At the time, we felt it was a better choice for the Core i7-8700K because it was faster in almost every case and for about the same price. For those building a high-end gaming system, the Non-X Ryzen was also attractive for $300, but if you're looking for maximum gaming performance, it looks like an Intel CPU should do it again. However, for low-cost game setups, the Ryzen 5 2600 is a worthwhile option that we often recommend. Overall, Ryzen for gaming has been hard to ignore due to the advantages of the AM4 platform and the possibility to upgrade to the next few generations of Ryzen processors.
If you've been working with a Ryzen 7 2700X (which is now 3 years old) and wondered what it's like to fight back in 2021 and what an upgrade to 5800X looks like, today we'll answer both questions with a game of 30 benchmarks.
All processors are configured with 32GB of dual-channel DDR4-3200 CL14 memory. For motherboards, AM4 platform is offered by MSI X570 Unify running the latest BIOS and for LGA1200 GB platform is Z590 Aorus Master. We tested 1080p, 1440p, and 4K gaming with a Radeon RX 6900 XT. We will review the data for dozens of addresses and then analyze the usual data. Let's do this... p> Game Benchmarks
Starting with Battlefield V, we get some interesting results. Initially, Battlefield 1 was used to compare these processors, and when we moved to Battlefield V, in 2018 and 2019, we used much slower GPUs like the GTX 1080 Ti and RTX 2080 Ti. On the other hand, the 6900 XT can print over 200 frames per second in 1080p and 1440p resolution, in fact, even with the fastest eight-core processors available today, we're still limited to the main 1080p processor.
So while the 2700X was good at an average of 143 fps, which is an acceptable performance level, it's like 234 fps, it's not so in the seconds we got the release 5800X the latest, this performance is up to 64%. Amplification It should also be noted that the 10700K - which is basically the 9900K - was still 52% faster than the 2700X, as we saw similar margins at 1440p.
Until we got to 4K, the preset was so high quality that the game was completely limited to the GPU using all four configurations. However, it's worth noting that the 2700X is slower than components like the 5800X, 11700K, and 10700K at CPU limitations, using the fastest 1080p gaming graphics card. With that in mind, if I were to run these tests again with an RTX 2080 Ti, the margin would be smaller with the 1080 Ti then a lot smaller.
For example, the RTX 3070 delivers 1080p performance at ~170 fps, reducing the margin between 2700X and 5800X by about 20%, so less than half of what's shown here is. But if you use lower quality settings at 1080p or 1440p, this will open the margins again, even with the bottom row GPU.
Watch Dogs: Legion is another CPU demanding game, and here we are 2700X at 1080p, so this time the 5800X was 41% faster, although it's worth noting that Comparing the low 1% performance, the margin was 52% higher and the new episode was in favor of 5,000 series. The Core i7-10700K, which is essentially the 9900K, was about 40% faster than the 1% lower performance.
Getting to 1440p with the 6900 XT, the drop in margin between the 2700X and the 10700K is basically nothing. The 5800X is up to 28% faster, which is significant, although we only see an 11% difference compared to the average frame rate. Then at 4K the game is completely limited to the GPU, so all four configurations provide essentially the same result.
The fact that the 2700X can produce less than 60 frames per second at 1% and an average frame rate of approx. 90fps, which means that for most gamer setups with this processor, the processor will still be limited, because the priority of games like Watch Dogs Legion usually has higher image quality than frame rate, and certainly an average of 90fps is done here.
The game you would need with a high frame rate is F1 2020, the 2700X does well, boosting over 200 fps at 1080p. The Intel 5800X, 10th and 11th generation processors were still much faster, delivering over 40% frames, but I think that's an unnecessary improvement for this title.
Even at 1440p when the margin is 18% in favor of the 5800X, the older 2700X pushes 200 fps. We see a slight difference in performance in 4K performance, but the 2700X is still allowed at an average of 137 fps. So even though it's slower than more modern processors, this isn't a game that suffers greatly from the 2700X.
The game that suffers the most is Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020. The best thing the Ryzen 7 2700X can collect here is 38fps, which makes the 5800X ~45% faster. This is an important margin that completely changes the way the game works.
