Got 1060 gtx 6B, need good cpu!

[David Miguel]

hello
My question is , Wich cpu is better for me? I game and record,, MB can be replaced if needed.

is AMD ryzen better?
Wich CPU should I buy?

BUDGET - 500 euros !

GPU-Geforce gtx 1060 6 GB
CPU - i5 4460 3.20Ghz
MB- GIGABYTE Z97M-D3H
RAM 16 GB
ssd 500 gb

this is an webside I order from it may help! = https://www.alientech.pt/

 

[sizzling]

A 4790k would be the cheapest route, works on your motherboard and is still very good. Any modern AMD or Intel CPU will require new motherboard and RAM (DDR4)

 

[photonboy]

For Ryzen or newer Intel CPU's you'd need:

1) CPU
2) new motherboard
3) new DDR4 memory
4) new Windows license (it's so confusing..)
5) reinstall software (maybe yes, maybe no. I say yes to avoid issues)

I would recommend an i7-4790K if you can get one (I can't navigate this site very well), then overclock (need good CPU cooler, and motherboard must support). Otherwise non-K i7-4770/4790 or whatever the name's are for CPU if motherboard doesn't support.

Sure Ryzen would be better (not sure about cost/value) and the R5-1600 or R7-1700 are worth considering. Then there's new Intel Coffee Lake but we need to know the BUDGET.

You may want to see how much of a CPU bottleneck you have as you may decide it's not worth the cost.

 

[David Miguel]

A 4790k would be the cheapest route, works on your motherboard and is still very good. Any modern AMD or Intel CPU will require new motherboard and RAM (DDR4)

hi, I can spend over 400 euros on a cpu, and I did pointed out that my MB can be replaced, if AMD is better, I'm going for AMD cpu with no problem, just wanted to know a good CPU so I can use my GTX in max and not bottlenecking it,

I stream sometimes and play games so a good CPU is required.

 

[David Miguel]

For Ryzen or newer Intel CPU's you'd need:

1) CPU
2) new motherboard
3) new DDR4 memory
4) new Windows license (it's so confusing..)
5) reinstall software (maybe yes, maybe no. I say yes to avoid issues)

I would recommend an i7-4790K if you can get one, then overclock (need good CPU cooler, and motherboard must support). Otherwise non-K CPU if motherboard doesn't support.

Sure Ryzen would be better (not sure about cost) and the R5-1600 or R7-1700 are worth considering. Then there's new Intel Coffee Lake but we need to know the BUDGET.

I updated my threat, abot the budget, 500 euros I'm planingg to spend, so for ryzen amd I would need new MB ram and Cpu, any other alternative? I want a cpu that will make difference, not a cpu I will have to replace in couple months. thanks for help

 

[sizzling]

A 4790k would be the cheapest route, works on your motherboard and is still very good. Any modern AMD or Intel CPU will require new motherboard and RAM (DDR4)

hi, I can spend over 400 euros on a cpu, and I did pointed out that my MB can be replaced, if AMD is better, I'm going for AMD cpu with no problem, just wanted to know a good CPU so I can use my GTX in max and not bottlenecking it,

I stream sometimes and play games so a good CPU is required.

Have you seen the price of RAM lately? A 4790k would be a great choice at a good price.

 

[photonboy]

Ryzen would require good memory too such as 2x8GB 3200MHz DDR4.

STREAMING if done on CPU now might be best done with NVidia's tool or OBS using the NVENC hardware encoder (NVidia's onboard encoder doesn't use much CPU processing).

The i7-4790K would be the best option if you can find one within budget. Again, you need to compare the TOTAL COST of upgrading.

You can get a ROUGH estimate of CPU processing for both SINGLE thread and TOTAL. If the CPU has four cores + hyperthreading or higher SINGLE THREAD usually matters most.

 

[David Miguel]

A 4790k would be the cheapest route, works on your motherboard and is still very good. Any modern AMD or Intel CPU will require new motherboard and RAM (DDR4)

hi, I can spend over 400 euros on a cpu, and I did pointed out that my MB can be replaced, if AMD is better, I'm going for AMD cpu with no problem, just wanted to know a good CPU so I can use my GTX in max and not bottlenecking it,

I stream sometimes and play games so a good CPU is required.

