6 core i7 question.

[elkido122]

Is it necessary to upgrade my 6700k for the more cpu demanding games coming out? I see that BF1 in a 64 player room a 4.2 ghz 5930k had 30% advantage over an i5 4690 at 3.9ghz . That kind of concerns me and makes me think my 6700k is not enough for new games coming out. Any help appreciated

 

[Gam3r01]

If you are worried about your 6700k then you shouldnt be considering benchmarks comparing to a locked i5 that is two generations old.

You should never upgrade your processor because something might be harder to run in the future. Save the money and upgrade when you actually need it. Your money would be better spent then compared to now.

 

[elkido122]

i can give an example. when i play playerunknowns battlegrounds and the room fills with 90 plus people its pretty choppy. makes me think its a cpu limitation issue.

 

[Gam3r01]

An early access game that was designed to profit off of H1Z1s success shouldnt really be a good baseline example. Can you confirm if said game can even use more than 8 threads? There is no benefit in throwing more threads at a game that dont need it.

 

[elkido122]

i guess most games are using more GPU like they should anyways. so maybe the need for more than 4 cores in games is a long long ways away since they are made to use gpu.

 

[elkido122]

i just dont want to have to worry about my 6700k not being enough.. i just dont want to have to change it.

 

[CRO5513Y]

Nah that's PUBGs lobby not your CPU. I have the same issue with a 6700K and all my mates do that's just the server having a hiccup with 100 people all in a small area while it loads the map. If it's any help, i know someone with a i7-5820K and 2x GTX 1080 that has the same problem like everyone else. Server side not you. The 6700K is still an excellent CPU for Gaming i wouldn't expect it to bottleneck even a Titan XP. Hope this helps

 

[elkido122]

thanks for the responses. i did some more testing and afterburner is showing me that in bf1 all cores are at 100% and in overwatch all cores are at 60-70%. That does seem high to me and makes me wonder if they percentages would go down if i had more cores. even though those cores wont be at 4.2ghz if i get a 6 core cause i won't overclock.

 

[bystander]

Don't upgrade unless you have a problem with performance now that can be solved with an upgrade. Even if BF1 is using all your cores/threads to 100%, is the performance not good in that game? Would you even notice a few more FPS with a higher core count?

Don't look for problems that don't exist. Don't upgrade based on early access or future games. Upgrade when you need it, and not earlier.

 

[elkido122]

just feels like my fps dips might be cpu related.

 

[Ecky]

In BF1, if your CPU is pegged at 100% when it happens, it likely is CPU-related. How low are your framerates dipping though? The 6700K is still probably the second best gaming CPU out there, except for niche cases, so there's not much yet to upgrade to. Be aware that moving to a 5820K is going back two generations in terms of performance per clock, as well as losing clockspeed, so while you'd have more cores, each one would be significantly slower.

 

[elkido122]

what if i went for a 6850k ? also the dips are about 15 fps to 20

 

[bystander]

what if i went for a 6850k ? also the dips are about 15 fps to 20

If your dips are that low, you may have system issues, not core count issues.

 

[elkido122]

like what?

 

[elkido122]

arent most fps dips CPU related anyways.? especially when i have a 1080ti

 

[sizzling]

The 6700k/7700k are still considered the kings of gaming. The Intels with higher core counts have slightly weaker cores, if threads were that important Ryzen would do better than it does. I don't see any upgrade options for pure gaming, everything looks like a side or slight down grade. Also I expect other things are the problem, have you actually measured cpu usage on all threads while gaming?

 

[elkido122]

yes i have. in battlefield 1 all cores/threads are at 100% and in overwatch about 50-60%. now i have a 6700k with a 1080ti and play at 1440p and running high settings on BF1 and on overwatch i set them to epic .

 

[sizzling]

What overclock are you running on your 6700k?

 

[elkido122]

Just the xmp one which runs it at the constant 4.2

 

[Dragos Manea]

Well, i tell from my point of view (Ryzen 1700X 8 cores/16 Threads), battlefield 1 is the only game which loads my cpu more then 50% (55-64 %) but in graphical intens areas i still have dips of 10-20 fps (smoke, explosions), both my gtx 1080 are at 85-95% load with everything on max and DSR to 200%. i have around 160-170 fps with dips to 130-140 without DSR and with dsr to 200% 120-130 fps with dips to 90-100 fps

I think you will be much better with a ryzen 1600/1600x to calm yourself about the cores/threads count. Right now the 1600 is the sweet spot for gaming 6 cores/12 threads is what a gamer needs for a few years.

 

[sizzling]

You should have a good opportunity to get more out of your current cpu. If you can get 4.6Ghz that is near enough a 10% increase in cpu power and should be achievable by most 6700k's. I really believe you will see more gain from this than changing cpu.

 

[sizzling]

Well, i tell from my point of view (Ryzen 1700X 8 cores/16 Threads), battlefield 1 is the only game which loads my cpu more then 50% (55-64 %) but in graphical intens areas i still have dips of 10-20 fps (smoke, explosions), both my gtx 1080 are at 85-95% load with everything on max and DSR to 200%. i have around 160-170 fps with dips to 130-140 without DSR and with dsr to 200% 120-130 fps with dips to 90-100 fps

I think you will be much better with a ryzen 1600/1600x to calm yourself about the cores/threads count. Right now the 1600 is the sweet spot for gaming 6 cores/12 threads is what a gamer needs for a few years.

Everything I have seen from benchmarks shows the i7 (6700k/7700k) has a lead over any Ryzen for pure gaming, games just benefit from the stronger cores. While I wouldn't buy an i5 today as I see Ryzen as a better option all round however for high fps gaming the i7 is still king.

 

[Dragos Manea]

Well 210 fps in rise of the tomb raider, 190 fps in crysis 3, 100 fps in farcry 4, 120 fps in farcry 3, 100 fps in dragon age inquisition, 200 fps in bf1, 150+ fps in doom (2016) you think it is not enought? What do you want more? Honestly i think a ryzen is worth over a i7, you cannot see the 10-15% difference between them because it already has a very high fps number, but where ryzen shines is in games that benefit from high core count like bf1, bf4 and the list will go on this year because more and more games uses more cores. The fps numbers are from my own pc and if anyone wants proofs i can post screenshots anytime.

EDIT: forgot to mention 100+ fps in witcher 3

 

[sizzling]

I'm not saying Ryzen is a bad choice but for pure gaming it would at best be a side step for the OP but in most games a small step down. Even the games which you list as benefiting from extra threads perform better in the reviews I have seen with an i7, now whether you need that extra performance is a different question.

If I was building my perfect gaming only build for high Hz gaming it would have the 7700k as it the best at the moment. If budget was an issue then I would go Ryzen 1600.

 

[Dragos Manea]

And my personal opinion is quite the oposite, but this si just my opninion (coming from someone who came from i7 6700k), one other benefit that you cannot measure is that ryzen is much more smooth in gameplay, intel is very choppy.