Effective way to compare cpus?
Let’s say I want to compare i3-8350k against i5-7300hq. Both use 4 cores 4 threads. The i3 is constantly at 4 gigahertz, while the i5 turbo boosts to 3.1 gigahertz when using all four cores. Assuming neither has any thermal throttling whatsoever, this should mean the i5 is about almost exactly 25% slower than the i3.

So in the same game, with the same settings, in the same exact situation and assuming both cpus are paired with very strong gpus (so there’s no gpu bottleneck)—the i5’s framerate shouldn’t have more than a 25% reduction relative to the i3, right?

Are there other factors which can play a role which I’m missing?
< >
115/15 megjegyzés mutatása
Clock speed and core count (physical and logical) and caches and operations per cycle and whatnot are all important metrics, but don't directly represent performance. Nothing but a comprehensive benchmark battery gives the whole picture.

SMH at Sony and Microsoft using FLOPs to tout their new consoles.
So even when core/thread counts are the same, framerates and cpu speed won’t necessarily have the same ratio between the two cores?
Legutóbb szerkesztette: COWZYOV; 2020. jún. 8., 16:42
I think the brand contributes as well good quality more reliable parts verses cheap oem.
I buy only gigabyte
https://www.gigabyte.com/au/Motherboard/Intel-CPU-Onboard
https://www.gigabyte.com/au
Legutóbb szerkesztette: Jaunitta 🌸; 2020. jún. 8., 19:41
Why would you get an I3 8350k, when the new comet lake processors just released?
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/processor-numbers.html

If it matters to you, the i3 is unlocked indicated by the 'K' suffix and the i5 is locked and has integrated graphics 'H'

the i3 is desktop, and the i5 is mobile (laptop/)
Legutóbb szerkesztette: Jessie; 2020. jún. 8., 22:45
Generally, the best way to compare CPUs is to analyze tests/data developed with sound methodology that measure their performance or other characteristics you care about in the typical workload you'll be using the product for.
The i3 is better. Higher single thread and overall scores.

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-i3-8350K-vs-Intel-i5-7300HQ/3102vs2922

The single-thread speed is more important for gaming. But the score doesn't directly translate to fps as desktops and laptops work differently. Even for two desktops the difference can't be deduced.
Don't buy nothing old like Intel 8th gen; 9th gen is cheaper. Ryzen 3100 or 3300 stomps all 8th and 9th gen i5 class. I3 shouldn't even be considered. That's more for a office/library PC
Bad 💀 Motha eredeti hozzászólása:
Ryzen 3100 or 3300 stomps all 8th and 9th gen i5 class. I3 shouldn't even be considered. That's more for a office/library PC
All these claims are false.
vadim eredeti hozzászólása:
Bad 💀 Motha eredeti hozzászólása:
Ryzen 3100 or 3300 stomps all 8th and 9th gen i5 class. I3 shouldn't even be considered. That's more for a office/library PC
All these claims are false.

Ok, benchmark much?
Do you even have them yet in Russia?
Bad 💀 Motha eredeti hozzászólása:
Ok, benchmark much?
Do you even have them yet in Russia?
One more stupid sentence...
Bad 💀 Motha eredeti hozzászólása:
Don't buy nothing old like Intel 8th gen; 9th gen is cheaper. Ryzen 3100 or 3300 stomps all 8th and 9th gen i5 class. I3 shouldn't even be considered. That's more for a office/library PC

The i3-9350k is a better cpu than the 3300x on several titles due to its better single thread speed and that's with cheap 2400 memory. Not bad for an office/library pc. I wonder what it could do with a z mobo.

I have been looking closely at the bottom of the range i3-10100 and wondering if it can stomp on the top of the range ryzen 3900 or not. As the 3300x, amd's version of the 6700k, stomps on top end ryzens, they might have to rename "team red" to "team red faces".

https://www.gamersnexus.net/images/media/2020/amd-r3-3300x/rdr2-vulkan_1080p.png
Legutóbb szerkesztette: hawkeye; 2020. jún. 9., 19:38
< >
115/15 megjegyzés mutatása
Laponként: 1530 50

Közzétéve: 2020. jún. 8., 16:34
Hozzászólások: 15