3570k vs 2700x gaming

zqa20 · Aug 7, 2018

How much faster on average is the 2700x compared the 3570k when it comes down to gaming @1080p

jojesa · Aug 7, 2018

On just gaming and depending on the game played...8-15 FPS with GTX 1070.
Which games do you play?

Hellfire13 · Aug 7, 2018

On an average, the 2700x is petty close to the 8700k in gaming... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr2B0RJd7Nc
Quite a bit faster... http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-3570K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-2700X/1316vs3958

But for gaming, 8700k should be a better choice.

Barty1884 · Aug 7, 2018

It'll depend on the specific titles you play, the resolution & the GPU it's paired with.

1080p with something like a 1050TI... I wouldn't expect a whole bunch of improvements.
Paired with a 1080TI on the other hand, and the gains could be substantial.

I would suggest looking up benchmarks for the titles you play - although for aging hardware like the 3570K you may be limited to Youtube "benchmarks".

Each title will vary quite a bit, depending on specifics.

For example: The Witcher 3.
Mid 40-70FPS on the 3570K (@ 4.2GHz) and paired with a 1080.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xChZ0Hp2glI

Vs
2700X + 1080, same settings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhoEAE0paec
65-80FPS, but more stable IMO.

PUBG
50-110FPS (probably 70ish average) on the 3570K / 1080 / High / 1080p
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UPVKIFcsJg

Vs
100-150 (~125FPS average) 2700X / 1080 / Ultra / 1080p
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDj-3OcxTnw

Of course, there has been optimization patches between the postings of those videos - and they're not direct apples to apples...

So there's two titles..... one with ~15% "gains" vs another with ~80% gains (and higher settings).

Totally varies game to game, GPU to GPU and resolutiion to resolution.

zqa20 · Aug 7, 2018

Barty1884 :

Hmm. I tend to play all sorts of games whether it be the witcher series, metro, kingdom come or some fps titles like overwatch and quake.

I was able to get a 1080 ti from EVGA so most likely I'll be stepping up to the 1180 if it comes out in the next 3 months which may make bottlenecks worse.

Do you think it might be better for me to either get the 8700k/2700x or wait for the 9700k 8 core 16 thread CPU coming out?

Hellfire13 · Aug 7, 2018

If you already have the 1080ti, then the 3570k will be limiting the card quite a bit. Since you are playing 1080p, you can mostly get away with it, but if you plan to upgrade those screen specs, then you will certainly need to upgrade that processor. 8700k should be mostly better for your gaming workload.

Barty1884 · Aug 7, 2018

For strictly gaming? I'd actually be inclined to look to the i5-8600K. 6 core is more than adequate for modern gaming.

The 8c/16t Intel option will be disproportionate in price vs the gains you'd see

Of course, if you want to game + stream, or even simply multi-task while gaming, then the 8700K is a very, very solid offering.

If going that route (if it were me), I'd actually look to 1st Gen Ryzen or maybe even Threadripper*. Prices have dropped substantially and, provided you take a little more care selecting your memory, with 1st Gen being a little more picky..... you can get a very good offering for pretty cheap these days.

You do tradeoff a little bit of performance vs comparable Intel offerings, but the "bang for your buck" is much greater.

*TR is pretty overkill for home use though.... although for the blowout sales on 1st Gen, it's pretty tempting.

For example, even the 8600K 6c/6t (+ cooler)

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel - Core i5-8600K 3.6GHz 6-Core Processor ($257.99 @ SuperBiiz)
CPU Cooler: CRYORIG - H7 49.0 CFM CPU Cooler ($49.79 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: MSI - Z370-A PRO ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($99.89 @ OutletPC)
Total: $407.67
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2018-08-07 13:04 EDT-0400

Vs a R5 1600 6c/12t

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD - Ryzen 5 1600 3.2GHz 6-Core Processor ($149.99 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: ASRock - AB350 Pro4 ATX AM4 Motherboard ($59.89 @ OutletPC)
Total: $209.88
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2018-08-07 13:02 EDT-0400

At 1080p, the Intel would give a more solid victory.
At 1440p (or 4K), the gap closes almost completely on averages, although the Intel platform stays ahead on minimums.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-8zSXwQxDs

Hellfire13 :

While the 3570K is no slouch..... it's going to show it's age moreso at 1080p than anything else?

