CPU upgrade....i5 or i7?

Hi guys,
I have one simple question. I'm going to upgrade my pc hardware and I have a doubt about CPU. I've read and personally test that AC stresses cpu so much, specially in the recent game versions. So...what do you think...is it better an i5 or an i7 to reach a higher and stable frame rate with a high end gpu (no sli)? Or an i7 is a waste of money?

 

The difference between the i5 and I7 processors is in regard to multi-threading. They each have four cores but the I7 has two threads available for each core. Other than that they employee the same basic technology. It is my understanding that AC utilizes cores and threads to calculate the physics to each car independently and that one core/thread works with the GPU to produce the picture.

I believe this means that the performance of the i7 should be significantly better than the i5 for AC where more than individual hot lapping is involved.

I stand to be corrected on my understanding but this will at least get the conversation started.

 

Games doesn't use Hyper Threading, go to i5. At same frequency (and cpu arquithecture), i5 and i7 perform equal.

 

i7 6700k

 

In most cases hyperthreading wont give a jump in gaming, if you have lots of backrground stuff going then it will help even if a game uses only 4 threads as it will have some left over for other tasks.

I remember some older cpu's I tried with HT on and off and got better perfomance with it off. I will do some tests later on my setup i7 6700k ad gtx 1080 to see if ht makes any difference but ive never tried this cpu with ht off.

I think my last cpu which was a 2700k ran better with ht off as it ran cooler so could be clocked higher with ht off and in game it was better to have higher cpu clock then more threads back then. I havent bothered going for silly clock speed on the 6700k but can test simple ht on and off to seenif there is a difference or not.

Software is only recently starting to actually take advantage of more threads, still not likely to be much using up 4 cores.

If price is the main issue then performance per dollar would likely always give the i5 the edge. I7 may be better in the long run as software evolves tontake advantage of more threads.

 

It would depend on where your system bottleneck is.

If you have a powerful graphics card (which one depends on resolution and target FPS), then a better processor would be a better match. This is assuming AC can use more than 4 threads. If AC can only use 4 threads, then an i5 would be the same.

If your bottleneck is on the graphics card already (weak GPU), then i5 or i7 would be the same.

I can tell you from my experience of having two systems running AC:

System 1: 970 GTX + i3 4160 + triple screens 1080p x3. The bottleneck is the i3. I can run 60fps smooth when running maximum 6 car grids. CPU gets about 80% usage and GPU about 60% usage. When running grids above 6 cars, the FPS go below 60fps because CPU does reach 100% usage.

System 2: R9 290 + i5 4670k + single 1440p screen. The bottleneck seems to be the GPU (100% GPU usage) when running small grids but will still give 100FPS or more. When running full grids, the bottleneck seems to be the CPU (100% CPU usage), but still giving about 90FPS.

I anticipate that if I were to use the i5 on the x3-screen system, then the bottleneck would always be on the 970 GTX, thus an i7 would be a waste.

My point in short: it depends on the power and demand of your GPU.

What I'll do in your shoes: unless you plan to keep the system for a short time, buy the i7 anyway. It's not that much more expensive.

 

Thanks guys fou your opinions. I've check some benchmark of i5 6600k vs i7 6700k and read about HT and so on....in general in games there is a small performance difference between these two processors....more or less 10%. My doubt is about AC that seems to prefer a powerfull cpu. And yes...I don't want to change soon this new configuration so probably i7 is the best solution though immediatly I'll don't notice any difference.

 

wait for the new amd ryzen processor...

 

I agree, this is very good advise. The wait shouldn't be that long.

 

yeah the way i see it if ryzen can be competitive intel should drop their prices. Early tech reviews its neck to neck with the $1000 i7 6900k

 

I was gonna wait for ryzen too, but went ahead and ordered a 6600k yesterday. One of the reasons is that I'm making a mini ITX build and I don't want an OC'd i7 and the heat that comes along with it in a small form factor case. Although it pretty much boils down to "I literally ran out of patience waiting for ryzen" LOL, plus in my technologically third world country where any new electronic item arrives a couple months late than usual and when it does finally arrive it ends up costing twice what it is supposed to be.

@petesky TBH, as much as I am rooting for AMD to blow intel out of the water with ryzen, I realistically think the mainstream ones won't be much faster than a OC'd i5/i7 (which I'm gonna do to my 6600k anyway given that my poor old 2500k ran at 4.9 since day 1 when I got it 4 or 5 years ago) core to core performance wise in regards to gaming, if they do manage to do that then I'd prolly just upgrade to it without a second thought once they come out over here in the next century. Those early tests are prolly done like "looky here, our AMD processor runs the same as this intel one when both are downclocked to 2 ghz terms and conditions apply" or some such bollocks so I'd rather just wait for the real world benchmarks instead of company self horn tooting.

Personally in the games I play, an i7 over an i5 makes zero sense. Maybe in AC it'd give a couple percent advantage but I can live with that.

