AMD RYZEN 7 2700X Performance on 3D Vision?
  1 / 2    
Debating on jumping on AMD camp for 3D vision due to significantly cheaper price point, similar performance boost (on regular game) to Intel. Does anyone have any input?
Debating on jumping on AMD camp for 3D vision due to significantly cheaper price point, similar performance boost (on regular game) to Intel.

Does anyone have any input?

8700K 5.0Ghz OC (Silicon Lottery Edition)
Noctua NH-15 cooler
Asus Maximus X Hero
16 GB Corsair Vengeance LPX RAM DDR4 3000
1TB Samsung PM961 OEM M.2 NVMe
MSI Gaming X Trio 1080Ti SLI
Corsair 1000RMi PSU
Cougar Conquer Case
Triple Screens Acer Predator 3D Vision XB272
3D Vision 2 Glasses
Win 10 Pro x64

#1
Posted 06/29/2018 07:59 PM   
Probably not the right call for 3D Vision. In general, games do not fully support a large amount of cores. Some do, but not in general. So the larger core count for Ryzen is mostly nullified. 2D gaming is not at all the same as 3D gaming, including VR. For 3D and VR in particular, you most likely want the best IPC (Instructions per Clock), which is where Intel is better. Single threaded performance is still the most important aspect for 3D Vision. Read this entire thread for some good details provided by RageDemon. https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/966422/3d-vision/3d-vision-cpu-bottelneck-gathering-information-thread-/
Probably not the right call for 3D Vision. In general, games do not fully support a large amount of cores. Some do, but not in general. So the larger core count for Ryzen is mostly nullified.

2D gaming is not at all the same as 3D gaming, including VR. For 3D and VR in particular, you most likely want the best IPC (Instructions per Clock), which is where Intel is better. Single threaded performance is still the most important aspect for 3D Vision.

Read this entire thread for some good details provided by RageDemon.


https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/966422/3d-vision/3d-vision-cpu-bottelneck-gathering-information-thread-/

Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607
Latest 3Dmigoto Release
Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers

#2
Posted 06/30/2018 12:31 AM   
so 8700K is still a superior choice, even with the WIN10 only bullsh1t from Intel?
so 8700K is still a superior choice, even with the WIN10 only bullsh1t from Intel?

8700K 5.0Ghz OC (Silicon Lottery Edition)
Noctua NH-15 cooler
Asus Maximus X Hero
16 GB Corsair Vengeance LPX RAM DDR4 3000
1TB Samsung PM961 OEM M.2 NVMe
MSI Gaming X Trio 1080Ti SLI
Corsair 1000RMi PSU
Cougar Conquer Case
Triple Screens Acer Predator 3D Vision XB272
3D Vision 2 Glasses
Win 10 Pro x64

#3
Posted 06/30/2018 09:42 PM   
Yes for 3D gaming I7-8700K is better choice.
Yes for 3D gaming I7-8700K is better choice.

Gigabyte Z370 Gaming 7 32GB Ram i9-9900K GigaByte Aorus Extreme Gaming 2080TI (single) Game Blaster Z Windows 10 X64 build #17763.195 Define R6 Blackout Case Corsair H110i GTX Sandisk 1TB (OS) SanDisk 2TB SSD (Games) Seagate EXOs 8 and 12 TB drives Samsung UN46c7000 HD TV Samsung UN55HU9000 UHD TVCurrently using ACER PASSIVE EDID override on 3D TVs LG 55

#4
Posted 06/30/2018 10:05 PM   
[quote="J-Enermax"]so 8700K is still a superior choice, even with the WIN10 only bullsh1t from Intel?[/quote] Actually AMD signed up for the same bullsh1te, so 2700X is also only directly supported by Win10. In both cases, you can run Win7 without any real problems, but this is probably last gen this will work. Next gen is irrelevant anyway, unless you have a workload that can use 16 threads, like video editing or something non-game related. Microsoft is planning to shaft everyone with a 6700K and above by not even supporting security updates, but they so far have not forced this. And we are past their previous deadline for 6700K. Not supporting security updates would be far worse for them than the users. I'm still running Win7 because I cannot tolerate those f*ing Win10 forced updates that break everything on my system, including stuff like USB. That is inexcusable, and the only reason it happens is because they no longer do any QA on Win10. Not interested in being a guinea pig so they can make more money. I'm probably going to pony up and go with the i7-8086K, even though it is a poor value choice, because IPC is important for us, and upping the clock speed is the other side of the equation. Pre-binned chip at full 5GHz on all cores is more attractive to me than the silicon lottery.
J-Enermax said:so 8700K is still a superior choice, even with the WIN10 only bullsh1t from Intel?

Actually AMD signed up for the same bullsh1te, so 2700X is also only directly supported by Win10.

In both cases, you can run Win7 without any real problems, but this is probably last gen this will work. Next gen is irrelevant anyway, unless you have a workload that can use 16 threads, like video editing or something non-game related.


Microsoft is planning to shaft everyone with a 6700K and above by not even supporting security updates, but they so far have not forced this. And we are past their previous deadline for 6700K. Not supporting security updates would be far worse for them than the users.

I'm still running Win7 because I cannot tolerate those f*ing Win10 forced updates that break everything on my system, including stuff like USB. That is inexcusable, and the only reason it happens is because they no longer do any QA on Win10. Not interested in being a guinea pig so they can make more money.


