Ryzen 2600x upgrade from i5-4690k?

[king3pj]

Here are my current specs...

i5-4690k @ 4.0GHz
Hyper 212 EVO cooler so modest overclocks are an option
16GB RAM
1070
all SSD system

Also, it's important to point out that I play on a 1440p 144Hz Gsync monitor so I'm looking for more than 60 FPS.

Overall I'm still pretty happy with the performance of my system. It handles high (120+ FPS) framerates in competitive games I play like Overwatch, Rocket League, Heroes of the Storm, Quake Champions, and the current Unreal Tournament. At the same time I am able to get 60+ FPS in the demanding AAA single player games I play.

For that reason I'm planning on skipping this upcoming Nvidia GPU generation and probably upgrading next time. My CPU is already 4 years old though and assuming it's another 2 years before the next gen Nvidia GPUs hit it will be 6 years old by then and I'll be wanting a complete system rebuild.

Instead of doing a full rebuild in a couple years and spending $800+ at once I'd like to continue staggering my updates just like I did when I bought the 1070 in 2016. Also I noticed that the COD Black Ops 4 beta last weekend was pushing all 4 of my cores to 80%+ usage so I think my 4690k is starting to show its age. I also play WoW and that game could always use more CPU.

Basically I've decided to upgrade my CPU, motherboard, and RAM and I've come down to two options.

Option 1: Buy a Ryzen CPU like the 2600x now. The problem with this is I see that current i5's and i7's beat it in most games. I just don't know how my current CPU stacks up against Ryzen since benchmarks don't usually show older CPUs like my 4690k.


Option 2: Stick with Intel. I almost pulled the trigger on an i5-8600 yesterday. Then I saw an article here saying that the 9th gen Intel CPUs will probably be released October 1st. Since I'm not in dire need of an upgrade right now I will be waiting for a 9th gen i5 or maybe even an i7 if I stick with Intel. I also want this CPU to live through 2-3 GPUs just like my current one did so waiting for the next generation seems like it would be worth it.

Intel 9th gen is where I'm leaning now depending on the feedback I get here. Since I have a 144Hz Gsync monitor every extra frame is nice to have. If Ryzen can get me what I want today though I see no point in waiting until this winter to upgrade.

Anyways thanks for reading my long winded post.

 

[vapour]

2600X is on par with I5-8400 and I5-8400 is not better than 4690k except for the extra two cores in some well-optimized games that utilize more than 4 cores. Most games do not benefit from extra 2 cores. I will wait for 9th Gen. Ryzen 2600X will be better if you stream and do a lot multitasking. For gaming, not really, still stronger single core wins. My suggestion is keep waiting and see how much 9th gen Intel can offer.

 

[bmockeg]

In your situation I would wait for Intel 9th gen

 

[king3pj]

Sounds like I'm holding off until this winter to make any upgrades then. It's still hard to compare things since CPU gaming benchmarks usually only go back 1 or 2 generations but I think an i5-9600 or i7-9700 will be a nice upgrade over my i5-4690k.

To answer the multi tasking thing Vapour brought up I don't stream or record my own gameplay. I do run a second monitor with Firefox, Discord, and or Spotify open pretty often but none of those things seem to put much extra stress on my system so I don't think the extra cores of Ryzen will do much for me. My performance seems to be pretty much the same whether I'm running those programs while gaming or not.

 

[Deleted member 362816]

2600X is on par with I5-8400 and I5-8400 is not better than 4690k except for the extra two cores in some well-optimized games that utilize more than 4 cores. Most games do not benefit from extra 2 cores. I will wait for 9th Gen. Ryzen 2600X will be better if you stream and do a lot multitasking. For gaming, not really, still stronger single core wins. My suggestion is keep waiting and see how much 9th gen Intel can offer.

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-8400-vs-Intel-Core-i5-4690K/3939vs2432

 

[vapour]

2600X is on par with I5-8400 and I5-8400 is not better than 4690k except for the extra two cores in some well-optimized games that utilize more than 4 cores. Most games do not benefit from extra 2 cores. I will wait for 9th Gen. Ryzen 2600X will be better if you stream and do a lot multitasking. For gaming, not really, still stronger single core wins. My suggestion is keep waiting and see how much 9th gen Intel can offer.