Hellfire13 · Aug 7, 2018

The CPU has not direct throughput bearing on screen resolution other than to compliment and support the card without limitations.
And at 1080p, the card(1080ti) will mostly be pressed on par with 1060 levels which is darn enough for the 3570k to support, but ofcourse for the IPC latency.

Barty1884 · Aug 7, 2018

Not a direct bearing, no. But generally speaking at higher resolutions (resulting in lower framerates), there's less of a hit on the CPU so the actual impact of the age/performance/cores of a given CPU is lessened.

Not 100% accurate in every title of course

Still *some* limiting going on by the CPU, but definitely lowers as resolution increases.

i7-4790K vs i5-750 at various resolutions (with a 1080TI).
https://youtu.be/daiF6lYguN4?t=201

Averages are very similar...... 1% and .1%'s are within ~10% of the better CPU at 4K vs 1080p where the swing can be 50% or more.

zqa20 · Aug 7, 2018

Hellfire13 :

I agree the 3570k is perfectly matched with a 1060. My old card was a 980 (it broke and EVGA sent me out a 10 series replacement) and those worked together just fine for the most part.

I think I might actually go with the 2700x as I can upgrade it (I think) to the 4700x and by that point I expect AMDs IPC to match or be faster than the current coffeelake lineup and also come with more cores.

Hellfire13 · Aug 7, 2018

zqa20 :

Hellfire13 :

I agree the 3570k is perfectly matched with a 1060. My old card was a 980 (it broke and EVGA sent me out a 10 series replacement) and those worked together just fine for the most part.

I think I might actually go with the 2700x as I can upgrade it (I think) to the 4700x and by that point I expect AMDs IPC to match or be faster than the current coffeelake lineup and also come with more cores.

Yeah, you can do that. The 2700x has closed the gap in gaming pretty fast.

zqa20 · Aug 7, 2018

Hellfire13 :

zqa20 :

Yeah, you can do that. The 2700x has closed the gap in gaming pretty fast.

Would you say on average the 2700x is around 15% slower than the 8700k for gaming?

Hellfire13 · Aug 7, 2018

From what I have seen, anywhere between 5% to 15% depending on the game. So, on an average, maybe 10% or less.

Barty1884 · Aug 7, 2018

Average is tough to gauge, as there's so many variables title to tile.

At 1080p, the average is <10% - although the swing can be sizeable in some titles.
Looking at <5% at 1440p/
https://www.techspot.com/review/1655-core-i7-8700k-vs-ryzen-7-2700x/page8.html

zqa20 · Aug 7, 2018

Barty1884 :

hmm. On the face of things the 8700k seems like the best choice at the moment. The only issue is if i get that chip I have no real upgrade path where as with AMD i can swap the chip out in 2020. tuff choice

Hellfire13 · Aug 7, 2018

Dont think more than 12 threads would be necessary for gaming in the forseeable future. So 8700k is a pretty decent choice as of now. But if you still wanna play safe for maximum longevity, 2700x should be fine.

Barty1884 · Aug 7, 2018

Even an 8600K for *just* gaming should be sufficient for a good length of time. But same deal applies, limited upgrade path if/when required.

I'd still lean towards a 1600/2600 or X variant from a value proposition, including socket support for a couple more years.

Needless to say there's a tradeoff for the price, but to me it's a solid option. The 8c/16t nature of the 2700X is complete overkill in a gaming rig IMO.

zqa20 · Aug 7, 2018

I was considering the 8600k but after looking at it's usage in games like battlefield 1 and I think an assassins creed game. I can see myself having buyers remorse in a year or 2. I at least want the 2600x

Barty1884 · Aug 7, 2018

There are titles that are currently using 6 cores, no doubt about it. BF1 will spike to 100% usage in some situations IIRC, but I don't think it's to the detriment of your FPS. Not 100% sure on AC.

We have a long ways to go before 6+ cores/threads is the "norm" and games are developed/built around that as the normal consumer. Perhaps games entering design/development in late 2018 will have an eye on 6c+.... but you're looking at (typically, at least AAA titles) a couple of years before they're available to play.

