Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Digerati" data-source="post: 631023" data-attributes="member: 59833">That has not been shown to always be true. In fact, some Ryzens has been disappointing in many reviews - not so much for &quot;poor&quot; performance, but for not living up to the hype.And <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite119" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll eyes&nbsp; &nbsp; :rolleyes:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":rolleyes:" /> the i7 7700k is NOT for gaming &quot;only&quot;. It is excellent for multi-tasking too, though the R7 1800X can excel in multi-tasking IF the program you are running can take advantage of the extra threading capability.If buyers are putting performance over budget, they need to decide their favorite programs (that is, specific games, graphics editors, CAD/CAE, compilers or whatever) then do their homework to determine the best processor for the programs they will be running most.Any decent processor will provide good &quot;game play&quot;. Some processors will provide better game play with this program, other processors with that program. And many games don&#039;t take advantage of all those extra cores (typically beyond 4) because developers know not all gamers have deep pockets.And of course, insufficient RAM and a mediocre graphics solution will bottleneck them all.So I am on both sides of the fence here. Why? Because no one processor (or line of processors) is best at all tasks. And more importantly, not being best at something does not mean the other is poor at that task. The fact is, if you are upgrading your current rig because it is getting long in the tooth, then it is most likely any current generation good performer you buy today will run circles around what you currently have. If not, then hang on to what got now. It&#039;s doing its job well. Here is a good comparative review: <a href="http://www.hardwarezone.com.sg/review-amd-ryzen-7-1800x-vs-intel-core-i7-7700k-next-gen-flagship-cpu-matchup/test-setup-performance" target="_blank">HardwareZone: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X vs Intel Core i7-7700K</a>.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Digerati, post: 631023, member: 59833"] That has not been shown to always be true. In fact, some Ryzens has been disappointing in many reviews - not so much for "poor" performance, but for not living up to the hype. And :rolleyes: the i7 7700k is NOT for gaming "only". It is excellent for multi-tasking too, though the R7 1800X can excel in multi-tasking [SIZE=5][B][U]IF[/U][/B][/SIZE] the program you are running can take advantage of the extra threading capability. If buyers are putting performance over budget, they need to decide their favorite programs (that is, [U]specific[/U] games, graphics editors, CAD/CAE, compilers or whatever) then do their homework to determine the best processor for the programs they will be running most. [U]Any[/U] decent processor will provide good "game play". Some processors will provide better game play with this program, other processors with that program. And many games don't take advantage of all those extra cores (typically beyond 4) because developers know not all gamers have deep pockets. And of course, insufficient RAM and a mediocre graphics solution will bottleneck them all. So I am on both sides of the fence here. Why? Because no one processor (or line of processors) is best at all tasks. And more importantly, not being best at something does [U]not[/U] mean the other is poor at that task. The fact is, if you are upgrading your current rig because it is getting long in the tooth, then it is most likely any current generation good performer you buy today will run circles around what you currently have. If not, then hang on to what got now. It's doing its job well. Here is a good comparative review: [URL='http://www.hardwarezone.com.sg/review-amd-ryzen-7-1800x-vs-intel-core-i7-7700k-next-gen-flagship-cpu-matchup/test-setup-performance']HardwareZone: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X vs Intel Core i7-7700K[/URL]. [/QUOTE]

Verification