Ryzen or Intel mid-range CPU

[Westwood]

Hi, all.

I'm building myself a mid-range gaming PC and I was wondering if you could help me with my dilemma.

I can't decide between Ryzen 5 3600 (or even 3600x) and i5-9600KF. In my country the prices for these two processors are identical.

My budget allows me to buy Radeon RX 5700 or even RX 5700 XT.

I will only use this PC to play DCS world (don't need multitasking, streaming or multimedia editing).

So which one would you suggest?

Thank you!

[rinkerbuck]

Those two are mostly likely very close in performance to eachother for DCS. Not sure if the applicable motherboards or RAM prices are appreciably different between the two but maybe a deciding factor?

[SVgamer72]

Ryzen for the additional cores/threads.

 

You may not think you need it today, but when you add in SRS, Voice Attack, Discord, etc. etc. you are doing more than you think. At some point down the road DCS may go Vulkan and take advantage of more cores. All things being equal, you are better off with 6/12 vs 6.

[dpgfla]

This is actually my current setup. I currently use a ryzen 5 3600, 5700 xt (red devil), 32 GB of 3600 ram and two 1 tb nvme drives and the game runs great. Over 100 fps easily on a 1440 superwide display. I do take a hit in fps because I primarily play in VR but easily hit 40 fps in vr after dumbing down some of the graphics.

[Sn8ke_iis]

For DCS you want single core/single thread performance and that isn't changing anytime soon. By the time DCS has a new graphics engine that supports more than 3 cores and multithreading there will be lots of new processors to choose from. The 9600K/KF surpass even the the 3900x in single core performance, costs less, and has lower latency for gaming performance. With the proper motherboard and cooling it also has a lot of overclocking headroom.

 

That being said, Intel should be releasing new processors in the next couple months and all the new K line will have multithreading enabled. The 10600 should be 6c/12t according to the leaks. Cost should be roughly the same. It should also turboboost to higher frequencies given adequate cooling.

 

AMD Ryzen 5 processors are good for things like rendering in Blender, etc. Unless you are a engineering student or art student studying 3D modeling and using the rig for gaming when you aren't working, Intel is what you want for just gaming.

 

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

 

https://www.pcgamer.com/best-cpu-for-gaming/

 

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3489-amd-ryzen-5-3600-cpu-review-benchmarks-vs-intel

[Cy-27]

Hi, all.

I'm building myself a mid-range gaming PC and I was wondering if you could help me with my dilemma.

I can't decide between Ryzen 5 3600 (or even 3600x) and i5-9600KF. In my country the prices for these two processors are identical.

My budget allows me to buy Radeon RX 5700 or even RX 5700 XT.

I will only use this PC to play DCS world (don't need multitasking, streaming or multimedia editing).

So which one would you suggest?

Thank you!

 

Don't buy 5700/5700XT, just buy RTX2060S or RTX2070, because Nvidia runs better in DCS than AMD(also for the reason that unbelievable so bad the AMD driver). For CPU just choose 3600X.

[Gnadentod]

For DCS you want single core/single thread performance and that isn't changing anytime soon. ... The 9600K/KF surpass even the the 3900x in single core performance, costs less, and has lower latency for gaming performance...

Still living in 2017: Check.

 

Don't buy 5700/5700XT, just buy RTX2060S or RTX2070, because Nvidia runs better in DCS than AMD(also for the reason that unbelievable so bad the AMD driver). For CPU just choose 3600X.

How do you come to these conclusions?

[BitMaster]

I tested the 5700XT in DCS and it was really nice, not as fast as my 1080ti but no problems or other quirks, solid performer and 100% FreeSync compatible...and 7nm with all benefits thereof.

Edited March 18, 2020 by BitMaster

[Sn8ke_iis]

Still living in 2017: Check

 

No, that's what the objective data from 2019 and 2020 benchmarks shows. DCS is currently limited by single core performance and doesn't use more than 3 cores for the foreseeable future. We'd all like the new graphics engine and Vulkun build to come. But the community moderators have said not to expect it anytime soon. If you would rather support AMD for some reason, that's cool. I'm indifferent and don't have any particular emotional loyalty to a company. I make decisions based on the available data.

 

Multiple benchmarks from multiple sources show the same thing. AMD Ryzen 5 are better for rendering, video editing, etc. dollar per dollar. Intel is better for games. The OP wasn't asking which corporation you like better.

 

Rumors and Lisa Su have hinted that there will be a new generation of Ryzen out by the end of the year. It will be interesting to see the gaming performance, IPC, and clockspeed of those CPUs.

