Wait for AMD Ryzen or get the i7 6700k?

celpas

Distinguished
Dec 30, 2010
778
0
19,060
I am tired of being CPU bottlenecked in many games and am upgrading my CPU which is a FX 8350.Should I get the i7 6700K right now or wait for AMD Ryzen?
 
Solution
Hard to know for sure until full release. However, if leaks are true, Ryzen should be just as fast as 6700k in IPC. Depends on what clockspeed you'll be running at though to get most performance. If Ryzen can't get to 6700k speeds, then in gaming 6700k would be faster until more games use more than 4 cores. Still to many unknowns on Ryzen right now, such as turbo clocks, and clockspeeds of Zen CPUs with less than 8 cores. Platforms/chipsets will have basically the same features. Kaby lake seems to have no IPC gain over Skylake. On real advantages for desktop users are higher clockspeeds and some newer codec support.
Depending on what games you play the 6700k isn't overkill. I don't think there are any definitive release dates yet for ryzen mainstream, so far the only news bits have been revolving around their enthusiast 8c/16t chip and no firm pricing. Without several key details like price (to determine value), official benchmarks by reviewers, reliable release date etc it's too hard to answer whether it's worth it to wait or not. That's up to you, if you're not in a rush waiting might be worthwhile. Otherwise skylake is the best available right now with kaby lake around the corner.
 
I have a 1070 and a 144Hz monitor, but higher res doesn't necessarily mean higher CPU usage (or lower). It shifts the bottleneck back to GPU if anything. One thing I will say is I am amazed how many games use all 8 threads, albeit at low ratio.
 
Like I said it depends on the game. Several with oc'd 6700k's are seeing around 90% use on games like bf1. Some are seeing their gtx 1060 failing to reach 100% use with locked core i5's at 1080p. Not all games are the same. I7's can also offer better frame times on games like witcher 3. The op asked about the 6700k vs ryzen which is difficult to answer with only half of the comparison in existence. There's no such thing as 'gaming' unless trying to lump witcher and solitaire in the same category.

There has been more than one person disappointed with say an i5 4460 or 4440 because someone said 'i5 is enough' and it's not, at least not for their setup, the games they play and so on. Suggesting i5's for gaming also doesn't mean the slowest cheapest i5 will handle everything flawlessly. Many games there is little difference between an i5 and i7 but just because one works well on 3 games doesn't mean it will for someone playing an entirely different game on a different setup.

Balance is definitely important, as you pointed out Multipack. You're seeing bottlenecks on the gpu, it doesn't mean an i7 isn't needed. It just means for your setup and your gpu with the games you play it's more than you need.

That's why it's difficult to blindly suggest options without any idea of the op's situation. Many are curious about ryzen as am I but there's still a lot of unknowns which makes it a guess. Not even leaked performance comparisons to tease out mainstream performance hints. If waiting for ryzen may as well consider kaby lake since it will also be out soon. It will be based around the 200 series chipset with a few new features over the 100 series for skylake out right now.
 

atomicWAR

Glorious
Ambassador


I have several games that use all 12 threads on my CPU so yes it is surprising just how many threads games will now use compared to a couple years ago. But your comment on higher res doesn't translate into higher or lower CPU usage is wrong. The short answer is the higher the resolution and in games settings the less CPU horse power you need to do it. What every your CPU can crank out at the lowest setting and resolution it is capable of doing at any resolution and any settings (not including CPU based physic systems) assuming of course your GPU is capable. I have tested this again and again. You can see this behavior on nearly ever modern gaming title. Linked below are some screen shots from Darksiders Deathfinitive addition showing this phenomenon.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/exxttjdto0rjfhf/DS2%20deathfinitive%20640x480.JPG?dl=0 640x480
https://www.dropbox.com/s/pp6f8n0mlh7mufn/DS2%20deathfinitive%201280x720.JPG?dl=0 1280x720
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3gxg7wf7fa2m6f7/DS2%20deathfinitive%201920x1080.JPG?dl=0 1920x1080
https://www.dropbox.com/s/i35siaaqoq5s90l/DS2%20deathfinitive%202560x1440.JPG?dl=0 2560x1440
https://www.dropbox.com/s/gmqfxgrzsuf0zgr/DS2%20deathfinitive%203840x2160.JPG?dl=0 3840x2160

Note: other than resolution all in game settings are identical with no vsync so not to create self imposed system bottleneck

The thing to notice is as the resolution goes up the CPU usage goes down. At 640x480 the cpu is working the hardest because the GPU can flood it more readily giving a 39% CPU usage rate by the time the resolution is maxed out at 4K CPU usage goes down to 18% to maintain the same in-game settings though the frame rate is slower then at 480P because the GPU can't push out the frames any faster.

Which brings me to the OPs i7 vs Ryzen question. If it were me I would wait for Ryzen to launch. Worst case is its a fail and you know you want to go Intel. Best case though you could get a better performing CPU for less money. Also the resolution you play at is important as I showed above but for a new purchase I would go for the best CPU you can afford for the money, whomever makes it to increase your systems life span.
 

sarwar_r87

Distinguished
Mar 28, 2008
837
0
19,060
" The 6700k will be cheaper than the Zen equivalent by then I expect "

Fanboys these days. U gave no idea. Neither does AMD at this point, probably.

