CPU/Mobo Comparing CPU performance

Mann

Adept
Hi,
I have an intel i5 9400f and I thought I had to move to the next platform in order to see any substantial improvement in gaming performance.
To my surprise irrespective to the CPU or GPU combination I choose, I couldn't get more than a 10% advantage in all of games to chose from.
This link above is just comparing the extremes.
I've tried poorer performing cards as well, but the need for an upgrade doesn't exist as long as you are prepared to leave 10% FPS on the table.
AMD/INTEL is this the best you have got??
 
Major breakthrough has been multi core processing this past few years, HEDT have been replaced by ryzen 9's and i9's. threadripper and intel x-series are all but extint except for certain niche applications requiring those pcie lanes.
 
Major breakthrough has been multi core processing this past few years, HEDT have been replaced by ryzen 9's and i9's. threadripper and intel x-series are all but extint except for certain niche applications requiring those pcie lanes.
All valid points, The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
From a 6 core 9th gen i5 to a 12th gen 16core monster, 3 generations of moore's law and 10% :D
 
The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
From a 6 core 9th gen i5 to a 12th gen 16core monster, 3 generations of moore's law and 10% :D
Core count is largely irrelevant for games. Even now, games are heavily single threaded. So single threaded performance is what matters most. You can see this live by checking the performance of 12th gen Intel i3 vs i9. The difference in FPS is miniscule because they are the same architecture, hence similar single threaded performance.

Even so, there has actually been a significant uptick in single threaded performance as well. But then, the next thing is that games are heavily reliant on the GPU. So CPU performance gains don't translate directly into higher FPS.

All this doesn't mean that performance gains are meaningless. There are two benefits we've seen in the last few years. First, day to day tasks are significantly faster. In my i5 11th gen NUC (mobile processor), rendering times for websites is negligible. It's noticeably faster than my Ryzen 3500U laptop. Overall operations are much smoother. I tried using a PC with 6 year old processor today, and I had to wait for something every now and then.

Second, processors are a lot more efficient now, which has led to significantly lighter laptops. My Ryzen 3500U laptop is a mere 1.3 kg. And I didn't even pay a premium for it, bought it for 30k in Feb 2020.

So yeah, gains in gaming may be low, but overall, benefits are manyfold.
 
Core count is largely irrelevant for games. Even now, games are heavily single threaded. So single threaded performance is what matters most. You can see this live by checking the performance of 12th gen Intel i3 vs i9. The difference in FPS is miniscule because they are the same architecture, hence similar single threaded performance.
Games live Cyberpunk, uses more than 4 cores. My 6 core 5600 uses almost 80-90% usage in it. Single core is only better for competitive games. Most modern games use more cores.
 
Then you're looking at the wrong component. You should be looking at GPU, not CPU. GPU controls bulk of the gaming performance, and you're complaining that changing the CPU is not increasing performance.
CPUs are not built only for gaming, they are general purpose components.

I'm mostly ranting because of this line of yours:
AMD/INTEL is this the best you have got??

Do you also complain about Boeing/Airbus because your Taxi is too slow?
 
See that 3600 at the bottom of the graph? Yea the 9400F is off the charts! (in the wrong direction)

CPU performance barely matters in 4k resolution since the gpu carries more load there. 1080p can show the improvement in the cpu performance and the cpu performance alone. The 7600X for example beats the 9400f in 1080p by around 50% in average.

Like gourav said, GPU is the component you should be looking to upgrade
 
Back
Top