I'm probably going to pony up and go with the i7-8086K, even though it is a poor value choice, because IPC is important for us, and upping the clock speed is the other side of the equation. Pre-binned chip at full 5GHz on all cores is more attractive to me than the silicon lottery.

Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607
Latest 3Dmigoto Release
Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers

#5
Posted 06/30/2018 11:37 PM   
Hey bo3b, A word to the wise mate: perhaps you might wish to wait for the rumoured 9700k with 8C/16T later this year / early next year? If you have the cash, buying this on [url]https://siliconlottery.com/collections/coffeelake[/url] when it becomes available guaranteeing 5GHz+ would be better value in the long term both in price, performance, and depreciation compared with an 8086, especially in the long term as games start using more cores. The added advantage is that to optimise '4 core games' you can disable 2-4 central cores leaving only 4 active cores on the sides thereby dissipating heat better than a dedicated 4 core CPU such as a 7700k, but still having all the extra shared cache from the disabled cores. In theory this would lead to better performance due to both cooler cores (better overclocking), and more cache, than a dedicated 4-6 core CPU. Up to you mate, you are the sage around these parts and I'm sure you know what you are doing. I also appreciate that you have a hatred for Win10. I have a gut feeling that your seemingly horrendous luck with it might be due to a sub-par motherboard. What are you running? I learned a long time ago that a premium motherboard, although at first sight might look excessive, pays dividends in many ways including better overclocking, better stability, better support, better components, and longer life. Support here is the operative word, as I might be tempted to bet that an Asus Maximum Hero from your i5-4670K era does not have the compatibility/USB etc problems you are having. Admittedly I am running a relatively new Hero ix, it ran flawlessly on windows 7, and now on windows 10 with each creators update as it was pushed to me in due time after "beta testing" by other users ;-) Out of curiosity, what is your motherboard? All the best mate.
Hey bo3b,

A word to the wise mate: perhaps you might wish to wait for the rumoured 9700k with 8C/16T later this year / early next year? If you have the cash, buying this on https://siliconlottery.com/collections/coffeelake when it becomes available guaranteeing 5GHz+ would be better value in the long term both in price, performance, and depreciation compared with an 8086, especially in the long term as games start using more cores.

The added advantage is that to optimise '4 core games' you can disable 2-4 central cores leaving only 4 active cores on the sides thereby dissipating heat better than a dedicated 4 core CPU such as a 7700k, but still having all the extra shared cache from the disabled cores. In theory this would lead to better performance due to
both cooler cores (better overclocking), and more cache, than a dedicated 4-6 core CPU.

Up to you mate, you are the sage around these parts and I'm sure you know what you are doing.

I also appreciate that you have a hatred for Win10. I have a gut feeling that your seemingly horrendous luck with it might be due to a sub-par motherboard. What are you running?

I learned a long time ago that a premium motherboard, although at first sight might look excessive, pays dividends in many ways including better overclocking, better stability, better support, better components, and longer life. Support here is the operative word, as I might be tempted to bet that an Asus Maximum Hero from your i5-4670K era does not have the compatibility/USB etc problems you are having.

Admittedly I am running a relatively new Hero ix, it ran flawlessly on windows 7, and now on windows 10 with each creators update as it was pushed to me in due time after "beta testing" by other users ;-)

Out of curiosity, what is your motherboard?

All the best mate.

Windows 10 64-bit, Intel 7700K @ 5.1GHz, 16GB 3600MHz CL15 DDR4 RAM, 2x GTX 1080 SLI, Asus Maximus IX Hero, Sound Blaster ZxR, PCIe Quad SSD, Oculus Rift CV1, DLP Link PGD-150 glasses, ViewSonic PJD6531w 3D DLP Projector @ 1280x800 120Hz native / 2560x1600 120Hz DSR 3D Gaming.

#6
Posted 07/01/2018 12:22 AM   
thanks for the info mate
thanks for the info mate

8700K 5.0Ghz OC (Silicon Lottery Edition)
Noctua NH-15 cooler
Asus Maximus X Hero
16 GB Corsair Vengeance LPX RAM DDR4 3000
1TB Samsung PM961 OEM M.2 NVMe
MSI Gaming X Trio 1080Ti SLI
Corsair 1000RMi PSU
Cougar Conquer Case
Triple Screens Acer Predator 3D Vision XB272
3D Vision 2 Glasses
Win 10 Pro x64

