores with multithreading)... 16 ms for 1 frame (60fps) is a lot of time for a CPU (which does calculations/spreading bits/bytes from 1 core to another within 5ms or even ns range afaik?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DL3MA   

Just started using the new ryzen. My specs are gtx980ti superclocked 6gig ddr5 vram. 16 gigs ddr4 2666, ssd and AMD Ryzen 7 1700 8-Core Socket AM4 3.0GHz CPU.

 

I range depending on map from 40-90fps all on high/epic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Togisan   
15 minutes ago, DL3MA said:

Just started using the new ryzen. My specs are gtx980ti superclocked 6gig ddr5 vram. 16 gigs ddr4 2666, ssd and AMD Ryzen 7 1700 8-Core Socket AM4 3.0GHz CPU.

 

I range depending on map from 40-90fps all on high/epic.

At 1080p?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
banOkay   

It should be about the same for IPC limited games like Squad, although I only found 1 Arma 3 benchmark the results should somewhat carry over.

nv_arma3.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zaira   

check this video.. for squad, arma 3 and all IPC hungry games with poor MT, just buy kaby or skylake and OC it

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tbh the 1600 isnt far behind the 6700k even in most games, I would say its pretty even with the 7600k. In the future there are gonna be optimizations for games and drivers etc for Ryzen 5 too. You could also overclock the 1600 with the stock cooler nicely to 3.6/3.7/3.8 GHz.

I am planning to get a 1600. If you buy it, tell me how it performs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Psyrus   
OC it and break it within 2 years, great... -.-


CPUs don't just "break" because you over clock them. Overvolting or bad thermal management can shorten their life span but I've been running my i7 920 at 3.6 ghz since I bought it in 2009. That's a 35% (almost 1ghz) overclock for over 8 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GonzoPR   
On 4/15/2017 at 0:51 PM, zaira said:

check this video.. for squad, arma 3 and all IPC hungry games with poor MT, just buy kaby or skylake and OC it

 

 

Why 1.5 supersampling?? That's an FPS killer. If it's to mitigate AA issues (i see you're also using FXAA though), try using SMAA with Reshade?

 

1.5x is just giving away frames for what i perceive as very little gain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Psyrus   
He changes it to low, with no difference.

 

Exactly. He's still cpu bound at that point so super sampling might as well be at 2. It won't change the fps until the gpu becomes the bottleneck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GonzoPR   

Strange as it's a performance killer for me using a 6700k and 1080. Haven't looked into this stuff for a while, might have a play around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DanielNL   

Well the things in the CPU wear out a lot faster when on 4.5 GHz continuously instead of 4.0 GHz on boost only...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nordic   
9 minutes ago, DanielNL said:

Well the things in the CPU wear out a lot faster when on 4.5 GHz continuously instead of 4.0 GHz on boost only...



No it doesn't. That's a myth.
Overclocking has literally 0 effect on your CPU's lifespam unless you overvolt it, which you won't be able to do as it will thermal throttle itself and stop operations to save itself.


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DanielNL   

aha. I hope lot has changed from my old i7 2600K (which I OC to 4.4 GHz and then suddenly decreased in performance, although it didn't reach 80°C with Intel stock fan and later when I got a good fan) to the new gen Intel Cores (I now have Skylake), I hope Skylake are way more robust than Sandy Bridge was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Psyrus   
13 hours ago, DanielNL said:

Well the things in the CPU wear out a lot faster when on 4.5 GHz continuously instead of 4.0 GHz on boost only...

 

Would you like to point out some literature that supports that claim? Because it's pretty much hogwash unless you have seen some studies/reviews that point to that conclusion. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing

Edit: I want to point out, that it is true that overclocking, when done badly can indeed affect CPU lifespan (generally not in a meaningful way since overclockers would usually upgrade well within a decade anyway)

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2468/6

 

4 hours ago, DanielNL said:

I hope lot has changed from my old i7 2600K (which I OC to 4.4 GHz and then suddenly decreased in performance, although it didn't reach 80°C with Intel stock fan and later when I got a good fan)

 

There could be a myriad of factors that caused your issues, but linking it directly to the CPU being overclocked without any (even circumstantial) proof is illogical. Perhaps you left your voltage set to "auto" and your motherboard decided it would be a great day to put the cpu on 1.6V. 

Edited by Psyrus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Psyrus   
3 hours ago, DanielNL said:

 

Mike said:

Quote

Over clocking always increases processor temperature and it will diminish cpu and cpu fan lifespan

 

He then said:

Quote

Now, If you want to over clock; it is necessary to increase the Core multiplier, the voltage and any other BIOS settings is automatic.

 

You can see why Mike thinks that overclocking definitively will diminish a CPU's lifespan. Also, you were asking about overclocking on a stock CPU cooler, which is like cranking up the boost on a turbo car without taking the necessary steps to make it operate safely. 

 

So to reiterate, your initial assertions:

On 4/18/2017 at 9:24 PM, DanielNL said:

OC it and break it within 2 years, great... -.-

 

On 4/19/2017 at 10:10 PM, DanielNL said:

Well the things in the CPU wear out a lot faster when on 4.5 GHz continuously instead of 4.0 GHz on boost only...

 

In isolation are incorrect, although the logic behind your statements has some merit. Properly overclocking a component may still lead to lifespan degradation, but you're talking maybe 15 years of use instead of 15-20 years of use, if the gap is even that big. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
banOkay   
3 hours ago, DanielNL said:

Well after all Squad IS using all 8 threads from Hyperthreading I7s, right?

 

HT gives you 0 gains in Squad so I don't think so. And still, it relies on 1 core IPC because Epic are great devs :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×