 

As far as the 5700XT, the latest drivers are supposed to have helped with the issues people were having. When I looked in to it the bugs that AMD acknowledged were for kind of obscure cases where people had multiple monitors and were gaming, watching videos, streaming, and listening to music all at the same time. I wouldn't recommend doing that for DCS or other graphic intensive games. DCS needs all your system's resources even if you have extra cores to spare.

[Gnadentod]

Intel is better for games...

This is living in 2017. No - even when looking at single core performance they are on par. It only and only depends on the application you're using. So your statement is wrong or inaccurate.

 

The OP wasn't asking which corporation you like better.

Very right, that's a point for me then.

[David OC]

This is living in 2017. No - even when looking at single core performance they are on par. It only and only depends on the application you're using. So your statement is wrong or inaccurate.

 

 

Very right, that's a point for me then.

 

 

You must be living under a rock yourself or just biased then?

 

 

If you google AMD 5700 xt drivers there are plenty of threads around about this around and how you can have problems.

 

 

 

From what I've seen online I would go for the 2060 super any day and twice on Sunday.

[Gnadentod]

You must be living under a rock yourself or just biased then?

 

 

If you google AMD 5700 xt drivers there are plenty of threads around about this around and how you can have problems.

 

 

 

From what I've seen online I would go for the 2060 super any day and twice on Sunday.

Well done misinterpreting my posts. I'm specifically talking about the Intel CPU versus AMD CPU on single core performance debate on my last post, not even about graphics card. Here he comes talking about the 5700 XT.

 

And how do people come to the conclusion that NVidia cards run better than AMD cards when it comes to DCS like Cu-27 did? Especially when they have never owned a AMD card that is? I'm very interested in responses ... I know the answer already. Just keep spitting bullshit of others you have read on the internet, in most cases problems created in the first place because they might be too stupid to keep their system and driver state clean...

 

Also nice try painting me as if I have said that AMD cards have "zero problems" compared to NVidia or whatever in general. What do I care what people have "problems" with Fortnite or Overwatch or whatever when I'm here talking about DCS? You can go right back with that link and your strawmanning, not gonna work.

Edited March 20, 2020 by Der Hirte

[Sn8ke_iis]

I have to hand it to AMD's marketing people. They've got people all over Reddit and various forums pushing their products. I find this kind of fanaticism just bizarre.

 

The following images are from the links I posted. Cinebench (which is a rendering benchmark for Cinema4D) is a common benchmark for overclocking and comparing processors. Not very applicable to gaming, but it's one of the standard benchmarks. As you can see, the 9600K has a higher score than the 3600 in the single thread test.

 

 

Now in the multithreaded benchmark using all the CPU's cores the 3600 really shines over the 9600K with its SMT. That's why I recommended it if you are an engineering or art student who will actually use the cores for some kind of productivity purpose when not playing DCS.

 

 

There are a couple benchmarks I've seen where the 3900 does pretty well in FPS on games like CS:GO and Rainbow 6 but that's a ~$400+ processor. Different weight class than the 3600 and 9600K. There are a couple of games from the benchmarks where those 2 are neck and neck but the majority has the 9600K with higher framerates.

 

Now if you reference the Passmark single thread synthetic test the 3600 scores 2572 while the 9600K scores 2852. So the 9600K is objectively faster in single core performance which is what's important for DCS. It won't use more than 3 cores or Hyperthreading/SMT. Not my opinion, it's just what the data shows. I'm not sure why some people are so emotionally invested in a semiconductor corporation.

 

One thing that AMD has going for it is you might be able to get another upgrade out of the current motherboard chipsets assuming the new CPU's keep the AM4 socket. We won't know that for sure until they are announced.

 

Myself I'm planning on a new build by the end of the year or after both Intel and AMD's new processors are out. I'll make the decision which to use once they are released and benchmarked by objective 3rd parties. You have to be very skeptical of both companies' marketing propaganda.

[David OC]

Well done misinterpreting my posts. I'm specifically talking about the Intel CPU versus AMD CPU on single core performance debate on my last post, not even about graphics card. Here he comes talking about the 5700 XT.

 

And how do people come to the conclusion that NVidia cards run better than AMD cards when it comes to DCS like Cu-27 did? Especially when they have never owned a AMD card that is? I'm very interested in responses ... I know the answer already. Just keep spitting bullshit of others you have read on the internet, in most cases problems created in the first place because they might be too stupid to keep their system and driver state clean...