#7
Posted 07/01/2018 01:36 AM   
[quote="RAGEdemon"]Hey bo3b, A word to the wise mate: perhaps you might wish to wait for the rumoured 9700k with 8C/16T later this year / early next year? If you have the cash, buying this on [url]https://siliconlottery.com/collections/coffeelake[/url] when it becomes available guaranteeing 5GHz+ would be better value in the long term both in price, performance, and depreciation compared with an 8086, especially in the long term as games start using more cores. The added advantage is that to optimise '4 core games' you can disable 2-4 central cores leaving only 4 active cores on the sides thereby dissipating heat better than a dedicated 4 core CPU such as a 7700k, but still having all the extra shared cache from the disabled cores. In theory this would lead to better performance due to both cooler cores (better overclocking), and more cache, than a dedicated 4-6 core CPU. Up to you mate, you are the sage around these parts and I'm sure you know what you are doing. I also appreciate that you have a hatred for Win10. I have a gut feeling that your seemingly horrendous luck with it might be due to a sub-par motherboard. What are you running? I learned a long time ago that a premium motherboard, although at first sight might look excessive, pays dividends in many ways including better overclocking, better stability, better support, better components, and longer life. Support here is the operative word, as I might be tempted to bet that an Asus Maximum Hero from your i5-4670K era does not have the compatibility/USB etc problems you are having. Admittedly I am running a relatively new Hero ix, it ran flawlessly on windows 7, and now on windows 10 with each creators update as it was pushed to me in due time after "beta testing" by other users ;-) Out of curiosity, what is your motherboard? All the best mate. [/quote] So my 8700K CPU order is backordered and I have an option to cancel and just buy from Silicon Lottery (save me the hassle of delid and risk getting lower Ghz chip). Should I order the 8700K or 8086K from Silicon Lottery? (The latter chip has a very high chance of hitting 5.0Ghz binned and only $20 more compared to the binned 8700K) What's the best value choice here? 5.0Ghz, 5.1Ghz, 5.2 or 5.3 binned?
RAGEdemon said:Hey bo3b,

A word to the wise mate: perhaps you might wish to wait for the rumoured 9700k with 8C/16T later this year / early next year? If you have the cash, buying this on https://siliconlottery.com/collections/coffeelake when it becomes available guaranteeing 5GHz+ would be better value in the long term both in price, performance, and depreciation compared with an 8086, especially in the long term as games start using more cores.

The added advantage is that to optimise '4 core games' you can disable 2-4 central cores leaving only 4 active cores on the sides thereby dissipating heat better than a dedicated 4 core CPU such as a 7700k, but still having all the extra shared cache from the disabled cores. In theory this would lead to better performance due to
both cooler cores (better overclocking), and more cache, than a dedicated 4-6 core CPU.

Up to you mate, you are the sage around these parts and I'm sure you know what you are doing.

I also appreciate that you have a hatred for Win10. I have a gut feeling that your seemingly horrendous luck with it might be due to a sub-par motherboard. What are you running?

I learned a long time ago that a premium motherboard, although at first sight might look excessive, pays dividends in many ways including better overclocking, better stability, better support, better components, and longer life. Support here is the operative word, as I might be tempted to bet that an Asus Maximum Hero from your i5-4670K era does not have the compatibility/USB etc problems you are having.

Admittedly I am running a relatively new Hero ix, it ran flawlessly on windows 7, and now on windows 10 with each creators update as it was pushed to me in due time after "beta testing" by other users ;-)

Out of curiosity, what is your motherboard?

All the best mate.



So my 8700K CPU order is backordered and I have an option to cancel and just buy from Silicon Lottery (save me the hassle of delid and risk getting lower Ghz chip).

Should I order the 8700K or 8086K from Silicon Lottery? (The latter chip has a very high chance of hitting 5.0Ghz binned and only $20 more compared to the binned 8700K)

What's the best value choice here? 5.0Ghz, 5.1Ghz, 5.2 or 5.3 binned?

8700K 5.0Ghz OC (Silicon Lottery Edition)
Noctua NH-15 cooler
Asus Maximus X Hero
16 GB Corsair Vengeance LPX RAM DDR4 3000
1TB Samsung PM961 OEM M.2 NVMe
MSI Gaming X Trio 1080Ti SLI
Corsair 1000RMi PSU
Cougar Conquer Case
Triple Screens Acer Predator 3D Vision XB272
3D Vision 2 Glasses
Win 10 Pro x64

#8
Posted 07/02/2018 10:54 PM   
"Value" is subjective depending on ones income and internal belief system. For someone wealthy who spends most of his time gaming and wants every bit of performance, will see value and dividends in getting the absolute fastest chip there is. It will not hurt his wallet. For someone not so cash rich who does not 3D game often, value would mean getting the cheapest chip there is that can run their favourite games well. Then there are in between people who have money, see the price tag, but do not recognise value in spending more on something they use every day, so will get the cheapest crap out there (and then complain that it's not any good). In reality, I would not believe there is a huge difference in performance between 5GHz and 5.3GHz. The performance % increase is 6% at best in 2D; I can't measure in 3D on bottlenecked games. If I were you, knowing you want a 6c CPU now instead of waiting for an 8c CPU, I would get the $500 8086 @ 5.1GHz, if only for peace of mind. IMO, 80$ is far too much to pay for another 100 MHz to go 5.2GHz. I would stay away from i5 for gaming. The time of 4 cores being enough for gaming has long since passed. Games are designed for consoles, and both XBOne and PS4 have 8 core CPUs. My 2 cents on what I might do, though I do not know your situation.
"Value" is subjective depending on ones income and internal belief system.

For someone wealthy who spends most of his time gaming and wants every bit of performance, will see value and dividends in getting the absolute fastest chip there is. It will not hurt his wallet.

For someone not so cash rich who does not 3D game often, value would mean getting the cheapest chip there is that can run their favourite games well.

Then there are in between people who have money, see the price tag, but do not recognise value in spending more on something they use every day, so will get the cheapest crap out there (and then complain that it's not any good).

