New computer. More CPUs or more GHZ?

[Lord_Arda]

Evening everybody,
I'm planning on getting a new computer, which would be my Paradox machine for the next years.
And of course, i'm asking in the forums of the most CPU intensive game: which is better for a smooth Vic2 play? More CPUs, or more GHZ? to be more specific, which would run the game better? Intel Core i5 7600K, or AMD Ryzen 5 1600?

 

[Sidereus]

For Vic2, as it is an older title, faster single-threaded performance (e.g. more GHz) will almost always be better than more cores, so if that's your only concern and you don't plan to run all kinds of other programs at the same time, go for the i5.*
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-7600K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-1600/3885vs3919

If you want to prepare for possible super-threaded Vic3 or have other multi-tasking needs, perhaps look for something with a few more cores.

*Disclaimer: not a Vic2 developer, nor a game dev

 

[Badesumofu]

Either of those CPUs should be more than enough for Vic2 (or indeed any current PDS game). Looking at the benchmarks posted above my post, the i5 is going to perform much better in any current PDS game. Games like EU4 and Stellaris are multi-threaded but aren't going to benefit much (possibly at all) from adding 5th and 6th cores. Essentially, the bulk of the work will be done by a single core. This is largely due to the nature of the games and doesn't seem likely to change much in the short to mid term.

In fact, I would say that not very many games are going to benefit from adding more cores beyond 4. The i5 looks like the better buy to me, although I must admit I am somewhat partial to Intel CPUs. I've always had better experiences with Intel builds, personally.

Single-threaded performance is not just based on clock speed. Clock speeds have been mostly static for about a decade now but single threaded performance has increased a lot in that time.

 

[spartansociety]

For the price you pay for the two, I would get the Ryzen one. Much better value for money if you plan on keeping your system for a few years. Also, it is very possible you will be able to use the motherboard and ram in a CPU upgrade in a few years time. With Intel you are guaranteed to need a new motherboard for any upgrades.

 

[Jorlaan]

I'd recommend an i7 over an i5. I have an i7 in my new computer and had an i5 in my last and boy I tell you there is a YUGE difference. Especially as this is for a computer for the next few years.

 

[aimlessnerd]

an i7 with an SSD has made a world of difference for my playing.

 

[spartansociety]

an i7 with an SSD has made a world of difference for my playing.

I would guess the vast majority of the noticeable difference was the SSD.

 

[Kovax]

I would guess the vast majority of the noticeable difference was the SSD.

Probably. The latest higher end i5 processors seem to be rated for performance roughly on par with the i7s from about a generation behind, for around $100 less. If you need absolute "bleeding edge" performance, an i7 is the way to go, otherwise one of the newer i5 processors should be more than adequate for practically anything you would be likely to run over the next year or two. I used to be a big fan of AMD, but their single-core performance has not kept pace with Intel's, and almost everything I run benefits more from better single-core performance than from more cores. Currently, I've got an Intel i5 7500 (replacing my venerable old AMD chip and motherboard), and am very pleased with it, but the more recent 7600K is a bit faster, and can be overclocked if you want to go down that road.

This whole thread probably belongs in the "off topic" or "support" sections, not in a game-specific forum.

 

[aimlessnerd]

I would guess the vast majority of the noticeable difference was the SSD.

you'd be surprised by what trash CPU i went with before i got the i7, and this was before moving the game to an SSD

 

[spartansociety]

OP, one point I thought I would clarify.

I5- 4 cores 4 threads
i7- 4 cores 8 threads with hyper threading
Ryzen 1600- 6 cores 12 threads

The hyper threading of the i7 helps make the 4 cores more efficient but is still only 4 cores and will slow down once they are all being used. This site explains it well
https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/intel-core-i5-vs-i7/

Games like the Witcher 3 do show a decent difference between the i5 and i7, but like more physical cores even more.


The 6 physical cores of the 1600 will be better in scenarios where 6 cores are under sustained load. The general concensus on the forums is that this is not currently the case for Paradox games. They do, however use a bunch of threads (and thus cores) and are improving over time. If you are planning on keeping the pc for several years this is something to consider.

Clock for clock the Ryzen is almost as good as the i7, but will stop at around 4 ghz. Your i5, with a decent cooler, might hit 4.8 or so.