Have you seen the price of RAM lately? A 4790k would be a great choice at a good price.

ah, no I actually just went to check prices now for new rams, well I allways thought they were the cheap part so I didn't see big deal on them, so my choice would be i7 4790k, will I notice difference? is it the best cpu I can get according to my build? thanks

 

[logainofhades]

I do agree that the 4790k is the cheapest, but you might struggle with some game recording. For your budget, a Ryzen 5 1600 is going to be your best bet. You get 2 more cores, which results in 4 more threads.



AMD RYZEN 5 1600 3.2GHZ SKT AM4 BOX PROCESSOR
€ 209.90

MOTHERBOARD GIGABYTE AB350M-GAMING 3 SKT AM4
89.90 €

G.SKILL PC4-25600 3200MHZ 16GB RIPJAWS V GRAY CL16 (2X8GB) DDR4
189.90 €

Sub Total € 398.13
Estimated Shipping Cost s \ VAT 0.00 €
VAT € 91.57
Order Total $ 489.70

 

[David Miguel]

the cpu you guys talking about is Intel® Core™ i7-4790K Processor 4.40 GHz, well mine was 3.2hgz, then again I know little about CPU , I do understand about GPUs, that does sound a good different but is it really? thanks

 

[David Miguel]

I do agree that the 4790k is the cheapest, but you might struggle with some game recording. For your budget, a Ryzen 5 1600 is going to be your best bet. You get 2 more cores, which results in 4 more threads.



AMD RYZEN 5 1600 3.2GHZ SKT AM4 BOX PROCESSOR
€ 209.90

MOTHERBOARD GIGABYTE AB350M-GAMING 3 SKT AM4
89.90 €

G.SKILL PC4-25600 3200MHZ 16GB RIPJAWS V GRAY CL16 (2X8GB) DDR4
189.90 €

Sub Total € 398.13
Estimated Shipping Cost s \ VAT 0.00 €
VAT € 91.57
Order Total $ 489.70

I checked and I liked this, is it better than i7 4790k? also I wont have any problems related with compatibility regarding my gtx 1060?

 

[photonboy]

the cpu you guys talking about is Intel® Core™ i7-4790K Processor 4.40 GHz, well mine was 3.2hgz, then again I know little about CPU , I do understand about GPUs, that does sound a good different but is it really? thanks

First, most games can't use more than about THREE good cores, but it varies a lot.

Second, the R5-1600 has 50% more cores/threads, but the i7-4790K is almost 40% faster due to higher frequency and architecture differences. (both at default/stock settings... you should ask about overclocking later though as your motherboard supports it. possibly 4.6GHz on all cores loaded?)

Ryzen should do better in the future once code is optimized for it but I can't predict how much that will be so I must leave it out of the equation.

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-4790K+%40+4.00GHz
vs
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+5+1600&id=2984

Basically if we use PASSMARK we see that you need to FULLY USE the R5-1600 to pull ahead, but that very rarely happens so the R5-1600 isn't a great choice, plus the hassle of reinstalling software.

Oh, and you need to buy a new CPU COOLER too if you want the most out of the R5-1600 or find an AM4 adapter for your CPU cooler (if one exists).

I hope some of this makes sense?

OTHER:
Again, not sure how you RECORD (because FRAPS kills your CPU, but NVidia's tool does not or OBS using NVidia's NVENC), however if you want to see how much CPU bottleneck you have now the only good way to estimate is by doing THIS:

1) use tool to display both GPU USAGE, and GPU FREQUENCY on the screen (i.e. MSI Afterburner, EVGA Precision.. )

2) If GPU frequency was say 1950MHz (whatever max is), and usage was 95% then that means there is minimal CPU bottleneck.

However if either the frequency, usage, or BOTH are lower you have some CPU bottleneck which gives a rough idea of how much you might gain.

Running higher resolutions tends to shift the bottleneck towards the GPU not CPU but this all varies by the game and settings.

*The above usage/frequency is more about AVERAGE FPS and doesn't show stutter/judder that MAY be caused by temporary CPU bottlenecks (read more about 0.1% and 1% lows online if you want).

 

[logainofhades]

It would be better at recording game-play, than a 4790k would, as it has better multi-threaded support, and the single thread performance isn't vastly different. No compatibility problems either.

 

[David Miguel]

thanks for help

 

[photonboy]

It would be better at recording game-play, than a 4790k would, as it has better multi-threaded support, and the single thread performance isn't vastly different. No compatibility problems either.