 

Also nice try painting me as if I have said that AMD cards have "zero problems" compared to NVidia or whatever in general. What do I care what people have "problems" with Fortnite or Overwatch or whatever when I'm here talking about DCS? You can go right back with that link and your strawmanning, not gonna work.

 

Go back and read, read.

 

Your the one that just attacks arrogantly everyone here with there own opinion about NVIDIA / AMD that are quite correct to many.

 

 

Don't buy 5700/5700XT, just buy RTX2060S or RTX2070, because Nvidia runs better in DCS than AMD(also for the reason that unbelievable so bad the AMD driver). For CPU just choose 3600X.

 

 

Still living in 2017: Check.

 

 

How do you come to these conclusions?

 

 

He came to those conclusions because it's all over the internet.

 

This is living in 2017. No - even when looking at single core performance they are on par. It only and only depends on the application you're using. So your statement is wrong or inaccurate.

 

Very right, that's a point for me then.

 

 

If your going to give it learn to take it or how about enough with the arrogant hero posts. It's not very helpful here.

[David OC]

I have to hand it to AMD's marketing people. They've got people all over Reddit and various forums pushing their products. I find this kind of fanaticism just bizarre.

 

Myself I'm planning on a new build by the end of the year or after both Intel and AMD's new processors are out. I'll make the decision which to use once they are released and benchmarked by objective 3rd parties. You have to be very skeptical of both companies' marketing propaganda.

 

 

Yep,

 

 

This is where I'm at also. I'll wait and see the 3rd party benchmarks.

[BitMaster]

I explain it this way to people who ask me ( gamers ):

 

Do you plan on heavy overclocking, extensive and expensive cooling, THEN an Intel chip will have an advantage, but not much and "imho" not worth it as the GPU being used will have a deciding factor...but for those with big $ it can pay out in 6-10 frames, 130 instead of 115 maybe.

 

If you dont want expensive and sophisticated cooling and are rather happy with a stock air cooler then AMD has an advantage. It can benefit from an AIO for a fraction of the cost of high end DIY loops ( and no worries with Alge, Fungus, general dismantling of water blocks to clean debris and what not else may come your way with DIY loops ).

 

In the end, they are so similar in performance, the real deal is not found in those 10-15, or 20 fps more. Who really cares if 115 or 130 fps, very very few do.

 

Balance the system performance wise, that is a much more difficult part.

 

* and I may add, you may have the $ to buy the best of the best but lack the skills to tune it, ahhh I see this very often...and then any midrange system that doesnt stutter or BSOD will give you more fun.

 

The real deal is getting it perform smooth at a decent FPS and no general issues witzh the system, i dare to say, I'd find issues on 75+% of those systems listed here, hands down.

 

In german we have a saying: "Perlen vor die Säue" some wisdom that applies throughout every disciplin.

Edited March 20, 2020 by BitMaster

[Gnadentod]

People strawmanning, still living in 2017, projecting their own psyche onto others when having no brain, using outdated graphs/graphs which only show one single application (which is what I said that it depends on the app you're using), misinterpreting willingly or unwillingly (I don't care which) posts so it fits their "argumentation": Check.

 

Didn't read further than the first sentences to see what's up, you're not gonna steal my time.

 

Do I now post my screenshots of how I benched my 3800X when I build this rig and it was higher score than 9900K namely in CPU-Z in single threading? ???

 

No, because I don't care about converting you. I can live with the fact that you will never be able to get it. Byeo.

Edited March 20, 2020 by Der Hirte

[David OC]

I would have no problem getting an AMD CPU next. The problems are more with their graphic drivers. They may work good for DCS, many still play other games and sim's also.

 

I'm not uninstalling and reinstalling driver versions so I can play those other sim / games I have on steam. If they get that sorted I'll think about it.

[BitMaster]

I sold one 5700XT + 3800X to a close friend who plays a lot of new and old games, tons of them. So far he hasn't complained but 1 time and I fixed it, was a misunderstanding of his how things work.

 

My son runs a 5500XT and also plays old & new games, no issues either, he is real happy that his FreeSync now works as it should.

 

There are always problems, no matter which team you choose, if you are unlucky. Most have no issues when the system is set up correctly.

[Sn8ke_iis]

When I looked through the AMD GPU driver change logs to see what all the ruckus was about is was usually for pretty obscure use cases. Like streaming on Twitch while watching Youtube while listening to Spotify kind of bugs. Something I would never do myself, but if that's what the kids are doing these days...

 

It's important to be mindful of selection bias, i.e. the people with issues are more likely to go online and complain about it. Same thing happened to Nvidia when they released their cards a few years back.