Short version is for Paradox games i5 fast now, i7 fastest now, Ryzen a little slower than i5 at the moment, with the potential to be much faster and last longer till an upgrade.

For Victoria 2, any modern CPU will be fine. the I5 is probably the best bet.

Also, remember the i5/i7 does not come with a fan, so you have to factor that cost in!

.....................
Now that I have typed all this I looked at your current specs... and my suggestion has changed. Your current CPU is fine and if overclocked might only be 10-20 percent behind a Kaby i7 and may be FASTER than the i5 in many games. Overclock that bad boy you already have, whack in an SSD for your games install/operating system and away you go. I would not suggest you upgrade the video card at the moment either, Etherum miners are literally buying all the video cards available in stores and pushing the prices to double of triple what they were.

 

[grimkm]

I actually just upgraded my ageing system..an i5 750 to an i5 7500..it came with a fan, but my old fan was compatible with the new socket. This was an upgrade in waiting for almost a decade, so I have noticed remarkable improvements. I did consider the ryzen 5, but beyond the hype, it didn't quite match up to what I was after. Shopping around a little too, I can't say that the price difference was too great either.

 

[RichStrat]

Go with the I5. Intel not only has a clock advantage but a significant ipc (instructions per clock) advantage. You should only go with AMD if you do heavily threaded stuff like video editing or other development work. Even most AAA games don't utilise more than four threads. SSD is a must for operating systems and games these days. Films and and such should be on a separate large capacity HDD. If your budget is not too tight then pay the extra for the I7 and get an NVMe SSD.

 

[spartansociety]

Go with the I5. Intel not only has a clock advantage but a significant ipc (instructions per clock) advantage. You should only go with AMD if you do heavily threaded stuff like video editing or other development work. Even most AAA games don't utilise more than four threads. SSD is a must for operating systems and games these days. Films and and such should be on a separate large capacity HDD. If your budget is not too tight then pay the extra for the I7 and get an NVMe SSD.

Your suggestion seems a bit outdated, the FX CPU's were crap for gaming (and most other things) but AMD has almost caught up in IPC these days. If all you want to do is game, it seems like their are a lot of good choices on either side of the fence. For many other things though, the AMD ones crush intel cpu's that cost a comparable amount.

 

[RichStrat]

Your suggestion seems a bit outdated, the FX CPU's were crap for gaming (and most other things) but AMD has almost caught up in IPC these days. If all you want to do is game, it seems like their are a lot of good choices on either side of the fence. For many other things though, the AMD ones crush intel cpu's that cost a comparable amount.

If you play Crysis or Witcher 3 or do any serious development worker then AMD may well be the better value? However the question was specifically for Victoria 2. You are not going to utilise more than 4 cores with Vic2 even if you've got a a couple of web pages open. Have you got any links on the latest IPC comparisons? I do do development work and Firefox has now finally gone multi process, so I could be persuaded to return to AMD myself if the single core performance deficit wasn't too great?

I certainly won't be spending any money on Skylake-X or the ludicrous 7640X and 7740X.

 

[spartansociety]

You are looking at about 50 percent increase in IPC over the last AMD CPU's which sounds massive, but is not quite enough to catch up to Skylake. It is around Broadwell-EP levels (can be as low as Sandy on some software) and stops around the 4ghz level when overclocking. What you get in return is a cheaper price and more cores than similarly priced chips from Intel, plus the potential for upgrades etc. There were problems with the motherboards and ram, but they seem to be mostly fixed.

The cores on these new chips don;t share the resources like the other ones did which was a big factor in the IPC increase.

I don't know what software you use so it's hard to provide links that are specific to what you want. In general, I would only spend the money on intel if I was going to use AVX a whole bunch (which most of us never will).

I suggest looking at the 1700. It is much cheaper than the 1800x, comes with a decent fan and will overclock to within a 100mhz of its older brother (with the included fan
).

Power use is way down as well, with the 1700 being more efficient then HEDT intel stock vs stock.

I think that AMD is the better purchase for most people for the first time in many years. I regret my 6700k purchase at the moment. The 6700k seems faster in most benchmarks but often has lower minimum fps in games. Plus, I tend to watch TV, Twitch etc on another monitor while playing strategy games, so having more cores would likely help.

The following website has a pretty in depth review showing its performance in different use cases although IPC is only briefly mentioned in the intro.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11170...review-a-deep-dive-on-1800x-1700x-and-1700/23.