I quoted some actual tested numbers. What are YOU basing things on?

The i7-4790K is about 40% faster per core. The R5-1600 has 50% more cores. Most games/applications can't even fully utilize the i7-4790K's number of cores so with very FEW exceptions the i7-4790K wins.

And yes, the Ryzen CPU often doesn't do much worse in some games because at some point the CPU bottleneck shifts to the GPU so they normalize more in tests but that is NOT how to compare CPU's.

When you compare CPU's you look at both SINGLE and TOTAL performance based on actual benchmarks and tests.

UPDATE:
*When I said "Ryzen will do better in the future..." I meant relative to how much better the Intel CPU does. The software COMPILERS right now are optimized more for Intel. That doesn't mean the R5-1600 will start beating the i7-4790K.

So for example, maybe you see a 15% efficiency improvement for Ryzen in some future game, but only a 5% for Intel's architecture. Hard to predict, and it does NOT change my suggestion at all.

 

[David Miguel]

It would be better at recording game-play, than a 4790k would, as it has better multi-threaded support, and the single thread performance isn't vastly different. No compatibility problems either.

I quoted some actual tested numbers. What are YOU basing things on?

The i7-4790K is about 40% faster per core. The R5-1600 has 50% more cores. Most games/applications can't even fully utilize the i7-4790K's number of cores so with very FEW exceptions the i7-4790K wins.

And yes, the Ryzen CPU often doesn't do much worse in some games because at some point the CPU bottleneck shifts to the GPU so they normalize more in tests but that is NOT how to compare CPU's.

When you compare CPU's you look at both SINGLE and TOTAL performance based on actual benchmarks and tests.

well I play PUBG on a plasma tv, I know that gibabyte gtx 1060 6 gb is a good GPU, and I notice the game scratches from time to time, on low settings ,or ultra settings I have no FPS drop, that's CPU right? so I wonder if i7 4ghz will make tthat disappeared , mine is i5 3.2.. every other game I can run it on ultra, usually without any problem.

 

[photonboy]

I'm not sure what "scratches" means but this OLDER benchmark showed Intel's i5-7600K beating the R5-1600X on Ultra and tying on Medium:
https://www.tweaktown.com/articles/8189/playerunknowns-battlegrounds-benchmarked-cpu-gpu-war/index5.html

Apparently there were some more recent updates to use more cores/threads but I can't find reliable information on how fully it can do that:
https://www.pcgamesn.com/playerunknowns-battlegrounds/cpu-game-update

*It's important to understand that the main game thread of code still runs on a SINGLE CORE then the other cores/threads run branching code (or other programs) so it's very hard to fully utilize an R5-1600 in any game.

Plus many of the 0.1% and 1% lows are due to a temporary overwhelming of a single CORE on the CPU, so again the core performance matters.

Don't get me wrong, more CORES/THREADS can be better but not in this case when the i7-4790K is quite a bit ahead. I actually HAVE recommended the R5-1600 several times due to the cost, but that's on a NEW build. You're in a unique position where you'd have to buy OTHER components too so it doesn't really make sense.

(BTW, "hyperthreading" is simply the same core running another thread of code during the times it is IDLE waiting for more code from system memory. It's sort of like having another physical core that's about 30% as fast.)

 

[David Miguel]

I'm not sure what "scratches" means but this OLDER benchmark showed Intel's i5-7600K beating the R5-1600X on Ultra and tying on Medium:
https://www.tweaktown.com/articles/8189/playerunknowns-battlegrounds-benchmarked-cpu-gpu-war/index5.html

Apparently there were some more recent updates to use more cores/threads but I can't find reliable information on how fully it can do that:
https://www.pcgamesn.com/playerunknowns-battlegrounds/cpu-game-update

*It's important to understand that the main game thread of code still runs on a SINGLE CORE then the other cores/threads run branching code (or other programs) so it's very hard to fully utilize an R5-1600 in any game.

Plus many of the 0.1% and 1% lows are due to a temporary overwhelming of a single CORE on the CPU, so again the core performance matters.

Don't get me wrong, more CORES/THREADS can be better but not in this case when the i7-4790K is quite a bit ahead. I actually HAVE recommended the R5-1600 several times due to the cost, but that's on a NEW build. You're in a unique position where you'd have to buy OTHER components too so it doesn't really make sense.