A similar margin is observed at 1440p, and the GPU will not become the main component of the performance limit until 4K, but even if it is 1% lower, the performance with the older Zen + processor is much worse.
Experiences with Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order show that at 1080p and 1440p resolutions, the 5800X delivers 36% more performance, and the console is not limited with thrusting graphics at 4K. As with Watch Dogs Legion, this is a single player title where players are more likely to prioritize images and only need around 60fps in terms of performance for an enjoyable experience. , although personally I prefer around 9fps for smoother input. The point is that you can get by with almost the old 2700X, and in fact only higher level GPU configurations that benefit from a faster processor. p>
Call of Duty Warzone is a game like Battlefield V where I expected the 2700X to suffer greatly, but surprisingly there's nothing wrong with that. Sure, the 5800X delivers about 50% more performance at 1080p compared to 1% less data, and the 10th and 11th generation Intel octa-core models are faster too, but averaging 172fps and 1% at 131fps. The 2700X is not slow and allows high refresh rates. Additionally, the margin is significantly reduced at 1440p, while the 5800X is 24% faster compared to 1% lower and 14% faster. in the middle. But with over 120fps at all times and at 170fps, the 2700X still delivers a great gaming experience and overclocks powerful GPUs like the RTX 3060 Ti, for example.
Death Stranding is another game where you don't need hundreds of frames per second and the 153 frames per second average that we see with 2700X to play with a high refresh rate in this title is more than enough.
We're seeing more evidence that Zen 3, along with Intel's 10th and 11th generation components, is faster to play. The 5800X was 44% faster at 1080p, while Intel processors were 33% faster on average. With the launch of new 8-core processors with limited processors, the margins are reduced a bit by 1440p, and then at 4K we're looking at the same performance for all four configurations. p>
Shadow of the Tomb Raider is a single-player game CPU, and while the 2700X was good for over 100fps at 1080p and 1440p, it's still significantly slower than recent AMD and Intel options. We're talking about 60% more performance with the 5800X and about 50% more with the 10700K.
The game's GPU is limited by 1440p, and that's a pretty tight margin, but the 5800X is still 21% faster than the average frame rate and 36% faster when comparing the 1% lower data. At 4K resolution, margins are neutralized in all tested configurations.
These results are interesting because I think those who play War Thunder might have a slightly higher performance than the 2700X. Granted it's still playable, but it might be 1 Low % at 86 frames FPS is less than ideal for competitive players. The 5800X was 70% faster here, averaging 1,880fps at true 1080p. Really huge performance. Even worse, the game is heavily tied to the CPU, which even at 4K resolution, the 2700X is still 20% slower than AMD and Intel 8-core processors.
The last game we want to look at in detail is NPC-Hitman 2.
Here the 2700X offers a powerful processor bottleneck at 1080p and 1440p, so the 5800X, 10700K, and 11700K 40 were at 1080p Pixels and 1440p are faster As we've seen many times, when playing in 4K the game is limited to the GPU and all processors enable the same level of performance.Performance Summary
Now it's time to compare these processors in 30 games with 1080p data, let's do it.
Here we compare the 2700X with the new 5800X, and as you can see, the Zen+ processor is 23% slower on average. There were only four games with a margin of one digit and eight games with a margin of 30% or more. War Thunder, Battlefield V, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, and World War Z were some of the worst CPU performers.
If you're using a 2700X with a newer GPU, this is probably a good time to start reviewing the CPU and the 5800X, although you might want to check out the 5900X because the price is usually worth some thing if you work and play. it's better.
Of course, if you're playing with an advanced GPU and ultra frame rates aren't a priority, but instead you care more about image quality, at resolutions like 1440p or higher, processor performance is a bit smaller.
Here the 2700X was only 13% slower than the 5800X. We have eight games with a performance margin of 20% or more.
The Ryzen 7 2700X is also slower than the Core i7-10700K, with a difference of 19% at 1080p, and it should be noted that the 11700K's margin is about the same. To be fair, the 2700X is designed to compete with the Core i7-8700K, where Ryzen is very durable for basic performance tasks, while Intel Core i7 is always better for gaming.What did we learn? Going back to the Ryzen 7 2700X in 2021 with new games and a very powerful graphics processor was very interesting. to look at some For the above data and concludes that the 2700X is a pretty terrible CPU for gaming, but it's important to note that the chip only looks really bad when it's focused on 1080p data.
