I don't know if I made a good choice by taking an ultra 7 265k
Posted by Ecstatic-Tooth-8803@reddit | buildapc | View on Reddit | 26 comments
So, I went to a couple of experts, and one told me that Ryzen is better for gaming, and I admit that, but I prefer Intel because of the more cores, and I don't need high performance. I also do video/streaming, so I need to make good use of many cores. After this response, the first said it's fine and I think it's a good idea.
The second, however, told me not to even try to say the word AMD, and I felt embarrassed even though my choice was Intel, but OK. However, he told me he doesn't make Ultra because they heat up a lot and consume a lot of power. I knew the opposite: compared to the 14th gen, the 15th gen heats up less and consumes slightly less power, but it has fewer cores (this is true).
Anyway, I also bought a 2070 Super for my current build (i5 3550, 2x8GB DDR3), and then to put it in the new PC later while waiting for more money for a 5070. Also, I'm a bit undecided on whether to choose a 5060, 5060ti, or 5070; not to mention the GB of VRAM, whether triple or dual fans, and various other things. What do you recommend?
VoraciousGorak@reddit
Never talk to him again. Fanboys and corposhills aren't to be trusted.
If you want to pay for DDR5, the 250K Plus might actually be pretty bangin' for you. The socket is dead-end but the CPU's performance is shockingly good for its price, it seems like Intel wants to actually get back into the market.
On the AMD side, AM5 will give you socket upgradability at the expense of Quicksync, which is a very beneficial tech for streaming - but fills a niche that can also be handled by the GPU, so it's not a deal breaker.
If I were building new, and with your tasks, I'd probably lean toward the 250K, but a 9900X (or a 7900 non-X for the extremely low power draw) would be perfectly fine choices on the AMD side.
For the GPU, 5060 is out if you have the budget for anything better. 5060 Ti 16GB is fine, 5070 is better, simple as.
Ok-Conference4199@reddit
If the am5 socket has one more gen left supposedly, isnt it also a dead end?
VoraciousGorak@reddit
That generation is rumored (maybe confirmed?) to also have 12-core CCDs, up from 8-core CCDs on literally every other Ryzen generation. That could open up some extreme competition in the midrange to high end, and may result in even AMD's lower-end CPUs starting at 8 cores. That could be pretty huge.
But no, having another generation of upgrade coming is the opposite of a 'dead end'.
Ecstatic-Tooth-8803@reddit (OP)
wait wait wait wait. Does 270K exists? PLUS? what is it? I remember 15th gen is only 245, 265, and 285. Is this and ultra 8?
YetanotherGrimpak@reddit
It's just a refresh, exactly same architecture with some caveats, such as extra e-cores, support for faster ram out of the box and increased anciliary clocks. Main point is price. If /when the prices drop to their MSRP, we're looking at solid performers on the 200$ and 300$ bracket.
VoraciousGorak@reddit
The latest refresh brought out the 250K Plus and 270K Plus which are both really good CPUs. They are barely weeks old.
YetanotherGrimpak@reddit
290kp was canceled as there is really no point for it. The 270kp is already what could be counted as an underclocked 285k because of the same core count but a bit less mhz. It is also cheaper than the 285k.
Only thing extra you gain from a 285k is TVB, and that's it. The 270kp can actually be faster due to changes on the anciliary clocks. Sure you can put the 285k ahead of the 270kp with tuning, but on the ultra 7 everything is out of the box anyways so...
Hostile_18@reddit
I've got the 270k Plus and its really good at productivity tasks. I love it. Generally AMD for gaming, Intel for productivity. Both do each well enough though. (Source; I also own a 9800x3d).
Aedion499@reddit
This "second guy" doesn't know what he's talking about, you had it right. 14th Gen Intel is far less efficient than the ultra series and if productivity tasks are your priority you made the right decision going with the 265k.
I have a 14700k and the performance is great but she definitely runs hotter than a 265k.
Ryzen x3d is mostly on top of gaming with some rare outliers of 14th Gen/ultra plus series outperforming x3d in certain 1% and 0.1% lows.
AMD being better at gaming usually only applies for eSports gamers trying to run 500+Hz at 1080p/900p. 1440p and above the real world difference between Intel and AMD gaming is unnoticeable.
Don't listen to the Riff Raff you got a phenomenal CPU for your use case and still has 90-95% of the real world gaming performance as Ryzen x3d while having better productivity performance for the same price.
They both have their strengths and if your main priority is gaming then there's no reason not to go AMD but if you want a nice balance of both productivity and gaming (especially casual gaming where you aren't counting frametime milliseconds) Intel is much better value.
Own-Indication5620@reddit
It's a good CPU and will do well at 1440p for gaming. The power usage is pretty overblown, a lot of times the E-Cores are being used and in my experience unless it's a CPU heavy game, your CPU usage should be fairly low on this chip. Most games I'm only using 60-80W or so, really not that bad, and it doesn't heat up much at all.
The Ryzen X3D series chips are objectively better for gaming, but it's also much more expensive on average.
Out of the GPUs I'd highly recommend the 5070 for 1080p/1440p gaming, 5060 for a budget. The 5060 TI although as more VRAM, it really lacks performance compared to the 5070.