(BTW, "hyperthreading" is simply the same core running another thread of code during the times it is IDLE waiting for more code from system memory. It's sort of like having another physical core that's about 30% as fast.)

I can understand what you mean, and thanks for the information you provided me, and the time it took you to explain everything, with scratch I mean, its not fluid , even on low settings or ultra, game runs the same way , playable, but sometimes when you in a larger city no matter the resolution, I lose frames and its just not good, that's why I realized I need a new CPU. that just happen in tthat game in particular ' player unknown battlegrounds' so I am hoping with this purchast, that the problem desapears !

 

[photonboy]

Does sound like a CPU issue, sure.

You should also experiment with VSYNC and similar such as:

a) VSYNC OFF, or
b) VSYNC ON, or
c) Adaptive VSYNC
d) GSYNC (requires expensive monitor)

The first three have severe pros and cons each.

VSYNC is used to eliminate screen tearing, but adds extra lag (more noticeable at 60FPS for 60Hz monitor, than at 144FPS monitor assuming you can hit 60FPS and 144FPS respectively).

VSYNC also causes added STUTTERING if you can't maintain the FPS (60FPS on 60Hz) because you miss the next refresh cycle for the monitor so get varying perceived frame time differences.

VSYNC OFF causes screen tear, but has less lag/sluggishness.

Adaptive VSYNC helps for some games in that it runs VSYNC ON if you can maintain the frame rate, but disables VSYNC if you can't to avoid added stuttering (i.e. drop below 60FPS on 60Hz monitor).

I use Adaptive VSYNC for some games, and here's how:

NCP-> manage 3d settings-> program settings-> add game-> (setting)-> save

I tweak the game so I stay at 60FPS (60Hz monitor) over 90% of the time, so basically it's to avoid sudden STUTTERING caused by the VSYNC mismatch if I drop below 60FPS. Useful for some of the Assassin's Creed games in particular as they seem to have sudden big drops more than others.

VSYNC OFF in some games is great if you see little to no screen tearing.

SUMMARY:
So optimizing everything includes:
a) experimenting with VSYNC ON/OFF, Adaptive... to find the best solution for that game, and
b) adjusting the game settings for the OPTIMAL visuals that help you achieve the FPS/VSYNC goal (whether it's 60FPS over 90% of the time via Adaptive VSYNC or whatever).

Other: there's also a "half refresh" version of Adaptive VSYNC that is useful for 144Hz (non-GSYNC/Freesync) monitors so it can synch to 72FPS VSYNC ON or VSYNC off below as per the explanation above.

On the other hand, since 144Hz monitors update the screen quicker you get LESS SCREEN TEAR observed at 50FPS than you would from 50FPS output to a 60Hz monitor so you can try VSYNC OFF first, though some games you should still CAP to 60FPS (some or all Bethesda games like Skyrim for example) with NVInspector or a suitable tool.

 

[logainofhades]

For straight up gaming, yes the i7 is better. For recording actual PC gameplay, the 1600 is a better option. The 1231v3 build, that I did for a friend, was enough proof of Haswell i7's capability in this area. Given the GPU the OP has, it will be the bottleneck before the CPU is, on just gaming. Side by side, I doubt any normal person would see the difference. Once you move on to recording, and possibly streaming, the change would be more apparent.

 

[photonboy]

For straight up gaming, yes the i7 is better. For recording actual PC gameplay, the 1600 is a better option. The 1231v3 build, that I did for a friend, was enough proof of Haswell i7's capability in this area. Given the GPU the OP has, it will be the bottleneck before the CPU is, on just gaming. Side by side, I doubt any normal person would see the difference. Once you move on to recording, and possibly streaming, the change would be more apparent.

No.
You don't seem to grasp what I'm saying. The R5-1600 is not a better CPU for recording + gaming UNLESS, and I repeat UNLESS those tasks need more processing than what the i7-4790K can provide (and even then the R5-1600 is only SLIGHTLY more powerful if both are fully utilized at stock settings).

Look at it another way. If the i7-4790K was 50% more powerful per core then the R5-1600 could never win any scenario because at the very BEST if both were 100% utilized they would be equal.

Now it's not always that simple, but unless you have some PROOF specifically of the i7-4790K vs R5-1600 for recording + gameplay where the R5-1600 setup is working better I'll assume that's not true.