Core i7 5960X and i7 8700K vs Phenom II X6 1090T BE

[Wintoosa]

Hi, I havent yet wrote anything to here even this account is quite old. I just thought that how would you describe the difference between AMD Phenom II X6 1090T @ 3,85Ghz vs Intel Core i7 5960X @ 4Ghz and the another case AMD Phenom II X6 1090T @ 3,7Ghz vs Intel Core i7 8700K @ 4,8Ghz?

First case was my pc uprage and the another my brother. In my case the biggest change was games - in Napoleon Total War 40-50 FPS -> avg. 100 FPS. And in the lastest Tomb Raider, the change was that there wasnt anymore some lagpeaks even the FPS was acceptable almost all of the time on Phenom. Maybe the memorychanel and its capacity was just near the surface on water, usually on top of surface but sometimes drop below the surface (lagpeaks)... Newest Deus Ex and Mirros Edge worked fine on Phenom but used 80-90% of its power. Same high usage happened on Assasins Creed Unity and Syndicate (works but use +90% CPU).

In my brothers case, the reason for change was BF1 and BF5. We were disappointed and surprised when we realized that changing GPU from GTX660 -> GTX1060 didnt help FPS much on BF1. And when the BF5 came Origin the problem was bigger, the cpu was all the time 100% in game. Avg Fps was 45, without Phenoms overclocks it was nearer 30-35 :/.

When we changed the Phenom to Core i7 8700K, the avg Fps in BF5 was 100. That is very huge difference and it seems that we need more GPU power if we wants more fps. In Dota 2 the difference was smaller but in that game all is very smooth on 144Hz screen.

So can I believe the Cinebench, that Core i7 8700K is 100% faster in single core (100 vs 200pts CineR15) and 200% faster in multicore (1500pts vs 500pts). And same on my pc, that i7 5960X is 65% faster in single core (165 vs 100) and 200% faster in multicore (1500 vs 500pts)?

It is hard to find reviews with Phenom 1090T and 5960X and 8700K.

[Hell Hound]

Well 3.7 is like stock, so stock vs ball to the walls clock (8700k)= no contest

BUT if properly clocked, I get min 80fps in Quake champions 145 max @ 5760x 1080



Don't forget cpu isn't everything 32gb @ cas 8 def has some pull

W/M.2 there really isn't a bottleneck, and if your getting 50fps @ 1080p you will get 50 @ 4k

Ryzen gave us 30% perf gain in games(1800x=5960x) so 50 vs 65

Here is 1100t stock getting 50 to 70 fps w/gtx 970 lolol so 30 % would be 65/90 frames




The 8700 would gives us 100 frames

But 10yrs to get 50% gains, Gpu is where its at

[FlanK3r]

Phenom II c6 and i7-8700K in many test eg there: https://www.sweclockers.com/test/244...lake/8#content

[Hell Hound]

Still @ Stock though

[Wintoosa]

Phenom II c6 and i7-8700K in many test eg there: https://www.sweclockers.com/test/244...lake/8#content

Thanks for that link. It is nice that someone has tested old processors and also compared to Coffee Lake. It seems that 8700K is 2-3x faster than Phenom II X6 1090T BE (usually 3x). In Battlefield 1 the difference is big - 82 FPS on Phenom avg and 225 FPS on 8700K. I could say that the uprage from AMD Leo to Coffee Lake is great So the GTX1060 was bottleneckled on my Phenom II X6 1090T. Also in Total War Warhammer we have big difference Phenoms avg 98 and 8700K 258. These are big difference in games, usually many thinks that GPU matter only but... But yea, CPU is very important also.

But still, AMD Thuban has always place on my heart. Easy chip to get 4Ghz and has OK multicore performance. Great chip and awesome cpu for AM2+ board.

There was 6900K = 5960X also in some test.

So maybe we can say that 8700K is something like 3x faster in multicore and in singlecore +2x.

[Hell Hound]

Thanks for that link. It is nice that someone has tested old processors and also compared to Coffee Lake. It seems that 8700K is 2-3x faster than Phenom II X6 1090T BE (usually 3x). In Battlefield 1 the difference is big - 82 FPS on Phenom avg and 225 FPS on 8700K. So the GTX1060 was bottleneckled on my Phenom II X6 1090T.