In reality, I would not believe there is a huge difference in performance between 5GHz and 5.3GHz. The performance % increase is 6% at best in 2D; I can't measure in 3D on bottlenecked games.

If I were you, knowing you want a 6c CPU now instead of waiting for an 8c CPU, I would get the $500 8086 @ 5.1GHz, if only for peace of mind. IMO, 80$ is far too much to pay for another 100 MHz to go 5.2GHz.

I would stay away from i5 for gaming. The time of 4 cores being enough for gaming has long since passed. Games are designed for consoles, and both XBOne and PS4 have 8 core CPUs.

My 2 cents on what I might do, though I do not know your situation.

Windows 10 64-bit, Intel 7700K @ 5.1GHz, 16GB 3600MHz CL15 DDR4 RAM, 2x GTX 1080 SLI, Asus Maximus IX Hero, Sound Blaster ZxR, PCIe Quad SSD, Oculus Rift CV1, DLP Link PGD-150 glasses, ViewSonic PJD6531w 3D DLP Projector @ 1280x800 120Hz native / 2560x1600 120Hz DSR 3D Gaming.

#9
Posted 07/02/2018 11:33 PM   
[quote="RAGEdemon"]Hey bo3b, A word to the wise mate: perhaps you might wish to wait for the rumoured 9700k with 8C/16T later this year / early next year? If you have the cash, buying this on [url]https://siliconlottery.com/collections/coffeelake[/url] when it becomes available guaranteeing 5GHz+ would be better value in the long term both in price, performance, and depreciation compared with an 8086, especially in the long term as games start using more cores.[/quote] That's not a terrible idea, but waiting is not a good game to play in general. In the long term, 3 years say, we have no idea where that will stand at that point. We also have no idea whether they will have any 5GHz chip with that combo. May or may not still be able to run Win7 on that gen. More importantly though- more cores is still a waste, today. I've yet to see any games that use all 8 cores of my i7-6700K. People go on and on about more cores for gaming, but it is still not happening. I have no other workloads that have any need for 16 threads. Please point out games that uses all 8 threads? I still maintain that buying for the future is a fools game. No one can know how the technology and corporate decisions will play out, pretending that we have some insight into all that makes no sense. In my opinion, the best way to manage the future tech is to buy now, sell later. Buy what makes sense now, and when/if that fabled multi-core future comes to pass, sell your current stuff and buy again. This way you optimize your resources for stuff you actually use, not buy stuff that sits idle. Don't get me wrong, if you use it, buy it. If you have workload that uses 8 threads already, bump it up. Gaming just isn't one of them. One perspective on 'value' is to not buy stuff that you never use, but don't chintz out either. [quote]The added advantage is that to optimise '4 core games' you can disable 2-4 central cores leaving only 4 active cores on the sides thereby dissipating heat better than a dedicated 4 core CPU such as a 7700k, but still having all the extra shared cache from the disabled cores. In theory this would lead to better performance due to both cooler cores (better overclocking), and more cache, than a dedicated 4-6 core CPU. Up to you mate, you are the sage around these parts and I'm sure you know what you are doing.[/quote] I like these ideas, but have never found them to work out in practice. This might work, but is getting into a different aspect of the silicon lottery, on a per core basis. Even with a single core active, current 8700K parts only clock a single core to 4.7GHz by default. That single core turbo is of course useless, because Windows dances all over all the cores, and ruins it. That is why overclocking all the cores is better. With some work, it might be feasible to figure out which of your specific cores can overclock well, and enable only them. Not a good use of time though, unless you are really strapped for cash, you are better off to get a pre-binned part. [quote]I also appreciate that you have a hatred for Win10. I have a gut feeling that your seemingly horrendous luck with it might be due to a sub-par motherboard. What are you running? I learned a long time ago that a premium motherboard, although at first sight might look excessive, pays dividends in many ways including better overclocking, better stability, better support, better components, and longer life. Support here is the operative word, as I might be tempted to bet that an Asus Maximum Hero from your i5-4670K era does not have the compatibility/USB etc problems you are having. Admittedly I am running a relatively new Hero ix, it ran flawlessly on windows 7, and now on windows 10 with each creators update as it was pushed to me in due time after "beta testing" by other users ;-) Out of curiosity, what is your motherboard? All the best mate.[/quote] No, Win10 earned it. I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, but after being screwed too many times, even a slow learner like me figures it out. Older Motherboard is an Asus Hero VII. That's a good board, and I have no reason to doubt it. Current other machine is a high-end Sager laptop (i7-6700K, GTX 980) that runs flawlessly under Win7, and always has glitches with Win10, most notably around updates. I don't know what motherboard it has, but it's fairly clear it's just an Intel standard chipset, no extra madness. Pretty much a desktop in laptop clothing. Under Win7, for example, all Rift stuff works fine, including their lame USB connections. Two cameras, headset, HDMI. Plus the extra USB stuff for keyboard/mouse/dongles and other junk. Under Win10, the Rift itself is bitchy, ports that just finished working under Win7 don't quite work on 10. I know that the Rift is running out of spec because of their poor design, but it's still notable. Then there are a bunch of old things I plug in, like SD card readers that may or may not work on 10. Thumbdrives that act fine on Win7, and don't on Win10. XBox360 wireless dongle will not always power up on Win10, but works fine on Win7. Keeping in mind this is the [i]exact [/i]same hardware, dual booting. I'm not really guessing here. No else seems to mind wasting their lives debugging problems that shouldn't exist in the first place, but I find it super irritating. It's wasting my personal time, simply so that f*ing Microsoft can be richer. I also do support for family members, and often get to figure out why someone's DVD player no longer reads discs after an update. Or why the damn Skype app that no one uses always shows up every boot. Or where all the icons on the desktop went because Microsoft randomizes your user settings. It's because Microsoft no longer cares about backwards compatibility, and no longer tests. Then there are the forced updates, that arrive just as I'm about to give a demo. Those are super special. I've got everything completely dialed and working- and they just fuck me over with no warning. Yeah, no thanks. Call me in 2020. :->
RAGEdemon said:Hey bo3b,