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-8400-vs-Intel-Core-i5-4690K/3939vs2432

SC Mixed
Avg. Single Core Mixed Speed 117 Pts Slightly faster single-core speed.
+5% 111 Pts

Yes slightly faster single core but OP OCed 4690k to possibly faster, so what? Multi core performance is better due to extra 2 cores. what is your point?

 

[Deleted member 362816]

Just read some benchmarks, the 2600x does outperform the 4690k, also the amd chipset is good till 2020, so it would be easy to upgrade later on unlike Intel, Please note I am a intel fanboy saying this.

 

[vapour]

Just read some benchmarks, the 2600x does outperform the 4690k, also the amd chipset is good till 2020, so it would be easy to upgrade later on unlike Intel, Please note I am a intel fanboy saying this.

For gaming? Not really. For productivity, yes as I have stated already. You need to consider the cost to get New CPU, MB and DDR4 ram for the performance diff. For gaming, it is little to none or worse in some games.

 

[Deleted member 362816]

The 4690k came out in 2014, there are many reason to upgrade to z370, or x470 at this time. Or you can always wait, by the times the 9th gen comes out something else better will be announced for next year. Why not just wait till 2020. lol. backwards thinking.

 

[punkncat]

I just upgraded from a 4690 (non K) to a 1700, via a 1200. I honestly felt like the 1200 was a lateral move. The 1700 isn't faster single thread, but it's ability to run everything under the sun at one time sure is.
Consider for a moment that on single thread alone there is almost nothing made at any manner of reasonable price point that matches the single core perf of the 4th gen i5's, even still.

 

[vapour]

The 4690k came out in 2014, there are many reason to upgrade to z370, or x470 at this time. Or you can always wait, by the times the 9th gen comes out something else better will be announced for next year. Why not just wait till 2020. lol. backwards thinking.

Wrong again, age is not the key. If every time new CPU/GPU comes out, you need to upgrade, you are spending way too much money for little performance boost. Also Intel refresh is kind of a joke, every gen is only several percent faster in many cases, more like marketing instead of real upgrades.

 

[Deleted member 362816]

Just read some benchmarks, the 2600x does outperform the 4690k, also the amd chipset is good till 2020, so it would be easy to upgrade later on unlike Intel, Please note I am a intel fanboy saying this.

For gaming? Not really. For productivity, yes as I have stated already. You need to consider the cost to get New CPU, MB and DDR4 ram for the performance diff. For gaming, it is little to none or worse in some games.

The 4690k came out in 2014, there are many reason to upgrade to z370, or x470 at this time. Or you can always wait, by the times the 9th gen comes out something else better will be announced for next year. Why not just wait till 2020. lol. backwards thinking.

Wrong again, age is not the key. If every time new CPU/GPU comes out, you need to upgrade, you are spending way too much money for little performance boost. Also Intel refresh is kind of a joke, every gen is only several percent faster in many cases, more like marketing instead of real upgrades.

So you are telling me that x470/z370 chip-sets them selves have no benefits over z97? Lol. ok then.
More and more games are starting to use more then 4 cores, thus intel and amd are following a trend.
Every thread i see you in becomes an you know it all argument not really a discussion. Pointless debating with you.

to the OP, if you want to wait for intels 9th gen stuff at least some of the new CPU's on the high end will be soldered again so that is a plus, if you want to go with x470/b450 those chipsets will be able to take cpu upgrades till 2020, that is a plus because Intel is known for not allowing this.

I would consider any chipset from 2017/2018 an upgrade over your current, but then again it depends on what you do with it.

As for Cpu's in general I guess for 90% of titles it depends on what resolution you play at, I am at 4k, so between a 5.2ghz 7700k and a stock 2600x, I see absolutely no difference.

 

[king3pj]

The 4690k came out in 2014, there are many reason to upgrade to z370, or x470 at this time. Or you can always wait, by the times the 9th gen comes out something else better will be announced for next year. Why not just wait till 2020. lol. backwards thinking.