Hope you are enjoying your lalaland whole it lasts. End is near
 


I think you are agreeing with me. I said that higher res doesn't really change CPU usage. It just puts more pressure on the GPU.
 


I am not a fanboy and I'd appreciate it if you didn't resort to personal insults. I am simply saying that the 6700k will be older and new tech is always given prestige pricing, plus the Kaby Lake chips will be on release too, so the 4 core 4GHz level Zen chips will likely cost more than the older generation Intel ones. And I still believe that.
 

celpas

Distinguished
Dec 30, 2010
778
0
19,060


My system currently has a 970 paired with the FX 8350 and in games like GTA 5 and Watch dogs 2 (specifically the latter) my GPU cant run to its fullest potential as Rivatuner shows the CPU bottlenecking my card. In WD2,no matter what settings I chose the fps stayed the same

Hence to avoid this scenario again I want one of the best CPUs money can buy so that it may not result in any bottleneck for at least 3 years or so. I could go for the Ryzen CPUs but the problem is I got burned with the FX series so I am scared of putting down money for the top of the line Ryzen CPU
 


Ryzen will be a whole other kettle of fish I am sure, although of course nobody can say for sure. From what you have asaid I'd personally recommend an i7 6700k. A Broadwell-E would be too far imo, but of course its an option too if you have more money than you know what to do with. The Kaby Lake chips will be more expensive, and as reviews on this very site show, offer negligible increases in performance. The 6700k will see you through another couple of gens of GPU's and is probably the best performance to cost option if you want to future proof for a few years. Just my take.
 

sarwar_r87

Distinguished
Mar 28, 2008
837
0
19,060
How can u say that. Things can change in the coming months. Hence you are a fan boy. Its not a insult. And I am sure a four core zen will be cheaper than a four core Intel, whatever gen.

"The Kaby Lake chips will be more expensive" ur crystal balls are failing.
Prices of CPU and GPU from the same company are based on performance. Go check newegg. Else Intel will cannibalize its sell of newer products.

Also if a Intel CPU costs 500 pounds today , after zen it may be 300. So who is their right frame of mind would want to buy a CPU now.
 

sarwar_r87

Distinguished
Mar 28, 2008
837
0
19,060
@OP, if you got burnt by fx series its not the fault of AMD. They always, except with fx 9xxx series, priced their CPU according to their merit. The reason you feel let down was because your expectations were misplaced, or the review you based your decision on was misleading.
 


And you need to take life a little less seriously my friend lol. And history shows CPU's dont go down in price. New ones go up..
 

atomicWAR

Glorious
Ambassador


Not exactly you said changing the resolution didn't change the load on the CPU one way or the other. I quote,"higher res doesn't necessarily mean higher CPU usage (or lower)". That is not true. Going up with the resolution brings the load on the CPU down. So in fact CPU usage goes down as resolution goes up.
 

celpas

Distinguished
Dec 30, 2010
778
0
19,060


Is Kaby Lake releasing in Q1 2017 too?
 
Hard to know for sure until full release. However, if leaks are true, Ryzen should be just as fast as 6700k in IPC. Depends on what clockspeed you'll be running at though to get most performance. If Ryzen can't get to 6700k speeds, then in gaming 6700k would be faster until more games use more than 4 cores. Still to many unknowns on Ryzen right now, such as turbo clocks, and clockspeeds of Zen CPUs with less than 8 cores. Platforms/chipsets will have basically the same features. Kaby lake seems to have no IPC gain over Skylake. On real advantages for desktop users are higher clockspeeds and some newer codec support.
 
Solution

renegadepestisrac

Reputable
Jun 4, 2014
14
0
4,510


Look, new games witch uses dx12 or vulcan runs smooth on fx 8000 series processors.
If you look the bench's performs almost same than the i7 6800k.

So i would wait if i where you.
When Ryzen will come out Intel prices will drop.
If AMD that god as they say buy one, else buy Intel for cheaper price.
You win either way...

 


Please share a gaming benchmark where any FX8xxx equals an i7 6800k. Everything I have seen shows they are outperformed by any modern i5, even with DX12. Here is an example of what I have seen in the benchmarks



Full article here http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/2673-battlefield-1-cpu-benchmark-dx11-vs-dx12-i5-i7-fx/page-2
 

OllympianGamer

Honorable
Dec 22, 2016
317
50
10,890
I asked myself the same question a month or so ago (had an 8320) and caved. Built a new rig with i7-6700k, the increase is so unbelievable I don't give a hoot if zen is good or not as I know this i7-6700k will keep me sorted for ages.
 

dopemoney

Distinguished
Feb 7, 2014
70
1
18,645


Well said. I had no idea the difference between a BE 9590 and a shiny new 6700k would be so big. It's night and day. Get the Intel chip.