[Sn8ke_iis]

People strawmanning, still living in 2017, projecting their own psyche onto others when having no brain, using outdated graphs/graphs which only show one single application (which is what I said that it depends on the app you're using), misinterpreting willingly or unwillingly (I don't care which) posts so it fits their "argumentation": Check.

 

Didn't read further than the first sentences to see what's up, you're not gonna steal my time.

 

Do I now post my screenshots of how I benched my 3800X when I build this rig and it was higher score than 9900K namely in CPU-Z in single threading? ???

 

No, because I don't care about converting you. I can live with the fact that you will never be able to get it. Byeo.

 

Are you OK? Pretty stressful time for a lot of people right now. I've been to war twice and I'm used to working out of my home. But I sympathize with people worried about their livelihoods. I'm not on lockdown where I am and can go outside for a walk. I'd suggest that for anybody if possible.

 

All the benchmarks I posted were current with the Gamer's Nexus benchmark being the oldest from summer 2019. You mentioned CPU-Z so I looked those up. The chart I found has the 3700x but no 3800x or 3900x so I would be interested to see what your scores are. Just from memory I was able to beat 543 but my chip was binned and delidded by Silicon Lottery which I had to pay a premium for.

 

I hope you and your family are well and in good health.

 

 

https://valid.x86.fr/bench/1

[BitMaster]

Any 8th or 9th gen Intel running at 5+GHz will outperform any AMD chip on the market in single thread. That is no secret. I dare to say even my sons 7700k at 5G can do that with his 3600MHz RAM.

 

But if you compare untweaked systems, the gap is a lot smaller and it will all come down to resolution, LOD and what GPU you can afford. Then the gap becomes almost non existent.

 

If I was a competitive gamer for money, I'd have to buy a 5.3GHz binned Intel.

If I was a Gamer that also streams while gaming and non-endless budget, I'd have to go AMD to get the wheel round, most likely.

 

If I had to buy new, it was an AMD with the highest clockspeed out-of-the-box, slam my waterblock on it and leave it on Auto-OC, paired with 3600MHz RAM and a pretty fast PCIv4 NVMe ( or two ).

 

It's getting boring to discuss this, like my car can do 0-60mph in 2.3sec and my neighbors does it in 2.1sec. Who really cares and how often do you really need that last bit of power that we argue so hard about ?

 

It all comes down to Performance per Dollar and how many of those you can invest while not forgetting the GPU and the law of diminishing returns.

 

--------------------------------

 

Time to look inside what really matters.

 

Life

[etherbattx]

Ryzen or Intel mid-range CPU

 

It all comes down to Performance per Dollar

are you sure this is what people are looking for?

 

most of the thread posts in these forums are about finding and achieving the best performance.

 

for apps like DCS, it really is about 0-60 performance.

[BitMaster]

are you sure this is what people are looking for?

 

most of the thread posts in these forums are about finding and achieving the best performance.

 

for apps like DCS, it really is about 0-60 performance.

 

If you can afford it.

 

If they could, they wouldnt need to ask: 9900k binned at 5.2G or better, NVMe 2x, 2080ti, 32GB 3600+MHz

[DocSigma]

Any 8th or 9th gen Intel running at 5+GHz will outperform any AMD chip on the market in single thread. That is no secret. I dare to say even my sons 7700k at 5G can do that with his 3600MHz RAM.

 

But if you compare untweaked systems, the gap is a lot smaller and it will all come down to resolution, LOD and what GPU you can afford. Then the gap becomes almost non existent.

 

If I was a competitive gamer for money, I'd have to buy a 5.3GHz binned Intel.

If I was a Gamer that also streams while gaming and non-endless budget, I'd have to go AMD to get the wheel round, most likely.

 

If I had to buy new, it was an AMD with the highest clockspeed out-of-the-box, slam my waterblock on it and leave it on Auto-OC, paired with 3600MHz RAM and a pretty fast PCIv4 NVMe ( or two ).

 

It's getting boring to discuss this, like my car can do 0-60mph in 2.3sec and my neighbors does it in 2.1sec. Who really cares and how often do you really need that last bit of power that we argue so hard about ?

 

It all comes down to Performance per Dollar and how many of those you can invest while not forgetting the GPU and the law of diminishing returns.

 

--------------------------------

 

Time to look inside what really matters.

 

Life

 

This. Absolutely right. Who cares about a few numbers here or there well within margins of error. Both high and mid range chips offer the same experience. Just buy what gives you the best bang for your buck and enjoy your new toy, you will not be disappointed either way.