To better illustrate what I'm getting at here, let's take a look at four generations of Ryzen 6-core / 12-core processors compared to half of the two CPU-infused games. Ignore the number of cores now, it doesn't matter if it's 6 or 8 cores, the data is comparable. In this previous benchmark, we found that at 1080p using the RTX 3090, the 2600X is 31% slower than the 5600X, which isn't far from the 6900 XT data in this review. According to the 30-game benchmark, there are only a handful of other titles that are limited to the GPU.
The chart below is about the 4-year Ryzen 5 benchmark, CPU and GPU, as we compared the Ryzen 5 1600X, 2600X, 3600X, and 5600X gaming performance with several different GPUs.
The visible 31% margin with the RTX 3090 is obviously high, but it goes to 24% with the RTX 3070 and then only 6% with the 5700 XT, a scalable GPU For comparison in performance with the RTX 3060, RTX 2070 Super, and GTX 1080 Ti. This means that if you use the 2700X with the previous generation $400-$500 graphics card, it won't be any slower than the 5800X in most games, so it will hold up well with the Core i7-8700K.
For gaming only, however, the 8700K is obsolete as a high-end processor, and we know this from our CPU review data, which includes the Ryzen 7 2700X and Core i5-10600K, which originally It is a Core i7-8700K. In this example, the 2700X was on average 19% slower than the 10600K, which is what we expected to find based on previous attempts to compare these CPU architectures.
For example, AMD fans often get that the 2700X will eventually be the best gaming processor of the future, eventually surpassing the 8700K thanks to two additional cores. However, we spent a lot of time researching these claims in mid-2018 and concluded that this is not the case for this comparison.
The 8700K was and still is the number one processor for the game, but its meaning for the game depends on the user, and there's certainly no wrong choice here. As we've said over and over in our top 5 CPU features from 2018 to 2019, if you want to get the most out of your game, go with Intel, point to the 8700K and then the 9900K.
But if you're also interested in hard work, we suggested that the Ryzen 7 2700 series provide better balance and be cheaper to buy for most of its life, early in the year. 2020 will drop to $160, which was nuts, while $8,700K was priced at at least $360 over the same period, so it's easy to see why there's so much fuss about these Ryzen 7 parts.
The higher cost advantage of the 8700K is the fact that today you don't need to upgrade, from 10600K, which is basically 8700K, to 10700K, which is basically 9900K, and your performance is 4%. More. That's a good thing, because the 9900K is actually the only upgrade option on this OS, and it's still pretty expensive, selling for about $300 on eBay, and that's what the new Core i7-11700F is all about.
On the other hand, those who were looking for business as well as gaming and therefore invested in 2700X, can now move to 5800X, 5900X or 5950X for great in-game improvements and software performance upgrade. .
Buying a 2700X in 2021 to build a budget used isn't really a bad idea, and for the same reasons, it makes sense to buy it in 2018, for productivity and gaming. The 2700/2700X chips usually cost $170, while the $8700K chip is $200, and you can expect to pay more for a used Intel motherboard. The new Ryzen 7 3700X usually sells for about 40% more at $240 and isn't worth the premium, you're looking at $350 for a used 5800X or $280 for a 10700-series processor.
You can save more on the Ryzen 8- part core of the first generation, but if you're just playing games and on a small budget, a second-generation or preferably a third-generation Ryzen 5 processor is an affordable and economical option. For example, the Ryzen 5 3600 is usually available for $160 which is faster than the 2700X in all the games we tested. Of course, the beauty of the AM4 platform is that if you have a good motherboard and a 400 or 500 series, you're faced with endless options to upgrade the road. AMD Ryzen 7 5800X on Amazon AMD Ryzen 5 5600X on Amazon Intel Core i7-11700 on Amazon Intel Core i7-10700K on Amazon AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT on Amazon AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT on Amazon Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 Nvidia GeForce RTX 3090 on Amazon
Ryzen 7 5800X vs. Core i7-11700K vs. Ryzen 7 2700X: 30 Game Standards