AMD Puts its Sights on Intel's i5-8400

FrgMstr

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
55,634
AMD is taking a direct shot at Intel's i5-8400 ($200), putting it up against its own Ryzen 5 2600 CPU ($166). Both systems are using a GTX 1070, run at 1080p with Ultra settings. Frametimes are tight together but Intel gets clobbered when you move to a streaming situation and transcoding. If you are a serious streamer and are looking to do it all off one box, instead of having a dedicated streaming rig, the 2700X ($325) is the way to go...at least today. Intel's new 9000 series with 8C will likely bring that back into parity, but we do not know the 9000 series pricing yet.

Video.

Game. Stream. Create. The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 processor games like the competition, but when you start streaming and encoding videos, the advantage is clear.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Wow... 6 core i5 struggling...... It must be the cache and SMT that helps Ryzen blow past the i5 in Gaming+streaming.
 
Got to wonder if Qucksync was used- I get that AMD wants to show themselves as competitive, and they are, and I admit to not knowing enough about streaming (because why), but the i5- or any Intel or AMD iGPU-enabled CPU- shouldn't be struggling with transcoding.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
Got to wonder if Qucksync was used- I get that AMD wants to show themselves as competitive, and they are, and I admit to not knowing enough about streaming (because why), but the i5- or any Intel or AMD iGPU-enabled CPU- shouldn't be struggling with transcoding.
Click to expand...

They are sure to setup the encoding in such a way to make AMD look better. I’ve been streaming off and on for years and it worked long before AMD released Ryzen.
 
i have always built intel but have always been a little angry walking out of micro center... i will take intels pain and store it in a jar and rub it all over my body at midnight.
 
When I first started thinking about upgrading I was reading articles and the 8400 was being listed as the go-to budget gaming build. But the more I looked around I noticed the pricing had fell and the world had marched on to the point where an 8600K was really where it's at (and better if you include used pricing) if not an 8700. Of course, that's all going to change *again* when the next iteration is for sale.

When I compared AMD offerings to Intel's it seemed like their top tier is about two rungs below Intel's. All that is to say that when I read the thread title I immediately thought that AMD had its eyes set on an old finish line and is going to be behind yet again and the comments seem to be confirming that opinion.
 
mope54 said:
When I first started thinking about upgrading I was reading articles and the 8400 was being listed as the go-to budget gaming build. But the more I looked around I noticed the pricing had fell and the world had marched on to the point where an 8600K was really where it's at (and better if you include used pricing) if not an 8700. Of course, that's all going to change *again* when the next iteration is for sale.

When I compared AMD offerings to Intel's it seemed like their top tier is about two rungs below Intel's. All that is to say that when I read the thread title I immediately thought that AMD had its eyes set on an old finish line and is going to be behind yet again and the comments seem to be confirming that opinion.
Click to expand...

Sure, but that is not what this thread is about.

Even the 1600x puts a hurt on the 8600k in steaming:
https://hardforum.com/threads/ryzen-rocks-at-live-streaming.1951842/
 
Thank you AMD but I am gonna pass. My next HTPC would have to be at least a 6 core APU. The real show stopper is RAM, though. I am not paying that out of principle and I am willing to wait even more.
 
mope54 said:
When I first started thinking about upgrading I was reading articles and the 8400 was being listed as the go-to budget gaming build. But the more I looked around I noticed the pricing had fell and the world had marched on to the point where an 8600K was really where it's at (and better if you include used pricing) if not an 8700. Of course, that's all going to change *again* when the next iteration is for sale.

When I compared AMD offerings to Intel's it seemed like their top tier is about two rungs below Intel's. All that is to say that when I read the thread title I immediately thought that AMD had its eyes set on an old finish line and is going to be behind yet again and the comments seem to be confirming that opinion.
Click to expand...
Those are some good drugs you are on.
 
I have a 1600x running at 3950 - its great , with my use am not missing extra cores .

Of course the bonus is I got to enjoy it for a year before intel released theirs , and mine was half their price and the board was $70 cheaper also .

AMD pricing is what is hurting Intel , not performance as both have their strengths . Intel fans should be thanking AMD for skylake-x, 8700k and the soldered heat spreader that is coming , because without the competition Intel would have just rehashed the same with a few hundred megahurtz added on and required another chipset and spent more promoting optane - oh and the prices would all been much higher , like the 8086k may have been released as a Extreme processor .

Kenny
 
I just upgraded last week to a Ryzen 2600 from an FX 8320. Couldn't be happier. Barely sweating running Overwatch at 75 fps and high settings. My bottleneck now is my VC which is ideal for me.
 
fightingfi said:
Hell even i went back to AMD ( 2700x) AMD is the shit for g4merz :)
Click to expand...

Oh, heck yeah...;) Nobody should be buying anything else--unless he enjoys getting ramrodded by Intel, that is. It's going to take Intel a while to catch up and these knee-jerk responses we've seen to date are not going to be of much help to Intel. But the main thing to remember is that AMD, this time, unlike what AMD did last time when it took everything in performance with the A64, is going to keep the R&D pedal to the metal. The team at AMD is going to keep the pressure on Intel in the years to come and going to keep raising the bar higher and higher. AMD has the right people running the place, now. It's good to see Intel having to hustle and compete for a change, even if I have no intention of buying their products...!
 
WaltC said:
Oh, heck yeah...;) Nobody should be buying anything else--unless he enjoys getting ramrodded by Intel, that is. It's going to take Intel a while to catch up and these knee-jerk responses we've seen to date are not going to be of much help to Intel. But the main thing to remember is that AMD, this time, unlike what AMD did last time when it took everything in performance with the A64, is going to keep the R&D pedal to the metal. The team at AMD is going to keep the pressure on Intel in the years to come and going to keep raising the bar higher and higher. AMD has the right people running the place, now. It's good to see Intel having to hustle and compete for a change, even if I have no intention of buying their products...!
Click to expand...

Lol.

People should by the best they can get for their money. Might be AMD, might be Intel, might be effing Arm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top