A word to the wise mate: perhaps you might wish to wait for the rumoured 9700k with 8C/16T later this year / early next year? If you have the cash, buying this on https://siliconlottery.com/collections/coffeelake when it becomes available guaranteeing 5GHz+ would be better value in the long term both in price, performance, and depreciation compared with an 8086, especially in the long term as games start using more cores.

That's not a terrible idea, but waiting is not a good game to play in general. In the long term, 3 years say, we have no idea where that will stand at that point. We also have no idea whether they will have any 5GHz chip with that combo. May or may not still be able to run Win7 on that gen.

More importantly though- more cores is still a waste, today. I've yet to see any games that use all 8 cores of my i7-6700K. People go on and on about more cores for gaming, but it is still not happening. I have no other workloads that have any need for 16 threads.

Please point out games that uses all 8 threads?


I still maintain that buying for the future is a fools game. No one can know how the technology and corporate decisions will play out, pretending that we have some insight into all that makes no sense.

In my opinion, the best way to manage the future tech is to buy now, sell later. Buy what makes sense now, and when/if that fabled multi-core future comes to pass, sell your current stuff and buy again. This way you optimize your resources for stuff you actually use, not buy stuff that sits idle.

Don't get me wrong, if you use it, buy it. If you have workload that uses 8 threads already, bump it up. Gaming just isn't one of them. One perspective on 'value' is to not buy stuff that you never use, but don't chintz out either.


The added advantage is that to optimise '4 core games' you can disable 2-4 central cores leaving only 4 active cores on the sides thereby dissipating heat better than a dedicated 4 core CPU such as a 7700k, but still having all the extra shared cache from the disabled cores. In theory this would lead to better performance due to
both cooler cores (better overclocking), and more cache, than a dedicated 4-6 core CPU.

Up to you mate, you are the sage around these parts and I'm sure you know what you are doing.

I like these ideas, but have never found them to work out in practice.

This might work, but is getting into a different aspect of the silicon lottery, on a per core basis. Even with a single core active, current 8700K parts only clock a single core to 4.7GHz by default. That single core turbo is of course useless, because Windows dances all over all the cores, and ruins it. That is why overclocking all the cores is better.

With some work, it might be feasible to figure out which of your specific cores can overclock well, and enable only them. Not a good use of time though, unless you are really strapped for cash, you are better off to get a pre-binned part.


I also appreciate that you have a hatred for Win10. I have a gut feeling that your seemingly horrendous luck with it might be due to a sub-par motherboard. What are you running?

I learned a long time ago that a premium motherboard, although at first sight might look excessive, pays dividends in many ways including better overclocking, better stability, better support, better components, and longer life. Support here is the operative word, as I might be tempted to bet that an Asus Maximum Hero from your i5-4670K era does not have the compatibility/USB etc problems you are having.

Admittedly I am running a relatively new Hero ix, it ran flawlessly on windows 7, and now on windows 10 with each creators update as it was pushed to me in due time after "beta testing" by other users ;-)

Out of curiosity, what is your motherboard?

All the best mate.

No, Win10 earned it. I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, but after being screwed too many times, even a slow learner like me figures it out.


Older Motherboard is an Asus Hero VII. That's a good board, and I have no reason to doubt it.

Current other machine is a high-end Sager laptop (i7-6700K, GTX 980) that runs flawlessly under Win7, and always has glitches with Win10, most notably around updates. I don't know what motherboard it has, but it's fairly clear it's just an Intel standard chipset, no extra madness. Pretty much a desktop in laptop clothing.

Under Win7, for example, all Rift stuff works fine, including their lame USB connections. Two cameras, headset, HDMI. Plus the extra USB stuff for keyboard/mouse/dongles and other junk. Under Win10, the Rift itself is bitchy, ports that just finished working under Win7 don't quite work on 10. I know that the Rift is running out of spec because of their poor design, but it's still notable.

Then there are a bunch of old things I plug in, like SD card readers that may or may not work on 10. Thumbdrives that act fine on Win7, and don't on Win10. XBox360 wireless dongle will not always power up on Win10, but works fine on Win7. Keeping in mind this is the exact same hardware, dual booting. I'm not really guessing here.

No else seems to mind wasting their lives debugging problems that shouldn't exist in the first place, but I find it super irritating. It's wasting my personal time, simply so that f*ing Microsoft can be richer.

I also do support for family members, and often get to figure out why someone's DVD player no longer reads discs after an update. Or why the damn Skype app that no one uses always shows up every boot. Or where all the icons on the desktop went because Microsoft randomizes your user settings. It's because Microsoft no longer cares about backwards compatibility, and no longer tests.