Indie titles or rushed games, it really doesn't matter how many cores/threads you have to throw at something. Poorly optimized titles are poorly optimized titles.

There's always going to be something "better", especially in 2 years. In 6-12 months time, you could probably look back at any purchase made today and think "why didn't I wait?". Problem is, if you look at it like that, you'd never actually buy anything :lol:

The 2600X is a great option. I will say though, consider the non-X chips, depending on the price. Typically the X chips are just better binned so the "stock" voltage can do a little more with them. Manually overclocking a 2600 should reach the same upper end as a manually overclocked 2600X. Of course, if the price delta is negligible then the "X" chips have a slightly higher theoretical upper end, so not a bad choice by any means.

zqa20 · Aug 7, 2018

Barty1884 :

In a sense yes. I am looking into the future a bit as I tend to keep my CPUs for around 5-6 years before upgrading (partly due to intel dead end mobos). If I plan on keeping this CPU for quite a few years I don't think it would be the best idea to buy a CPU where it's getting maxed out on some games currently especially as I'm somebody who likes to have a few tabs open on my second monitor.

My 980 breaking prematurely has kind of forced my hand a little as I was planning to do a full upgrade later this year when the 11 series comes out along with the 9000 series Intel 8c16t. I may just bite the bullet and buy the 2700x and enjoy it. I'm sure whether I buy the i7 or the 2700x I'll be happy with my purchase.

Also if you're wondering I've been playing through metro last light today with this 1080 ti and 3570k and for the most part the ti tends to bounce around the 90%-95% usage so the old i5 isn't that much of a bottleneck surprisingly...at least in metro

Barty1884 · Aug 7, 2018

I see your point with an 8600K, but not the 2600X..... 6c/12t, same as the 8700K you'd consider?

It will totally depend on the title. If it's performing well enough in the titles you play currently, there's certainly no harm in waiting a bit - see what Intel bring to the table with their upcoming offerings. If nothing else, it'll impact the "prior" gen stuff, where you might be able to pick up an 8700K for 8600K money

The 2700X (or 2600X even) should see you through 5 years comfortably. At this point in time, I'd even hazard a guess it'll actually be more relevant in 6 years than a 3570K is in 2018 (and the 3570K is still no slouch)..... but of course, who knows how things will develop over time.

zqa20 · Aug 7, 2018

Barty1884 :

I don't see the 2600x as on par with the 8700k, it's just a much cheaper option with some obvious trade offs

This is just hearsay, but I'd maybe consider the 2600x a safer pick in the long run>8600k. Now from what i see, there's no real difference between the 3570k 4c4t and the 3770k 4c8t, in terms of raw fps, but from what i hear as time has passed, the 3770k is a much smoother experience, like less stutter for example. As my 3570k is now pushing 80% usage in a lot of modern games I can't help but think...I'd probably be having a smoother experience right now if i went with the i7.

I think I was listening to tech deals on youtube that said something to the effect of "there's some things you can't measure in a benchmark"

That's the main reason I don't want to go with the 8600k is because I don't want to run into the problems I'm having now when gaming. Sure my 3570k was allowing my 1080 ti to run at 90-95% usage in metro last light pushing 120+ fps consistently but from time to time I'd get this stutter which I'm now just accustomed to.

Barty1884 · Aug 7, 2018

Added cores/threads, generally speaking, result in better 1% and .1% lows - so would improve in the space(s) you're "feeling" issues.

Man, Tech Deals.... can't watch him myself, something about him drives me crazy :lol:..

I assume that should be "there's some things you can't measure in a benchmark" ? Which is true. It's the reason Min/Max/Average have fallen away as a benchmark "result". 1% and .1% tell you a lot more about the smoothness etc - but still no direct replacement for actually "feeling" the gameplay.

3570k vs 2700x gaming

Honorable

Glorious

Titan

Retired Moderator

Honorable

Titan

Retired Moderator

Titan

Retired Moderator

Honorable

Titan

Honorable

Titan

Retired Moderator

Honorable

Titan

Retired Moderator

Honorable

Retired Moderator

Honorable

Retired Moderator

Honorable

Retired Moderator

Share this page