MSI gtx 970 VS 1050ti Gaming X

[gm-madi]

getting new gaming PC very soon for few games like WoW, CS, batlefield, GTA 5 etc ... got 2 brand new choices
1- i5 7400 / bad motherboard h110 / Msi gtx 970 gaming 4gb / 8gb RAM
2- ryzen 1600 / msi b350 gaming Plus / msi gtx 1050ti gaming X / 8gb RAM

to be honnest, i love ryzen (6 cores 12 threads, 70% CPU utilisation maximum in all modern games which is super future proof, same am4 socket untill 2020) but that MSI 970 made me think again and again.

glad to receive some help.

 

[maxalge]

Ryzen really is a great architecture for gaming, and will dominate in other tasks that take use of more cores. Sure at 720p it might be a bottleneck... But if you're gaming at that resolution, then you probably don't need more then a 950. Comparing it to am3 is uncalled for considering at that point it was still running on pile-driver which I wholeheartedly agree wasn't great after a year or two.

not great no, adequate

I am going to ask you again, do you understand why cpu's are benchmarked at low resolutions?

 

[ryzenlover2017]

I agree that Intel is often better value for gaming alone, but when you factor in that 95 percent of gamers are likely to occasionally do things other than gaming this begins to reverse. I understand that they do benchmarks at lower resolutions to mitigate GPU strain, but who cares if their CPU can run 118fps in 720p where Jimmys can only do 110 when they are going to game at higher resolution, where the gap of bridged... And the overall experience will be a better one for many.

 

[maxalge]

I agree that Intel is often better value for gaming alone, but when you factor in that 95 percent of gamers are likely to occasionally do things other than gaming this begins to reverse. I understand that they do benchmarks at lower resolutions to mitigate GPU strain, but who cares if their CPU can run 118fps in 720p where Jimmys can only do 110 when they are going to game at higher resolution, where the gap of bridged... And the overall experience will be a better one for many.

so you understand that when BENCHMARKING cpu's you need to remove any gpu bottleneck yes?

OK

Then, when judging what the best cpu is, you want to know what the fps limit it can reach actually is


Game A

i5 8400 can reach 200 fps in cpu benchmarks in Game A

ryzen 1600 maxes out at 90 fps in cpu benchmarks in Game A


which is the better cpu to pair with a 1080 ti, which is capable of easily reaching 200 fps in Game A?

Which would be fine to pair with a gtx 1060 which is capable of 90 fps in Game A?



would you slap in the 1600 with a 1080 ti in Game A?

 

[ryzenlover2017]

That it not even accurate... The 1600 it's only slightly slower in some games and that is so easily fixed by overclocking, and the 1600 will easily come in handy when games begin using more cores

 

[maxalge]

That it not even accurate... The 1600 it's only slightly slower in some games and that is so easily fixed by overclocking, and the 1600 will easily come in handy when games begin using more cores

Yes it is, there are many games where the ryzen taps out at the ~90 fps range

overclocking it to 4ghz wont make it faster than an i5 8400

By the time more cores become better, both of these processors will be obsolete. Just like the 8350.

You buy the best performance you can right now, not with the nebulous promise of MAAAYBE a bit better performance down the road, that is madness

 

[ryzenlover2017]

All I'm saying is that... If you are not only gaming, and doing some sort of content creation you can benefit from ryzen.

 

[gm-madi]

i finally got my build set up with:
- msi gtx 1050ti gaming X overclocked to 2000Mhz with 53°c maximum
- Ryzen 1600 @ 3.9Ghz 1.3250v with 72°c max
- 1 x8gb ADATA 3000Mhz RAM overclocked manually to 3200 1.36v
and of course the great MSI b350 Gaming Plus, i was worried about MoBo choice but seems its the best choice i made.

everything works fine except i got a fake Wraith Spire ( very noisy with 7 blades while the original one is super quiet with 5 blades ).