Then there are the forced updates, that arrive just as I'm about to give a demo. Those are super special. I've got everything completely dialed and working- and they just fuck me over with no warning. Yeah, no thanks. Call me in 2020. :->

Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607
Latest 3Dmigoto Release
Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers

#10
Posted 07/03/2018 07:11 AM   
[quote="J-Enermax"]So my 8700K CPU order is backordered and I have an option to cancel and just buy from Silicon Lottery (save me the hassle of delid and risk getting lower Ghz chip). Should I order the 8700K or 8086K from Silicon Lottery? (The latter chip has a very high chance of hitting 5.0Ghz binned and only $20 more compared to the binned 8700K) What's the best value choice here? 5.0Ghz, 5.1Ghz, 5.2 or 5.3 binned?[/quote] Going from stock, 3.7GHz to 5.0GHz is the big win. Above that, you are definitely into diminishing returns. I would not spend very much extra for 100Mhz at any point. You won't be able to even see it in benchmarks, let alone in actual use. The 4.7GHz turbo frequency makes it seem like only a bump of 300MHz, but Turbo is a fraud, and doesn't do anything on Windows. Windows has a weak kernel, and it does a lot of irrational behavior, like randomly moving workloads from core to core. Even if you are running a single-threaded game and set affinity, you won't see turbo, because Windows will come in and fire up other stuff you could care less about. So, the actual metric is going from base clock of 3.7GHz to a 5.0GHz on all cores. This is why the 8086K has caught my attention, because 100% of those chips can overclock to 5.0GHz, as stated by SiliconLottery.com. Versus something like 86% for i7-8700K. https://fuse.wikichip.org/news/1412/core-i7-8086k-overclockability-silicon-lottery-stats/ There's not enough difference between 4.9 and 5.0 to matter, but it's certainly more fun to say 5.0. Don't think I'd pay a premium for it though. I think all of those chips were delidded.
J-Enermax said:So my 8700K CPU order is backordered and I have an option to cancel and just buy from Silicon Lottery (save me the hassle of delid and risk getting lower Ghz chip).

Should I order the 8700K or 8086K from Silicon Lottery? (The latter chip has a very high chance of hitting 5.0Ghz binned and only $20 more compared to the binned 8700K)

What's the best value choice here? 5.0Ghz, 5.1Ghz, 5.2 or 5.3 binned?

Going from stock, 3.7GHz to 5.0GHz is the big win. Above that, you are definitely into diminishing returns.

I would not spend very much extra for 100Mhz at any point. You won't be able to even see it in benchmarks, let alone in actual use.


The 4.7GHz turbo frequency makes it seem like only a bump of 300MHz, but Turbo is a fraud, and doesn't do anything on Windows. Windows has a weak kernel, and it does a lot of irrational behavior, like randomly moving workloads from core to core. Even if you are running a single-threaded game and set affinity, you won't see turbo, because Windows will come in and fire up other stuff you could care less about.

So, the actual metric is going from base clock of 3.7GHz to a 5.0GHz on all cores. This is why the 8086K has caught my attention, because 100% of those chips can overclock to 5.0GHz, as stated by SiliconLottery.com. Versus something like 86% for i7-8700K.

https://fuse.wikichip.org/news/1412/core-i7-8086k-overclockability-silicon-lottery-stats/

There's not enough difference between 4.9 and 5.0 to matter, but it's certainly more fun to say 5.0. Don't think I'd pay a premium for it though. I think all of those chips were delidded.

Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607
Latest 3Dmigoto Release
Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers

#11
Posted 07/03/2018 07:27 AM   
[quote="bo3b"] Then there are the forced updates, that arrive just as I'm about to give a demo. Those are super special. I've got everything completely dialed and working- and they just fuck me over with no warning. Yeah, no thanks. Call me in 2020. :-> [/quote] Thank you for the laugh mate; made my morning :) Re: your request for showing games using more than 4 cores or "8 cores": A peak into the DX12/Vulkan future: [img]https://images.techhive.com/images/article/2016/02/dx12_cpu_ashes_of_the_singularity_beta_2_average_cpu_frame_rate_high_quality_19x10-100647718-large.png[/img] Past games: The i7-5960X is 8 cores 16 thread beast but has a low operating frequency. Never the less, the advantage of an 8 core setup even from a few years back is clear - it's worth paying attention to the CPU frequencies to fully grasp what is going on: [img]https://gamegpu.com/images/stories/Test_GPU/Action/WATCH_DOGS_2/wd2_proz.png[/img] [img]https://d1rktuf34l9h2g.cloudfront.net/1/1d/600x1000px-LL-1d1b73df_STAR_WARS_Battlefront-test-starwars_proz.jpeg[/img] [img]https://d1rktuf34l9h2g.cloudfront.net/a/ad/1000x1000px-LL-ad9c9023_Test_GPU-RPG-Fallout_4-test-proz.jpeg[/img] [img]https://i.imgur.com/s1Em8AI.jpg[/img] [img]https://d1rktuf34l9h2g.cloudfront.net/5/5d/5d375ea0_Jdzy6K.png [/img] Note here that the 8C/16T CPU at a significantly lower frequency is beating 4 core CPUs at higher frequencies i.e. the 8 cores being utilised well. Also one should take note of the huge difference in performance between 4T i5 and 8T i7 CPUs. I appreciate your sentiment that it is a fool's game to try and future proof. I do not quite agree with it however, because of my personal rationale as follows: 1. Silicon has a 5GHz barrier that it won't surpass much any time soon. The only way forward, far more so than a decade ago, is more cores @5GHz base. Already we see NextGen consoles make great use of these cores - BF1, GTA5, Battlefront, Fallout 4, Ashes of the singularity; this right here, is the future. 2. The realities of Future-proofing: It is natural to assume that more games will properly use DX12 and make far better use of more cores going into the future. It is also a safe bet that Next gen consoles, being stuck at the 5GHz barrier, will likely use even more cores than the 8 they use currently. This means that ports from them should make good use of as many cores as a PC CPU can spare, IPC x Clock being as it currently stands of course. Already consoles use 8 cores (granted they are weak individually) - but the threading potential that Mantle/Vulcan and DX12 have presented is very real and will absolutely be taken advantage of going forward. It would be unwise to invest in a CPU which uses less than these going forward (i.e. i5 wouldn't be a good decision for the future speaking generally, not specifically for 3D Vision bottlenecked gaming). 3. Future prediction can be done - we are not utterly blind - by predicting and observing trends that cannot be ignored - we have hit a 5GHz brick wall that will only be more and more difficult to go past until we start using something other than silicon. IPC x clock right now, will likely be the same IPC x clock 10 years from now except maybe 25% improvement. Not much has changed over the past decade in these terms. The only way to up performance is more cores, and certainly demand will force software developers to make use of these extra cores, as it has forced CPU manufacturers to make CPUs such as the 32C ThreadRipper 2. In this regard, future proofing means getting a CPU with the best IPC x clock right now, while also getting as many cores. Thinking about this intelligently, we have had 4 core CPUs for a decade. We have just had a 6 core CPU launch, with a promise of an 8 core CPU in 6 months or so. After waiting 10 years, I personally wouldn't feel comfortable or feel that I was getting value if I bought the 6c CPU now instead of waiting a comparatively short 6 months and getting the 8c CPU then, after understanding the not so subtle implications of the above benchmarks :)
bo3b said:
Then there are the forced updates, that arrive just as I'm about to give a demo. Those are super special. I've got everything completely dialed and working- and they just fuck me over with no warning. Yeah, no thanks. Call me in 2020. :->


Thank you for the laugh mate; made my morning :)

Re: your request for showing games using more than 4 cores or "8 cores":

A peak into the DX12/Vulkan future:
Image

Past games:
The i7-5960X is 8 cores 16 thread beast but has a low operating frequency. Never the less, the advantage of an 8 core setup even from a few years back is clear - it's worth paying attention to the CPU frequencies to fully grasp what is going on:
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image

Note here that the 8C/16T CPU at a significantly lower frequency is beating 4 core CPUs at higher frequencies i.e. the 8 cores being utilised well.

Also one should take note of the huge difference in performance between 4T i5 and 8T i7 CPUs.

I appreciate your sentiment that it is a fool's game to try and future proof. I do not quite agree with it however, because of my personal rationale as follows:

1. Silicon has a 5GHz barrier that it won't surpass much any time soon. The only way forward, far more so than a decade ago, is more cores @5GHz base. Already we see NextGen consoles make great use of these cores - BF1, GTA5, Battlefront, Fallout 4, Ashes of the singularity; this right here, is the future.

2. The realities of Future-proofing: It is natural to assume that more games will properly use DX12 and make far better use of more cores going into the future. It is also a safe bet that Next gen consoles, being stuck at the 5GHz barrier, will likely use even more cores than the 8 they use currently. This means that ports from them should make good use of as many cores as a PC CPU can spare, IPC x Clock being as it currently stands of course.

Already consoles use 8 cores (granted they are weak individually) - but the threading potential that Mantle/Vulcan and DX12 have presented is very real and will absolutely be taken advantage of going forward. It would be unwise to invest in a CPU which uses less than these going forward (i.e. i5 wouldn't be a good decision for the future speaking generally, not specifically for 3D Vision bottlenecked gaming).

3. Future prediction can be done - we are not utterly blind - by predicting and observing trends that cannot be ignored - we have hit a 5GHz brick wall that will only be more and more difficult to go past until we start using something other than silicon. IPC x clock right now, will likely be the same IPC x clock 10 years from now except maybe 25% improvement. Not much has changed over the past decade in these terms. The only way to up performance is more cores, and certainly demand will force software developers to make use of these extra cores, as it has forced CPU manufacturers to make CPUs such as the 32C ThreadRipper 2.

In this regard, future proofing means getting a CPU with the best IPC x clock right now, while also getting as many cores. Thinking about this intelligently, we have had 4 core CPUs for a decade. We have just had a 6 core CPU launch, with a promise of an 8 core CPU in 6 months or so.