If I was building a new PC now I would probably agree with you that waiting is not necessary. My i5-4690k is still holding up pretty well though. Yes, it might be starting to show its age in certain games like the Black Ops 4 beta but It's not like I'm in desperate need of an upgrade. If I absolutely needed a CPU today I would have no problem grabbing the i5-8600 but I don't.

I don't see the harm in waiting a few more months for a 9th Intel. That is a whole lot different than waiting for winter of 2020 for the 10th gen. Even with the incremental Intel upgrades you guys are talking about the 9th gen is still 5 generations newer than what I have right now. It seems like that will probably be a nice upgrade to me.

 

[vapour]

So you are telling me that x470/z370 chip-sets them selves have no benefits over z97? Lol. ok then.
More and more games are starting to use more then 4 cores, thus intel and amd are following a trend.
Every thread i see you in becomes an you know it all argument not really a discussion. Pointless debating with you.

As for Cpu's in general I guess for 90% of titles it depends on what resolution you play at, I am at 4k, so between a 5.2ghz 7700k and a stock 2600x, I see absolutely no difference.

Really, I am saying no benefit on gaming and show me where you see that please, all I am saying the cost to get new platform does not justify the benefit in gaming performance boost if there are any.
I said for productivity yes. Learn to read.
For 4k, even an older gen CPU will be fine as GPU is the limiting factor.

Can not argue with evidence or rationing then attack the person, classic.

 

[Deleted member 362816]

So you are telling me that x470/z370 chip-sets them selves have no benefits over z97? Lol. ok then.
More and more games are starting to use more then 4 cores, thus intel and amd are following a trend.
Every thread i see you in becomes an you know it all argument not really a discussion. Pointless debating with you.

As for Cpu's in general I guess for 90% of titles it depends on what resolution you play at, I am at 4k, so between a 5.2ghz 7700k and a stock 2600x, I see absolutely no difference.

Really, I am saying no benefit on gaming and show me where you see that please.
I said for productivity yes. Learn to read.
For 4k, even an older gen CPU will be fine as GPU is the limiting factor.

Ok keyboard warrior, Saying no benefit in gaming is a lie even a 1% gain is considered a upgrade.

If OP has the money I would consider AM4 as a compete upgrade today and later on because the current chipsets are good till 2020. More and more games are becoming 4+ core every month stupid to think this isn't going to be the trend.

Op just lookup real world benchmarks of the AMD offering compared to what you have or something similar and don't take our word. Everyone here has a opinion on what is best and often it is completely biases.

 

[Deleted member 362816]

So you are telling me that x470/z370 chip-sets them selves have no benefits over z97? Lol. ok then.
More and more games are starting to use more then 4 cores, thus intel and amd are following a trend.
Every thread i see you in becomes an you know it all argument not really a discussion. Pointless debating with you.

As for Cpu's in general I guess for 90% of titles it depends on what resolution you play at, I am at 4k, so between a 5.2ghz 7700k and a stock 2600x, I see absolutely no difference.

Really, I am saying no benefit on gaming and show me where you see that please, all I am saying the cost to get new platform does not justify the benefit in gaming performance boost if there are any.
I said for productivity yes. Learn to read.
For 4k, even an older gen CPU will be fine as GPU is the limiting factor.

Can not argue with evidence or rationing then attack the person, classic.

Evidence? What have you provided in that regard? your spew is not evidence.

 

[king3pj]

I just upgraded from a 4690 (non K) to a 1700, via a 1200. I honestly felt like the 1200 was a lateral move. The 1700 isn't faster single thread, but it's ability to run everything under the sun at one time sure is.
Consider for a moment that on single thread alone there is almost nothing made at any manner of reasonable price point that matches the single core perf of the 4th gen i5's, even still.

Thank you for the first hand experience with a similar upgrade to the one I am considering. I'm not purely after single thread performance because some games do make use of more cores but I am after whatever CPU can get me closest to 144 FPS most often. For many games I guess single core performance and highest framerate are the same thing so that means Intel.