One thing I am definitely gonna wait for though no matter what is for them Vega GPUs to come out so that I can throw my 980 away and replace it with the top end Vega or 1080ti if that ends up being a thing, whichever of the two ends up being better.

 

if I was going to build, just a gamming PC, I would build something like this...

Intel® Core™ i7-7700K ($339.00 - $350.00 RRP) with a ROG MAXIMUS IX FORMULA = overclock bliss of 5ghz, stock clocks are 4.2, and 4.5 turbo


4 x DIMM, Max. 64GB, DDR4 4133(O.C.)/4000(O.C.)/3866(O.C.)/3733(O.C.)/3600(O.C.)/3466(O.C.)/3400(O.C.)/3333(O.C.)/3300(O.C.)/3200(O.C.)/3000(O.C.)/2800(O.C.)/2666(O.C.)/2400(O.C.)/2133 MHz Non-ECC, Un-buffered Memory *
Dual Channel Memory Architecture
Supports Intel® Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)
Supports NVIDIA® 2-Way SLI™ Technology
Supports AMD 3-Way CrossFireX™ Technology

2 x PCIe 3.0/2.0 x16 (x16 or dual x8, gray)
1 x PCIe 3.0/2.0 x16 (x4 mode, black) *13 x PCIe 3.0/2.0 x1

Intel® Z270 Chipset : 1 x M.2 Socket 3, with M Key, type 2242/2260/2280/22110 storage devices support (both SATA & PCIE mode)*2
1 x M.2 Socket 3, with M Key, type 2242/2260/2280 storage devices support (PCIE mode only)*3
6 x SATA 6Gb/s port(s)
Support Raid 0, 1, 5, 10
Supports Intel® Smart Response Technology*4Intel®
Rapid Storage Technology supports
Intel® Optane™ Memory Ready *5

Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
Supports dual band frequency 2.4/5 GHz
Supports MU-MIMO

ROG SupremeFX 8-Channel High Definition Audio CODEC S1220
- Impedance sense for front and rear headphone outputs
- Supports : Jack-detection, Multi-streaming, Front Panel Jack-retasking
- High quality 120 dB SNR stereo playback output and 113 dB SNR recording input
- SupremeFX Shielding Technology
- ESS® ES9023P
- Supports up to 32-Bit/192kHz playback *7Audio Feature :
- Gold-plated jacks
- Optical S/PDIF out port(s) at back panel
- Sonic Radar III
- Sonic Studio III

notice the KN water blocks, top middle of the MB

got a soft spot for good quality Asus boards

Anyhoo, best of luck in your soon to be new build of 2017.
what ever you decide in building, I hope it brings you nothing than pure joy.

 

which case are you using mate? im considering the silverstone raven for the next build..heat shouldnt be a problem as my room is air conditioned..dont want a chunky case anymore.

 

Going with a Corsair 380T. I pretty much needed a case that I could carry along with me on plane trips since I'll be moving a lot this year due to my work. The handle on top was a selling point as well. Plus it looks cute. My first choice was to go with the Lian Li PC-TU200 but seems they are not sold over here so went with the 380T. The 380T is not exactly the smallest mini ITX case out there, but it is small enough to fit in overhead luggage cabins on planes and allows me to fit a big 240mm radiator in it, so it ticks all of my boxes. EDIT - if I was building a little PC without my silly constraints of having to carry it around, I'd have gone with an NZXT Manta. That case is beautiful.

 

Guys don't forget about optimization issues with AMD, in most games AMD hardware is optimized worse than Nvidia and Intel, that is a fact.

 

Interesting thread!

I am too at a point where my 4 years old laptop is suffering... Just enough to play AC with low graphic settings.
Personaly, I am only playing AC ; so my computer will do the job until the release of AC 2

It's sure that it would be nice to have better graphics but I am a little bit worried by buying a new system now, which would already be outdated in 2 years.

 

Yeah the wait for a driver there'll be even newer hardware out...lol

 

i7 Games will use multi cores more & more in the future.

 

Interesting responses, because I would have said AC isn't CPU hungry at all.

I run an i7-860, that's a seven year old CPU with four cores and hyperthreading at lowly stock 2.8Ghz. I get mostly 60 frames solid (exception: race start, smoking tires) with a 24 AI GT3 grid of mixed makes, all on V10 tires obviously. Physics usage, depending on track, between 50 and 70%, far from any overload. I would get more frames if I wasn't vsyncing. GTX970 pushes 1920x1200 mostly ultra details. Same holds true for RF2 which should be a tad more physics intense because of the tire model and real road. So it appears that you don't need a monster CPU for modern racing.

More and more games make use of as many cores as you can get, so hyperthreading makes sense today. The Intel K versions are for overclocking, the non-K versions are a tad cheaper.

 

I need more fps...I own a 144 hz monitor with gsync and I want to reach and mantain more or less 144 fps in all game situations (I'm speaking only about AC). Now with my i5 2500k (@4.5 gHz) and gtx 970 is not possibile and I need to completly turn off the reflections to obtain high fps (over 90) during an online race with full grid. But ok....I understand your opinions and I'll take my decision soon. Thanks