That dropped @ 1080p to 130(8700) to 65(1100T), Most of the test dropped down @ 1080 to 100% @ best

The 1100T pushes 1080ti to 100% usage,

Frames don't drop until you go past 4K

Look @ these

Fallout 4



Ac Unity - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-qm0IoMRe8

Hitman 2016 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSod_IKOsDo

Titanfall 2 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2opQzeP5Fk

Doom 2016 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-MHB0Bt4D4

[Hell Hound]

With G-sync,Free sync

35- 165(G-sync) - 45-120(Free-sync) is all you need

[Hell Hound]

AMD Thuban has always place on my heart. Easy chip to get 4Ghz and has OK multicore performance. Great chip and awesome cpu for AM2+ board.

There was 6900K = 5960X also in some test.

So maybe we can say that 8700K is something like 3x faster in multicore and in singlecore +2x.

Don't forget there is not much headroom left in 8700 those scores wont move much but the 1100t will show you massive improvement 30 to 50% in some cases. Memory bandwidth doubles 9+ to 20.4Gbs latency is 47ns @ 1866c8 (Ryzen is 70/80ns)

Intel X299 or Threadripper x399 is a proper upgrade, H.E.D.T to Mainstream is a side grade


Once u go very high res your gonna spend 60% of bugdet on gpu and maybe 15% on cpu,

990fx = 40 pcie lanes
usb 3
The R3.0 has native usb type c and 3.1
Aswell as M.2

115x has like half the lanes which equal to mostly the same bandwith (2x)2.0 16x vs (3x)3.0 8x lanes


I have a 8086k still in the BOX

[Hell Hound]

If we look @ the 7zip results we see stock 1100T= 6600K @ stock

The 1100T is only using 1333c8 memory, the 6600k is using 2133c15

Vishera is using 1866c9 and is only 20% behind 8600K



Fire Strike physics score shows 1100T has 7% less clock & is 15% behind 6600K






With 30-40% core and 50-60% uncore overclock + 1866c8-2000c7 ram the 1100T will Take off

Here is a vid showing 1090T keeping pace w/ a 1700x 20-30% in Doom2016 and bf4 seems to perform better on the thuban rig.

[Wintoosa]

Hell Hound, I know that AMD Thuban has great potential. When you overclock your six-cores NB-speed 2->3Ghz you will get nice impact on games. And yeah, Thuban can manage many games when you have overclocks around 4Ghz. We have two Thubans. My Brothers Thuban was changed to 8700K and the main reason was Battlefield 1 and 5. Both games utilized 100% Thuban CPU. The motherboard was M4A785TD-V EVO, which is nice and basic 100 euros motherboard but it has quite steep volt droppage. That was the reason why we kept the clocks on 3700Mhz with Thuban. Our experience was that his FPS doubled on BF1 and 5 when we changed the Thuban to 8700K. We havent measured PC with the energymeter, but the pc feels less hot with 8700K than Thuban. We think also that when we will uprage his GTX1060 something beter, we have great cpu to pair it. The lastest Gpu change from GTX660 to GTX1060 felt smaller uprage than we expected and one reason could be CPU.

Mine reason to uprage Thuban to 5960X was Total War Games. In NTW, my FPS raised from about 40-50 -> 100 when i got the Core i7 5960X. I also has some games which needed the SSE4.1 support and Thuban cant run these games. Great example was Mafia III but it has got now the update which makes possible to run the game with cpus without SSE4.1. But if you want play newest Assasins Creeds like Odysseia or Origins, you cannot play these on Thuban. And yea, I know that Total Wars has Intel-optimized code. And maybe one reason to uprage was also that I needed some change almost 10 year usage of AMD.

But yea, you are right, the GPU is the most important. We has nice evidence it from by second brothers PC. Its Xeon X5650 can manage many powerfull GPUs and we have not any need to uprage the CPU and X58. Thuban is nice CPU, but also hot when overclocked and lacking of SSE4.1 can make some problems in games.

[swiftex]

Thanks for all the posts guys. Very informative and I went with the 8700k.