expired Posted by Maxturdinator almost 2 years ago
Item 1 of 5
Item 1 of 5
expired Posted by Maxturdinator almost 2 years ago
AMD Ryzen 9 5900X AM4 Unlocked Desktop Processor + Uncharted: Legacy of Thieves
+ Free Shipping$340
$570
40% offAmazon
Visit Amazon
Top Comments
You're always going to be CPU or GPU bound... at higher resolutions you're more likely to be GPU bound with most GPUs--- so differences between CPUs will appear much smaller.
Here's a story on CPU scaling back then the 3000 series was kind, where if you were running something in 4k max you'd see just a few FPS difference between literally any modern CPU made in the previous 5 or so years.... i3, i5, i7, R5, R9, all meh.
https://www.tomshardwar
The i9 is barely more than 3% ahead of the i3. The R9 is almost identical to the R5 at 4k.
Hell the nearly decade old now i7-4770k was only a bit over 8% slower than the leader at 4k.
Because the GPU was the bottleneck.
Now drop down to 1440p max and differences get a little bigger... i3 to i9 is now a jump of over 10%... and that poor 4770k is over 25% behind the leader... because some CPU bottleneck is leaking through.
At 1080p the gap is larger still, over 20% between i3 and i9 and almost 50% difference from that 4770k to the leader as your bottleneck is largely in the CPU now not the GPU...
Now, if you're running like a 3060ti or something, you're gonna be GPU bound a lot sooner, meaning the "CPU makes little difference" threshold will drop a fair bit.
In contrast, the 4090 finally gets us to a world where you can be CPU bound even at 4k/Ultra... (which is the only reason I finally moved from my 3600x to a 5800X3D when I upgraded from a 3090 to a 4090, since all my gaming is at 4k)
https://www.techpowerup
That for example is 53 games benchmarked on a 5800x vs a 5800x3d with a 4090 in both.
Even at 4k you see a near 7% difference on average, and double-digit differences (some in the 20-30% range) in almost a third of the games favoring the 5800x3d... certainly there's many games there still GPU bound, but a shocking # that aren't.
At 1440p with the 4090 the 5800x3d is over 15% ahead of the 5800X on average, and more in the 20-35% range in almost half of em.
34 Comments
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Our community has rated this post as helpful. If you agree, why not thank geost
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
But if your wanting to game and your gonna pair it with an rtx 3080 or 3090 get the 5800x3d
This is only $10 more though and in stock.
But then, that turned out to be the case for the GPUs too.
FWIW. I do primarily gaming on a 1440p ultrawide, teamed with a 6900XT and 32gb (2X16) of only 3200mhz ram. I get 500-600fps in Rocket League (max settings), and 300-700fps in Fortnite (depending on where you're looking). 120-150 fps on Warzone 2.0 and 120 fps on FH5 (I capped it but even uncapped it's barely more than that). Cyberpunk played well (no noticeable stutters) when I tried it but I don't remember the fps. I'd be surprised it if were much more than 60 though. Oh yea, I also play MSFS with is. Runs amazingly well on very high settings on the 1440p monitor but the reason I went with the 5900X is for VR, and It will get 35-40 fps in VR on my HP Reverb G2 ( no idea what settings I use as I'm constantly fidgeting with them but it looks pretty good)
I have everything on Max settings aside from ray tracing.
I get about 22000 in cinebench R23 (multi core) and like 1620 in single core. Passmark of 42000 (top 99%) using PBO and a mild curve optimization.
I have a 240mm radiator and my temps idle at 47C max at 80C, room ambient temp of ~24C, you could probably do better with a bigger radiator but there's no reason for me to bother as I don't ever thermal throttle.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.