So who is upgrading?

Within a gen no, but like others I haven’t upgraded my cpu in 10+ years so it is time.
Good for you. Don’t do it unless you need to.
Doing this atm. Anyone else should too.

I'm waiting for the 3950X

what do they say?

same senpai

I will be upgrading to r5 3600 or 3600x depending on the price

Attached: 1552031162376.png (340x111, 14K)

Attached: zen.png (1274x599, 250K)

reviews are already out, intel eeks out slightly ahead for for gaymen, everything else it's gets stomped by AMD

>upgrading your CPU
You can just swap that component out, like that?

>all of the 3700Xs are sold out
>it'll probably weeks to months before they get more

Attached: 1547904075553.png (848x761, 657K)

With AMD you can. The AM4 socket is what the first gen Ryzen was on and it's what this gen Ryzen is on too.

3600/3600x seems like a pretty dope CPU for gaymen. I wish I could say the same for 5700, in all reviews that thing runs ultra hot which is partly the fault of the shitty blower fan they use on the reference models but I was honestly expecting more from Navi. GPU market has been super shit lately, 3.5gb memecard was the last decent card that came out and it was five years ago. Basically we're stuck between expensive mid-range cards that don;t really offer too much of a performance difference for the current users to upgrade, or very pricey Nvidia cards.

Attached: 1452236204308.gif (320x286, 1.33M)

yes, it's literally like lego, you take out the old one and click a new one in. Your motherboard has to support it though

Attached: 1533336402258.jpg (608x342, 25K)

Who 3800X here?

>Your motherboard has to support it though
It would really be a shame if a certain developer kept changing their socket on a yearly basis

Attached: 1552931643312.jpg (2048x1536, 185K)

The 5700 performs the same as the 2060S for $50 less and the XT roughly matches 2070S for $400
the 5700 is the mid-range card to get and it's even at mid-range price, why are you bitching

the 5700xt falls bewteen the 2070 super and the 2060 super, but it's priced the same as the 2060 super. I'd wait for third party ones to come out but right now it seems like it's a pretty good deal. The 5700 maybe less so

JUST BUY A WHOLE NEW PC EVERY TIME YOU NEED TO UPGRADE, GOYIM

8770k master race

I'd wait a week since all the reviews are hastily made

>intel is better for gaming
guess im not downgrading to AMD like every other year this happens

I have: Ryzen 2600, 16gb ram, 1050ti 4gb. Zero point in me upgrading right now. When I can I’ll probably get a rx580.

I don't think they're too hasty, most of the youtube fags had them for weeks now testing them, it's just that the NDA is lifted

Id wait a month because they sold out in an hour

>he doesn't even know the proper name of his CPU
Typical Intel brainlet buying whatever (they) shill him

Attached: 1559056650985.jpg (1510x1593, 1.07M)

I have the ab350 pro4 which supports it, still changing the CPU gives me anxiety just thinking about it. I haven't upgraded since I built it a couple years ago. I think I'll upgrade my GPU first anyways.

Not him, but does intel really do that? If so, that’s fuckin gay

>9700K is at 97%
>3700X is at 94%
>all while obliterating Intel in every other regard
>all while also being much cheaper
>all while consuming way less power
You're retarded

Yes they do

upgrading your gpu would be fine. Wouldn't change anything else, not worth it.

>muh productivity
only give a shit about gaming nigger, and intel does it better so ill stay blue

I need to decide if I want to go to 1440p or not. Whether I want ultra best settings at 1080p at 100+fps or high settings at 1440p at 60-70fps

I'll upgrade when they new Ryzen 5 G is out. Been rocking the 2200G since launch and it's been phenomenal to me.

New ryzen cpus wasn't even "launched" in my shithole. But judging by navi placeholders, prices are gonna be 150~200 dollarydoos over msrp.

Attached: 1559768264020.png (565x541, 157K)

>why are you bitching
Remember when midrange xx60/x70 cards used to go for around $250 and not around $400 like today? Or when xx80 carda were going for around $500 and not $800?

good decision my dear friend! don't forget that the i9-9900K™ is the premier CPU to buy if you want the best 1080p gaming experience! At only $500 it's a steal!

Attached: 1517514360407.jpg (343x344, 49K)

Let me guess, they have a monopoly over motherboards?
What do you think I should ask for my current card? I’d like to sell it. It’s a gigabyte windforce with the two fans

Attached: Untitled.png (767x463, 346K)

I should upgrade before the miners turn it into shit

desu I'll just pay the nvidia tax for 2060S
will still buy a 3700X since Intel won't get their shit together until maybe 2022 and my current CPU is showing its age

>Remember when midrange xx60/x70 cards used to go for around $250
yes, and outside of the 970 and maybe the 770, they were pretty dogshit. The standards of "mid-range" got raised and now a "mid-range" GPU can do 60 FPS in 4K in some very select cases.
If you're getting more performance then spending a small premium isn't a huge deal. It's when NVIDIA tries to jew their customers by charging extortionately more for only moderate gains is when it's a problem, and it stung them in the ass hard since their quarterly earnings are in free-fall.

They're the ones who design the chipset and the sockets so they're the only ones who have a say on the matter. Also check Ebay for 1050ti listings and try to get an estimate.

No one cares about CSGO

try again nigger
sick, i can play a 7 year old shooter with 20 more fps if i buy RIGHT NOW!

Attached: Speccy64_2019-07-07_21-11-10.png (391x65, 12K)

>loses in benchmarks to Intel in gaming
Why should I care again?

...

Pointless unless your CPU is 8+ years old.

I have a 2080 and an i7 9700 so I'm not upgrading, but I've had my shit for like 6 months already.

It's good Ryzen is crushing; it means I might have a choice when I upgrade next and I've always liked AMD. My last CPU from them was an FX 6350. I'm not beholden to any brand; I just want good shit that works.

Attached: pc.jpg (640x577, 181K)

even more of a reason to upgrade! the i7-6700K™ is still good, but antiquated. Why not buy the i9-9900K™? It's the best performance at the best price!

Attached: sneeky.png (238x220, 32K)

I'm not poor, I would rather pay for better performance than have any drops in performance.

I'm upgrading to a used 1600 lmao

I'm thinking of it over a 9700k but all the reviews and benchmarks I checked were missing it.

>splitting hairs over results above 500fps in csgo when amd loses in all other games
sad

>I'm not poor
even more reason not to burn your house down

I'm upgrading to be prepared for next gen

Why would anyone care about 500fps csgo?

Attached: 619727629_7d1ac2f531.jpg (435x500, 244K)

Exactly

Attached: 1553841047890.png (1920x1080, 1.38M)

Why do people do meme benchmarks like this? A game from 7 years ago that doesn't take advantage of any new tech and has insanely high scores in the hundreds of frames regardless of what CPU you use. The results are meaningless.

Wouldn't it make more sense to assess CPUs by testing actual CPU-intensive games? Something like a total war or paradox grand strategy game, for example.

You say that but I almost guarantee you're on 1080p. There is virtually zero gaming difference at 1440p and AMD is better for literally everything else.

It's a neat sort of synthetic test

nice frame consistency you got there, i too love massive swings in performance when I play competitive games

Waiting to see how the 9 handles Cemu and PS3. If it does it well I'll buy it with this year's tax return

CSGO has always been known to favor Intel. For AMD to surpass Intel in a game that has been known to favor it, it's a big deal.

but the results have zero in-practice validity.

>all benchmarks in 1080p
Who the hell plays in 1080p in 2019? Who the hell buys a top of the line CPU to play in 1080p?

Rocking a ryzen 1600. It runs every game I want and I have no issues with it. Upgrading is tempting still

my point is nobody should be using fucking CSGO to assess CPU performance, period

Same here

Attached: 1559679184433.jpg (600x600, 48K)

you probably cant see past 60fps

Attached: GettingPlayed.gif (245x167, 943K)

I wouldn't get an x cpu personally. The only difference between x and non x is the stock and boost speeds. You can get a non x chip and overclock it to match the x version for less money. I think the x ones are binned so your mileage may vary

It's a CPU heavy game

>Who the hell plays in 1080p in 2019?
99% of people.
1440p is shit.
4k is great, but not viable yet.

When did Yea Forums get infested by AMD shills?
Nobody's going to be dumb enough to fall for your tricks again.

1440p 144Hz is extremely easy to obtain. Literally how poor are you? Are you pairing your top of the line CPU for a 1060 or something?

>falling for the 4K meme
Shit's not worth it, senpai. I much prefer getting good performance on modest hardware than having to spend exponentially more for overpriced top-of-the-line meme hardware. And for what? A few extra pixels and not needing to use AA?

What's wrong with 1440p

no it's not.

nothing, he's just an eyelet or brainlet (or both)

>4K
More like 1440p

I need a new CPU, which requires a new mobo. And I should get a nice sync monitor too. Anyway, dont see why I should upgrade unless I have 1k plus to spend.

The jump is barely noticeable from 1080p

Meh, what I said applies for 1440p as well, just to a lesser degree. Maybe in the future it'll be worth it, but not now. I'm perfectly content gaming at 1920x1080 and having everything running smooth as butter on modest hardware and not having to fuss any more than that.

LOL

This is what eyelets actually believe

it doesn't exist lmao

Theoretically true facts incoming.

3600 looks great, solid base level do everything chip. X probably isn't worth it but there's very few benchmarks, it doesn't seem like they gave out any as review samples so it's hard to say at this point. Not promising just looking that the numbers though.
3900X is overkill and inefficient for gaming and general use. If you want peak gaming and nothing else 9900K is better, but 3900X has it beat for heavy productivity and pretty much everything but gaming. Unless you've already got an intel mobo ryzen is going to be a better deal.
3700X is the sweetspot for high performance decent price. 3600 is probably enough for most gaming builds and definitely the best value, but if you want the cores and performance either for workloads or in hopes that consoles being ryzen 8cores in the future will make for better multithreading in games here's your bet.
3800X is in the same position as 3600X, we don't know enough to say for sure but probably not worth it if it's just a very slightly higher factory clocked 3700X like it looks.

5700(nonXT) is okay but a bit overpriced for what it is, it doesn't push the temperatures enough to make the crappy blower config a significant flaw. Not really worth buying though.
5700XT is a good base to build off of but the reference card is ass, wait for the third party models with better and quieter cooling.

The new motherboards aren't worth it 99% of the time, just get a Tomahawk or B450 Carbon or something.

>not being an eyelet
>not having built-in antialiasing with zero performance hit

Attached: homer dazed universe.jpg (960x849, 191K)

because it's a cpu benchmark

>FXAA built into your eyes
no thanks

its at higher clocks and power usage though, 9900k """"95w"""" is more like 250w

got this for about 700 rate me

fuck consolefags

Attached: 20190707_193709.jpg (462x448, 77K)

works on my machine

Attached: Grand Theft Auto V 7_7_2019 6_06_24 PM.jpg (3840x2160, 961K)

I'm not sure if this is b8 but this is much worse than modern consoles at double the price

>700
redpilled

Attached: 1562528284886.jpg (300x294, 73K)

the reality is that u only need a mid range $200 or less cpu and a 2080ti if you don't want high framerates above 200

>Intel brainlets all buy the top flagship CPU claiming to not be poor
>only to play at 1080p
lol what

>5700 beats 2060s while being $50 cheaper
>5700xt beats 2070 and comes close to 2070s while being $100 cheaper
Aftermarket coolers when?

OH NONONONO I THOUGHT PC WAS CHEAP??

woosh

1) you're just restating my premise. Yes, that's my entire point. If you can't demonstrate any real-world use of your new processors, what's the actual point of them
2) there ARE games where beefier CPUs actually help. It's just that it's not these games that they benchmark. Late-game paradox games or other strategy games with fucktons of units, for example.

jesus christ even when that cpu came out it was trash, i had a phenom 965

Attached: lol.jpg (714x63, 15K)

what can I do with this new chippu?
give me (3) three things

Attached: 1545356332415.png (512x323, 15K)

in competitive gaming higher framerate is always lower response time, however miniscule, even if the display cant display that many FULL frames

1, its like nice looking chip
2, you can eat it if you want
3, dipping sauce?

