安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
The 5800X can and will be held back to a degree on your motherboard (along with any other 105W TDP SKU) because it can't handle the level of current the chip actually needs. It's the downside of using many B450 boards and a bunch of super cheap B550s.
Per the specific example of consoles having had more cores for a while now, yes, they have, but they were also MUCH slower than those found in PC CPUs, and eventually games that needed more than fast quad cores started becoming more common, so the idea that things didn't move up isn't even totally true anyway. Meanwhile, the ones in the current consoles are more comparable, and while you're not going to need 8 cores next year (games don't parallelize well so even a decent quad core is okay for most), I'd say it's at the point to where you can choose either and not really be "wrong". But, again, developers are going to try as much as they can to target the widest audience possible and most people still have quad cores. So, for short term gaming performance, yes, I agree with you, but that specific example always irks me because it's not even entirely true, and misrepresent things by assuming 8 slow cores in an era where PC CPUs topped out at 4 cores outside the HEDT is anywhere comparable to an era where the console CPUs are not more comparable and we're in an era where octo cores are pretty cheap, and not even near the top that is offered either.
The 5600X would be able to actually push PBO on that board while the 5800X just can't, so in raw core performance the 5600X would pull ahead. The B550-A PRO, B550 AORUS Elite, and B550-F are all boards that I would recommend for users seeking high performance out of Zen3, because there's more than enough power from the VRM to handle a 16 core like the 5950X, and this is probably the last generation for AM4, so making the most out of the socket so one needs to upgrade the whole platform later rather than sooner is worth a little bit extra.
But not for our OP who already has a cheap B450 board only capable of 100 amps. The 5800X needs 125A, the 5900X needs 160A, and the 5950X needs 200A. Coincidentally, most B550s above a certain price point have SIGNIFICANTLY better VRM than most X470 boards and they're often on par with decent X570 boards, and sometimes actually better.
For instance, the B550 AORUS Master can pull more power than the X570 AORUS Master and the same as the X570 AORUS XTREME; the B550 and XTREME boards can pull 300A while the X570 AORUS Master can pull 250A.
More recently, a user on reddit was having issues with their 5900X crashing, and they were using a 100A board. Nobody else had a clue what was going on, but I suggested that because his board VRM was typically capable of around half of what a 12 core 24 thread processor like that needed to run well, that it could be related to the VRM being so overstressed that his performance was well below average and the system would hang and crash. After replacing his 100A board with a 200A board, the problem was immediately gone. People are both heavily overestimating what their motherboard can handle, and underestimating how much power Ryzen 9 in particular actually needs because of the TDP being the same as the 5800X.
I was just commenting on that one specific reasoning you gave (that is, that consoles have had eight cores since last generation and requirements didn't suddenly shoot up then to make them required so they won't now) because I think it ignores a lot of other factors and is a bit dishonest to use it as reasoning why game requirements won't go up (they did then and will continue to do so).
However, I wasn't saying that it meant the recommendation you gave was wrong though; I agreed with it. I agreed that a 5600X would be better short term for gaming performance than a 3700X, in the case a 5800X was out of the question.
They can't keep forcing out lower core counts because it heavily impacts their ability to keep selling games to PC gamers which is only getting more popular.
As you mentioned, this is likely due to the fact that Total War games are able to optimize the processing power of eight cores specifically, while additional cores can even have a negative impact (as demonstrated by their benchmark tests and interpreted by the host).
Although the 5600X is the better value for gaming as a whole, strategy games in particular can really benefit from the added processing power. Since I'm getting a rig together for Total War: Warhammer 3, play a lot of other strategy games, and use CPU-heavy apps for work, so I feel like I can justify the added cost.
For most people though, they should appreciate how Gamer Nexus ends their review of the Ryzen 5800X with some words of wisdom:
"We take it all back: it is worth every penny of that $150 difference to get that 1.1747% more performance than the 5600X. In fact, we need to come clean about being misleading too.
It's technically even better than that... it's 1.1746680286% better; which is more numbers and therefore more better. "
Statistically you can spend quite a bit less on Intel for the same core/thread count, and with overclocking, you can get similar if not better performance in most cases
GN's 5800X review doesn't have results of the 10700K when its overclocked, but it does for the 10600K and 10900K, which is odd
Overclocked Intel can give better consistency since the clocks aren't bouncing all over the place like they typically do with Ryzen, and those CPUs can't overclock safely and well enough for it to be worth it
Maybe with Alder Lake coming and the whole Zen 3 3D cache refresh coming well see pricing and structure changing but it's hard to say with the way the market's been lately with the shortages and supply chain issues.