I'm thinking about saving up to upgrade from my i5 4590 to a better CPU. I'm looking for a CPU better purely in gaming. I do not stream or edit videos or nothing. I do record music but I've never had issues with CPU performance regarding audio production even with the old AMD Phenom X4 I used to have. I do like to play CPU intensive games such as Rust, DayZ, Squad, Arma 3 etc and want as good a performance boost as possible. I recently got a 1070 and would like to get a good CPU paired with it. I get the feeling the i5 9400F will do better in these CPU intensive games or am I wrong? I live in Sweden and the Ryzen 5 3600 is actually more expensive than the i5-9400F at 2390kr ($255) while the 9400F is at 1790kr ($190). I thought the Ryzen 5 3600 was cheaper than the i5? And the 9600k costs 2690kr ($285). I sadly do not have money to buy an i7 or Ryzen 7 but I hope either of the i5 9400f or Ryzen 5 3600 is a good upgrade when it comes to CPU intensive games from an i5 4590. Would like some advice. Maybe I would be better of finding some used i5 or i7 from the 7th or 8th generation for a good price? And yes, I am aware I will need to get a new mobo and RAM.
-
We tested the Nvidia App performance problems — games can run up to 15 percent slower with the app
Question i5 9400/9600 or Ryzen 5 3600
- Thread starter ninen2001
- Start date
The 9400F does ok in average FPS in most games, but, it's minimum FPS takes some noticeable hits, as most people think only 6 threads is somewhat lacking nowadays...
I'd look hard at an R5-2600/2600X on sale these days for $120-ish...if the $195 R5-3600 is out of reach...,
I'd look hard at an R5-2600/2600X on sale these days for $120-ish...if the $195 R5-3600 is out of reach...,
MrN1ce9uy
Judicious
- Aug 20, 2009
- 7,001
- 667
- 35,890
That's true when comparing K-series Intel to Ryzen, but you're talking about the low-clocked i5-9400F. The Ryzen 5 3600 is faster even in single-core, and it will last much longer because games are already maxing out the 6-cores/6-threads of the Core i5.
- Sep 11, 2019
- 68
- 5
- 45
I got a 9600k to upgrade from my old I7 4790 system and boy it cost me a bit. AMD is good from price over performance and intel just makes u pay extra for the higher endish stuff and when u go for the lower priced intel then your stupid. Jig u have a budget go with AMD. If not like me where u need a decent cpu for your rtx 2070 then go for the i9 9600k. My opinion is that your better off paying more for higher end and more better brand. Intel’s skylark architecture is utilised far more in games then AMD. But both have there weaknesses and strengths. So your answer.
If you have money to spend go with the i5 9500k. You have to get a z390 to maximise performance
If you have a very tight Bridget cos you’ll get a b450 go with amd.
If you have money to spend go with the i5 9500k. You have to get a z390 to maximise performance
If you have a very tight Bridget cos you’ll get a b450 go with amd.
- Sep 11, 2019
- 68
- 5
- 45
Well not really in simple words here is the true fact
AMD better for Lower end builds
Intel better for better quality higher end builds
AMD does <Mod Edit> when they try make high end products.
AMD better for Lower end builds
Intel better for better quality higher end builds
AMD does <Mod Edit> when they try make high end products.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Sep 11, 2019
- 68
- 5
- 45
- Sep 11, 2019
- 68
- 5
- 45
And HOW are they maximising 6 cores!!!! You could easily play on a 4 core I7 4790 and get high fps. All the reviews I’ve seen say that games don’t utilise 6 threads or more and it’s useless and I had an 8 hyperthreaded cpu. 6 threads is plenty to get u for the next 3-5 years. Think back in 2014 when they released the 4th gen CPUS u could imagine people where thinking oh 4 cores will be useless in the next five years. Where are we now still on 4 cores as recommended. 6 cores is helpful but u don’t need more then 6 threads either to
- Sep 11, 2019
- 68
- 5
- 45
What are you saying you get a better cpu by spending 20 bucks more. Plus it’s intel more reputable plus they do better in higher end cpus
MrN1ce9uy
Judicious
- Aug 20, 2009
- 7,001
- 667
- 35,890
I find it interesting there are people like you who still hold Intel and Nvidia to such high esteem. To each is own though. 👍
Last edited by a moderator:
- Sep 11, 2019
- 68
- 5
- 45
It’s like apple and windows users I’m not to stubborn to be honest I would’ve Went with amd instead of Nvidia like for the 5700 XT but I heard about ray tracing and I’ve never had amd before except for a 570 which seemed worse then my 1050 ti. TBH in gaming terms they both do the job but if you like amd or intel get which ever model you like. You’re right everyone has there own opinion. AMD ain’t to bad they bring affordable good gaming parts into the market where intel are overpriced as well
MrN1ce9uy
Judicious
- Aug 20, 2009
- 7,001
- 667
- 35,890
Well, after AMD's price drops last year, the RX 570 is where AMD was beating Nvidia by the biggest margin. For some reason people seem to think the 1050 Ti is better just because it is Nvidia. I will admit though, AMD's graphics drivers are worse than Nvidia's. So I can see people wanting to go with Nvidia in most cases, but the RX 570 is dear to me because it was the largest margin AMD had over Nvidia in a given price range.
- Sep 11, 2019
- 68
- 5
- 45
Yeah very true I agree the only thing Nvidia has that amd doesn’t is game optimisation which is still a little <Mod Edit> ad it doesn’t support some decent games
Last edited by a moderator:
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
News Intel's Arrow Lake performance fix is now available — another update coming next month- Started by Admin
- Replies: 25
-
-
News We tested the Nvidia App performance problems — games can run up to 15 percent slower with the app
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 44
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram