Ryzen vs Skylake Performance in XR/X4?

[Lwerewolf]

Any old overclockable i7 (2nd gen +) should do, provided that you clock it to 4.5ghz and above (relatively easy to achieve, especially if you delid).

As far as AMD being behind - if they can manage to get a hold of a manufacturing process more suited for a high-end desktop chip, they'll most likely easily close the frequency gap. Clock for clock, ryzen and intel are pretty much equal at the moment.

Finally, if you're buying for X4... you're not in a hurry

At stock speeds yes
but if you plan to overclock then power consumption can go northward very quickly
extreme example

Up to 5ghz should be doable with a single GPU and a good ~500w PSU... and that's for synthetic benches - power draw in gaming workloads should be waaay less

[pjknibbs]

As far as AMD being behind - if they can manage to get a hold of a manufacturing process more suited for a high-end desktop chip, they'll most likely easily close the frequency gap.

They're already on the same 14nm process that Intel uses for its fastest chips, though? As far as clock speed gap, fastest Ryzens are clocked at 3.8GHz base, fastest Intels are 4.3GHz, so doesn't seem like there's that much of a gap there, to be honest.

[red assassin]

Clock speeds have been largely static and largely irrelevant when comparing different architectures for years - it's differences in optimisation (instructions per clock, pipelining, critical path detection, etc) that account for most of the speed differences between different architectures.

[Lwerewolf]

As far as AMD being behind - if they can manage to get a hold of a manufacturing process more suited for a high-end desktop chip, they'll most likely easily close the frequency gap.

They're already on the same 14nm process that Intel uses for its fastest chips, though? As far as clock speed gap, fastest Ryzens are clocked at 3.8GHz base, fastest Intels are 4.3GHz, so doesn't seem like there's that much of a gap there, to be honest.

They're on an LPP (low power process) node. Pretty much made for smartphone chips. AFAIK, Intel has the only high performance 14nm node out there. Pretty much the reason why current AMD chips hit a brick wall at around 4GHz - the voltage requirements get insane. Look up the IPC difference - it's practically not there. We'll see how the upcoming 7nm processes will shape things up, given reports of intel's sub-14nm efforts not clocking well.

...still kinda sad that 5 years later I have no incentive to upgrade from the 3770k (4.7ghz daily)...

[Quando]

Any old overclockable i7 (2nd gen +) should do, provided that you clock it to 4.5ghz and above (relatively easy to achieve, especially if you delid).

....

Nope it doesn't. OCd my 3770K to 4.5GHZ and added a 1080Ti last week. This game only uses 55% of my GPU because it's bottlenecked by my CPU way to hard. So it doesnt matter if I play on 1080p or 4K, FPS are always same (~110FPS).

Adding a better CPU would allow me >200 FPS in 1080p. This game is Script heavy = CPU. Elite Dangerous ist GPU heavy, so my CPU doesn't limit my system and that's why I see FPS counters up to 300 FPS in 1080p.

Despite that bottlenecking, new Tech is always faster. Check this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbGT-u4i3EY

Same clocked 3770K vs 7700K. In Tomb Raider and Witcher3 7700K beats 3770K by ~40 FPS. With my 3770K I cant run Witcher 3 with 60 FPS 4K if everything is maxed (10-15 FPS missing). But I could using a 7700K. Thats why I will upgrade to 8700K soon.