I guess the whole reason for my post was to find out if Ryzen was a big enough upgrade over my 4690k in pure gaming performance to justify buying that now instead of waiting for 9th gen Intel. It sounds like it probably isn't.

 

[Deleted member 362816]

I just upgraded from a 4690 (non K) to a 1700, via a 1200. I honestly felt like the 1200 was a lateral move. The 1700 isn't faster single thread, but it's ability to run everything under the sun at one time sure is.
Consider for a moment that on single thread alone there is almost nothing made at any manner of reasonable price point that matches the single core perf of the 4th gen i5's, even still.

Thank you for the first hand experience with a similar upgrade to the one I am considering. I'm not purely after single thread performance because some games do make use of more cores but I am after whatever CPU can get me closest to 144 FPS most often. For many games I guess single core performance and highest framerate are the same thing so that means Intel.

I guess the whole reason for my post was to find out if Ryzen was a big enough upgrade over my 4690k in pure gaming performance to justify buying that now instead of waiting for 9th gen Intel. It sounds like it probably isn't.

if 144fps in your main thing I would just buy the RTX 2080 or whatever they call it when it comes out.

 

[king3pj]

So you are telling me that x470/z370 chip-sets them selves have no benefits over z97? Lol. ok then.
More and more games are starting to use more then 4 cores, thus intel and amd are following a trend.
Every thread i see you in becomes an you know it all argument not really a discussion. Pointless debating with you.

As for Cpu's in general I guess for 90% of titles it depends on what resolution you play at, I am at 4k, so between a 5.2ghz 7700k and a stock 2600x, I see absolutely no difference.

Really, I am saying no benefit on gaming and show me where you see that please.
I said for productivity yes. Learn to read.
For 4k, even an older gen CPU will be fine as GPU is the limiting factor.

If OP has the money I would consider AM4 as a compete upgrade today and later on because the current chipsets are good till 2020. More and more games are becoming 4+ core every month stupid to think this isn't going to be the trend.

Op just lookup real world benchmarks of the AMD offering compared to what you have or something similar and don't take our word. Everyone here has a opinion on what is best and often it is completely biases.

I guess I just think it would be a waste to buy a CPU today and buy another one before 2020 so the benefit of AM4 lasting until 2020 isn't as much of a big deal to me. I plan to use whatever I buy for a while just like I did with my 4690k.

Also I'm not sure what is going on with someone else selecting posts as the best answer over and over again. I thought the OP usually did that here. Also it seems weird that you unselected the answer I chose as well as the answers that one of you keep selecting.

I guess I'm just moving on from this post. I think I got what I needed from it and I'm not interested in the back and forth fighting between you two.

 

[Rogue Leader]

So you are telling me that x470/z370 chip-sets them selves have no benefits over z97? Lol. ok then.
More and more games are starting to use more then 4 cores, thus intel and amd are following a trend.
Every thread i see you in becomes an you know it all argument not really a discussion. Pointless debating with you.

As for Cpu's in general I guess for 90% of titles it depends on what resolution you play at, I am at 4k, so between a 5.2ghz 7700k and a stock 2600x, I see absolutely no difference.

Really, I am saying no benefit on gaming and show me where you see that please, all I am saying the cost to get new platform does not justify the benefit in gaming performance boost if there are any.
I said for productivity yes. Learn to read.
For 4k, even an older gen CPU will be fine as GPU is the limiting factor.

Can not argue with evidence or rationing then attack the person, classic.

Evidence? What have you provided in that regard? your spew is not evidence.

Keep it civil or bans will be handed out. This is your one and only warning.

I guess I'm just moving on from this post. I think I got what I needed from it and I'm not interested in the back and forth fighting between you two.

My apologies on behalf of the forum. This will be dealt with.

 

[punkncat]

^ Personally, had I not been in the situation where I had "need" of another computer and an elegant way to solve the current issue I would have waited another gen or two as well. I would point out that the comparison made was after I had fairly aggressively (for this chip) OC'ed them both to make it a more even field. The 'x' binned chip you are selecting will put down better numbers, but overall I think it's still worth waiting a bit for more core utilization and clock speed.