After waiting 10 years, I personally wouldn't feel comfortable or feel that I was getting value if I bought the 6c CPU now instead of waiting a comparatively short 6 months and getting the 8c CPU then, after understanding the not so subtle implications of the above benchmarks :)

Windows 10 64-bit, Intel 7700K @ 5.1GHz, 16GB 3600MHz CL15 DDR4 RAM, 2x GTX 1080 SLI, Asus Maximus IX Hero, Sound Blaster ZxR, PCIe Quad SSD, Oculus Rift CV1, DLP Link PGD-150 glasses, ViewSonic PJD6531w 3D DLP Projector @ 1280x800 120Hz native / 2560x1600 120Hz DSR 3D Gaming.

#12
Posted 07/03/2018 01:57 PM   
have Intel promised or planned 8 core officially or is this another un-founded rumor? 4 core was dominating for a decade. I find it hard to believe that Intel would jump to 8 core with their very recent 6 core architecture. It's not like they are the underdog, wanting to prove themselves. Right now, their claim on the market is wide and deep (both in the regular consumer market and in the gaming enthusiast). If I was Intel, I would just stay with 6 core for a few years and save my 8 core for another day. P.S. But I acknowledge that having 8 core is better (like you stated)
have Intel promised or planned 8 core officially or is this another un-founded rumor? 4 core was dominating for a decade. I find it hard to believe that Intel would jump to 8 core with their very recent 6 core architecture. It's not like they are the underdog, wanting to prove themselves. Right now, their claim on the market is wide and deep (both in the regular consumer market and in the gaming enthusiast).

If I was Intel, I would just stay with 6 core for a few years and save my 8 core for another day.

P.S. But I acknowledge that having 8 core is better (like you stated)

8700K 5.0Ghz OC (Silicon Lottery Edition)
Noctua NH-15 cooler
Asus Maximus X Hero
16 GB Corsair Vengeance LPX RAM DDR4 3000
1TB Samsung PM961 OEM M.2 NVMe
MSI Gaming X Trio 1080Ti SLI
Corsair 1000RMi PSU
Cougar Conquer Case
Triple Screens Acer Predator 3D Vision XB272
3D Vision 2 Glasses
Win 10 Pro x64

#13
Posted 07/03/2018 05:45 PM   
RyZen happened. If it didn't, we'd all still be on 4 cores for the foreseeable future. For everything except gaming, RyZen is toe to toe with performance at a fraction of the cost of Intel, and Intel are scared because gaming is only a fraction of the CPU market. AMD in fact has the gaming market cornered too because both XBOne and PS4 use AMD chips for both CPU and graphics - just not on PC, which is a relatively small market. You can google around for 8 core info; here are some details: https://wccftech.com/intel-8-core-16-thread-coffee-lake-cpu-z390-platform-details/ The core war is just beginning...
RyZen happened. If it didn't, we'd all still be on 4 cores for the foreseeable future. For everything except gaming, RyZen is toe to toe with performance at a fraction of the cost of Intel, and Intel are scared because gaming is only a fraction of the CPU market.

AMD in fact has the gaming market cornered too because both XBOne and PS4 use AMD chips for both CPU and graphics - just not on PC, which is a relatively small market.

You can google around for 8 core info; here are some details:
https://wccftech.com/intel-8-core-16-thread-coffee-lake-cpu-z390-platform-details/

The core war is just beginning...

Windows 10 64-bit, Intel 7700K @ 5.1GHz, 16GB 3600MHz CL15 DDR4 RAM, 2x GTX 1080 SLI, Asus Maximus IX Hero, Sound Blaster ZxR, PCIe Quad SSD, Oculus Rift CV1, DLP Link PGD-150 glasses, ViewSonic PJD6531w 3D DLP Projector @ 1280x800 120Hz native / 2560x1600 120Hz DSR 3D Gaming.

#14
Posted 07/03/2018 06:23 PM   
while I believe the effect of having 8 cores as much as you do, the advent of 8 core is still ... not there yet. With the "RyZen happens" statement, one would expect Intel to yell loudly about their 8 core plan. Why the silence? Maybe RyZen doesn't impact them as much and the current competition was subpar and have YET to pose a threat Yes, I think 8 core will happen but that's a question of WHEN, not IF. I would take WCCFTECH news with a huge grain of salt. Their NVIDIA news was fake/wrong/inaccurate since last year but they still shamelessly post unfounded rumor as if confirmed, vetted news (despite every piece of me want to believe their "news")
while I believe the effect of having 8 cores as much as you do, the advent of 8 core is still ... not there yet. With the "RyZen happens" statement, one would expect Intel to yell loudly about their 8 core plan. Why the silence? Maybe RyZen doesn't impact them as much and the current competition was subpar and have YET to pose a threat

Yes, I think 8 core will happen but that's a question of WHEN, not IF.

I would take WCCFTECH news with a huge grain of salt. Their NVIDIA news was fake/wrong/inaccurate since last year but they still shamelessly post unfounded rumor as if confirmed, vetted news (despite every piece of me want to believe their "news")

8700K 5.0Ghz OC (Silicon Lottery Edition)
Noctua NH-15 cooler
Asus Maximus X Hero
16 GB Corsair Vengeance LPX RAM DDR4 3000
1TB Samsung PM961 OEM M.2 NVMe
MSI Gaming X Trio 1080Ti SLI
Corsair 1000RMi PSU
Cougar Conquer Case
Triple Screens Acer Predator 3D Vision XB272
3D Vision 2 Glasses
Win 10 Pro x64

#15
Posted 07/03/2018 07:57 PM   
  1 / 2    
Scroll To Top