Attached: Matsumoto2.gif (160x120, 529K)

*No!*

My current laptop has a Nvidia mx150, will I see a big jump going to one with a 1660ti?

>get new glasses
>resolution enhanced, AA disabled
I'm OK with this

Attached: americanpsycho09.gif (400x233, 1.91M)

holy fuck yes. like 10x the jump no memes.

the performance hit is

My plan is to upgrade a few years after the next gen consoles drop. My rig will be about 10 years old though my card will be only 5 years. The idea is to get a full upgrade mid gen next cycle. Though, this will all depend on my gaming habits at the time as I only really play one thing on my desktop these days while I play everything else on consoles.

>2080ti masterrace
>144+ fps in just about everything at 1440p
Not being poor feels good

>just ABOUT everything
based poorfag cant even keep it above 144

>getting the same fps at 1080p for 25% of the price
Feels good being frugal

You can't tell the difference between 144fps and 120fps with a g-sync monitor so it's a non-issue. most games get 144+ anyways but some resource heavy games aren't quite there yet.

you're on a decade old resolution. that's like if someone was bragging about getting the same fps as 1080p in 720p

Have the new Radeon 5700s fixed OpenGL performance yet?

would it be smarter to upgrade a monitor or GPU first? I was thinking it would be smarter to replace my 970 with a newer card before getting a new monitor

>i9 9900K
Already have the fastest gaming cpu.

>mommy no ooo *brap* i need more allowance waa *shits pants* oopsie

Does a 3700x have a 9700k beat out for 1440p, or is it just better for the money?
I was thinking of a 3800x just because it's the same price as the 9700k I was looking at. I hope it's more than just a 3700x with a slightly higher base clock.

seething

get a real job you fast food wagie

Yes, to a 9900KS if it lives up to expectations.

power to them, they still get a similar experience. But at the size that 720p monitors are it would be hard to get the same level. 1440p at 2feet looks pretty close to 1080p, there is definitely a difference but not as pronounced as 720p at that distance. If you sit with your monitor touching your eyeball then I guess, might as well do 4k then

GPU. The monitor is a handicap without the GPU to run it.

play a new game and use afterburner and check the cpu (individual cores) vs gpu to see which one is at 99-100% and limiting your fps.

>Intel benches come out, everyone looks at 1080p results on single threaded games "YEAH INTEL IS THE BEST IN GAMING"
>Amd benches come out suddenly doesn't matter

*shits on you* do somethinga bout it poorfag

The only non-X 3000 chip that's out right now is the 3600. For 8-core Ryzen chips, the 3700X and 3800X are the only options right now.

I have a 4k monitor with the same card. It struggles with almost all new games so you'll have to lower resolutions anyways, but if you think you'll make use of the resolution outside of games, it might be worth it.
Buying a high end GPU if you're on a 1080p monitor will be a way bigger waste.

An alternative is just to save the money and wait until both are cheaper.

There's virtually no difference in gaming performance at 1440p and AMD is much cheaper, crushes Intel in every other regard and consumes way WAY less power. You would literally have to be brain dead retarded to buy Intel.

Attached: Matisse_6.jpg (1000x552, 102K)

>way less power
Why lie faggot

A socket change a year keeps the goyim in fear. Pay up piggies it's time to upgrade.

>works
that's also because the i7 and i9 were always overkill for gaming anyway.

>comparing current gen AMD to last gen intel
kill yourself you stupid shill, it wont take long for Intel to leapfrog over AMD in less than a year.

cope

Since when did companies started using other companies name and products for comparison shots? It used to be "the competition" or "others" or anything vague. Now everyone references their competitors directly.

with their 14nm+++++++++++++++++++++++++ architecture? The decade old architecture they can't squeeze anything more out? They're going to surpass Zen 2's brand spanking new not mature 7nm architecture? You're retarded. Their 7nm architecture is only going to get much better and Intel have nothing to counter it. Their 10nm architecture is still way off and will likely be obsolete by the time they release it.

diminishing returns. The jump from 1080p to 1440p is much less noticeable than from 720p to 1080p, and IMO isn't worth upgrading for. But if you want to, then go for it.

tomshardware.com/reviews/ryzen-9-3900x-7-3700x-review,6214-3.html

Attached: ryzen 2 avg wattage.jpg (711x457, 62K)

redpill me on socket changes. What purpose do they actually serve other than to make me need to throw out a perfectly good mobo?

me. It feels great.

Attached: file.png (1758x643, 212K)

That's objectively not true. The jump is literally equal.

The jump from 1440p to 4k on a computer monitor, however...

Attached: 2 0 1 5.jpg (327x154, 13K)

Usually some small changes in architecture but they could make them backwards compatible if they wanted to.

B550 chipset when?

>That's objectively not true. The jump is literally equal.
Completely missed the point. Objectively by what metric? Number of pixels? My entire point is that the higher the pixel count, the less each increase feels like. Overall to the end user, going from 720 to 1080 is a much bigger leap than from 1080 to 1440p. Not talking about literal numbers of pixels, but in terms of the impact it has on what the end user sees.

And then of course there's the jump to 4K which is a complete and total meme because nobody can even fucking tell the difference unless their eyeball is pressed up against the screen.

At the end of the year probably

Just built 6 new PCs with Ryzen 7 2700x for my LAN center. Going to build the rest with r7 3700x. Excited to get all 21 of them upgraded.

Attached: 20190707_221529.jpg (2981x1960, 2.81M)

I'm gonna wait till they release the 16-core CPU

Where can I go see 1080p, 1440p and 4K side by side in person for free?

AMD taking over these days.

They are in all the consoles.
They have the desktop CPU market now.
GPU supremacy is probably next.

Will probably have a switch next year after the new consoles come out. I'll build a pc then and I'm set for the entire generation.

So what do they gain from making them not compatible? Some sort of backroom deal with the mobo manufacturers?

I have a Ryzen 7 1800X, paired with a GTX 1080 Ti.
Should I bother to upgrade right now?

did this age badly?

Attached: amd vs intel.png (778x960, 224K)

at a local store dumbass

yes
now AMD is the top panel and Intel is the bottom one, but instead of "MOAR COARS" its "REFRESH AND MOAR NIGGAHURTZ"

It was true for Sandy Bridge and Haswell. Now, AMD is on the top, and Intel is on the bottom going "ADD MOAR GIGGAHURTZ"

What a low IQ mutt

1440p high refresh rate is where it's at right now. All the best PC monitors are 1440p and insane refresh rates because that's the sweet spot.

My stock 1600 is still more than enough for games since rarely are they anything other than gpu heavy which my 580 can still deal with.
What I do want to upgrade is to ATX motherboard and case, I went with mATX because I liked how the air 240 looked but now I want expansion cards and internal drives. Just don't know what case to go with.

yeah i plan on upgrading to a 9900k now that i found a connect to get it under 400

Attached: shitpost speccy.jpg (742x525, 54K)

And how much does it cost to build a PC capable of maintaining the latest games at 1440p and 144 fps?
Nah, I'm fine at 1080p/60hz. Juice ain't worth the squeeze. Especially with how retarded many of those monitors' prices are on top of everything else.

Nice, now what about the Prime95 29.4b8 comparisons

>Flavor of the month CPU
A i5 9400 is all you need for games
Not like anyone here actually plays videogames anyways and definitely not demanding ones

3700x with rx5700xt for 2560x1440/144hz, y/n?

I wouldn't doubt it

Keep the 3700X but swap the 5700XT for a 2060 Super.

Intel is faster by having a 700+ mhz higher clock.

gtx 1660ti is an excellent graphics card.

Should I upgrade to a Ryzen 5 3600 if I'm still rocking an FX-8370? According to task manager modern games aren't utilizing 100% of my CPU but is that just it's 8 cores?

t. retarded person

Attached: [Sae-nce]_Hidamari_Sketch_-_Special_01_(1280x720_Blu-ray_FLAC).mkv_snapshot_08.55_[2019.07.07_18.18. (1280x720, 802K)

Gonna wait for AMD to sort out their BIOS issues and then I'll upgrade to a 3700X.

>modern games aren't utilizing 100% of my CPU but is that just it's 8 cores?
That's beacause you can count with one hand the number of games capable of using 8 cores to their fullest potential. Games need single thread performance more than anything. Upgrading will give you a massive boost in most if not every single game out there.

Just get a used 1660 Ti and wait until that card drops below 60FPS at 1440p in benchmarks to upgrade.

that's an entry level card for 1080p that should cost around 180-200 USD

the fucking cunts ruined the gpu market

That's what I figured. Thank you anonymous.

>real life needs anti-aliasing
What the fuck

>i9 9700k

Attached: 1557615234352.jpg (640x478, 191K)

Absolutely. Hell, I’m going from a 4790 to a 3600 but only because I really need a new motherboard and mATX Intel mobos are expensive and rare.

Not me, still rocking Sandy Bridge. I'm glad AMD is giving Intel a little kick in the pants. It will mean a cheaper more robust 10NM Intel that will likely be the true successor to Sandy Bridge I have been waiting for.

I'm planning on buying a 3700x in the near future, but I don't want to drop 200+ Euros on a board. It's currently possible for me to get an ASUS Crosshair VI Hero for just over 100 Euros. I know it's a 2 year old board, but it seems to offer a ton more features than X570, X470 and B450 boards at the same price point and I'd be able to reuse my old Scythe Mugen 2 cooler since it has AM3+ mounting holes.

Is there any reason I shouldn't be buying this board? I doubt I'll ever need PCIe 4.0 for anything, and it doesn't seem like I'd really be missing out on anything other than that.

Attached: 1558644207442.png (960x696, 669K)

but i already upgraded to the i7 8086k and RTX 2080

am I missing something here? I was planning on grabbing the 3700x since it was touted as the best price/performance cpu but the fucking motherboards are expensive as fuck. what the fuck?

get older motherboards

I want to upgrade my phenom II to a 3600 but I need to get a job for it

Attached: 098.jpg (232x197, 8K)

I think ASUS put bios updates for 3000 CPUs on that board but you should double check
alot of reviews showed no difference between X470 and X570 boards so you might have no difference with X370 too
also double check if the new bios has PBO but that still might be janky too

Can you suck scrotums?

People are already running the new CPUs on that board, but there seem to be some issues with the beta bios they released recently. I read about a guy who needed to reset CMOS before every boot, or the board wouldn't post.

Is it safe to assume that that shit will get fixed, or is there a chance that ASUS will just say fuck it and just don't bother?

What does 90fps look like on a 144hz monitor?

like shit. get yourself something that actually hits above 144hz

>Not talking about literal numbers of pixels, but in terms of the impact it has on what the end user sees.
end users who aren't retarded will be impacted directly proportional to the increase in pixel density. This only stops being true when pixel density is objectively unnoticable by human eyes. 1440p on a 27" monitor is not at that level, therefore the jump from 1080p to 1440p is objectively as noticeable as 720p to 1080p is.

lol only old games are going to hit 144fps at 1440p or modern games on low medium settings. What a meme.

If I want to buy a new PC right now that will last me through the next console generation, how much money should I be looking to spend?

Attached: 1556404893870.png (1440x720, 765K)

>9900k at 5ghz

Nope. Why bother.

>entry level
No it's not, on 2560x1080 it plays everything maxed out on 60 fps. I just ordered a 1920x1080 144hz monitor because of how well it runs.

they should do it if it's an expensive board but I don't know for sure
I've only seen ASRock and Gigabyte respond quickly in customer support

Yeah because it's a prehistoric resolution

You in some shithole user? I got enough for a new build in like 1month / paid weekly.

Lots of modern games hit 144fps if you have the GPU to drive it. Most 1440p panels have adaptive sync anyways. It doesn't matter if you don't absolutely have 144fps, games will look buttery smooth and feel exactly the same as 144fps