BreadfruitNaive6261@reddit
I know the price is not pretty but anything below 5070ti is not worth buying at time. 12gb vram is obsolete
Own-Indication5620@reddit
Lol, far from it. I've played everything well on a 5070 at 1440p, and with DLSS it's pretty easy to play 4K/60 FPS on almost every game out there. No one bought the 5070 TI, just look at Steam survey.
BreadfruitNaive6261@reddit
Who cares who bought the ti? You either go amd if you just want to play, or 5070ti/5080 if you not only play but also want to host local AI models, etc
Own-Indication5620@reddit
Ok bud.
Ecstatic-Tooth-8803@reddit (OP)
bro is texting from elon musk phone
webjunk1e@reddit
It depends what you're comparing it with. Not all cores are created equal, so simply having "more" doesn't necessarily mean anything. The 265K has a whopping 20 cores, but they're all single threaded and only 8 of those 20 are "performance" cores. The other 12 are efficiency cores that clock a whole gigahertz lower. That honestly only makes it on par with something like a 9700X, which while having "only" 8 cores, accounts for 16 threads, instead of 20, but all of which can run at 5.5GHz clock, instead of mostly 4.5GHz on the Intel part. If you consider something like a 9900X, now you've got 24 threads with no compromise. Now, the 265K may still be a better value, depending on your regional pricing, but the point is that it's not nearly as simple as more cores equal better.
DecentRule8534@reddit
The Skymont e-cores are pretty beastly for their power draw and tend to perform somewhere between Zen 3 and Zen 4 cores. In the case of Arrow Lake 1 P + 1 E cores will beat a Zen 5 hyper threaded core. With the possible exception of heavy AVX-512 workloads the 265k outperforms the 9900x by about 20% despite having 4 fewer threads.
9okm@reddit
Did you buy this recently? Why didn't you get the 270k?
reckless150681@reddit
This is a contradictory statement.
There are multiple ways to quantify "high performance", and the correct way(s) depends on what you're trying to do with the PC. Core count? Frequency? Synthetic benchmarks? Power draw? Heat production? etc. etc. Both Ryzen and Intel are good, if you can specify / justify what you need it for.
Same thing -- it depends on what you want to do. What games do you want to play? What resolution? What framerate? Do you need a GPU for other tasks (CAD, editing, etc.)?
Ecstatic-Tooth-8803@reddit (OP)
I hope to be min. 200fps in every game in 1440p. I want too to get these components n.1 because i can use them for a lot of years (i still have, like i said before, an i5 3550, a 980 and 2x8gb ddr3, because they were very good) and n.2 because i want i dont want pc gets hot, yes, ofc there are liquid cooler, but i want to be low, for some year.
reckless150681@reddit
Your PC getting hot is not a problem, up to a point. Temperature is NOT the same as power usage; in fact, an overheating PC actually uses less power than a non-overheating PC, because the overheating PC will automatically cut power usage.
At any rate, between your CPU and GPU, you'll want at least one of them to be Intel / Nvidia; but the other one can totally be AMD. In fact, if streaming / video editing is only a small thing for you, both can be AMD.
There is no difference in quality in electrical parts, irrespective of brand, outside of specific components (e.g. Intel 13th / 14th gen are indeed likely to fail). Mechanical parts like fans, bearings, etc. are more likely to fail. So forget about picking the right brand from a longevity perspective, and just pick what is the best value for your needs.
-UserRemoved-@reddit
Are you aware of the difference between E-cores and P-cores?
Are you aware of GPU encoding for streaming? Such as NVENC
People have weird biases and even weirder dedication to companies that don't give a shit about them, just their money. In this situation, your preference of Intel is just fine, but their behavior I would consider unreasonable.
Kind of stupid, but ok.
If you prefer the 265k, then go for it. You can use benchmarks to determine performance differences and decide for yourself.
For most people, this decision would largely be based on their personal budget. You can again use benchmarks to find performance differences and decide for yourself which one is most worth your money.
Ecstatic-Tooth-8803@reddit (OP)
Oh ok. Idk what is nvec and E-core are the "strong" core, if I dont wrong there are 12 or 8 E-core and 8 or 12 P-core, they are backgroung core i mean discord, chrome, spotify, obs studio ecc.
-UserRemoved-@reddit
NVENC, or Nvidia Encoder, utilizes specific cores on the GPU that were put there just for encoding video, thus game performance takes a far lesser hit. AMD has similar technology.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NVENC
No, E-cores (efficiency cores) are weaker cores. P-cores (performance cores) are the stronger ones.
People have been streaming and multitasking for far longer than E-cores have been around, not to mention most people will be encoding the streams via GPU and not CPU. Any modern mid range or high end CPU is going to be more than capable of general use and gaming, which it sounds like is all you're doing.
YetanotherGrimpak@reddit
285k user here:
- Yes, core ultra does not heat up as much as 13th/14th gen. You can actually cool it quite easily with just air. Whoever said that was wrong.
- Yes, the x3d chips from AMD are better suited for gaming. 265k's major strength was the price, but with the release of the 270kp, which is basically an underclocked 285k at that low of a price (supposedly about 350$ MSRP), it became a bit moot.
- Yes, unfortunately you will need to invest a bit more on ram as the intel core ultra cpus do scale quite nicely up to 8000mhz and you really want that Z890 board as to tune it up a bit. The anciliary clocks (ring/NGU/D2D) were set up way too conservatively and there's quite a bit of performance to extract from there.
That said, 5060ti and above, maybe even 9070xt instead of the 5070. Yes, streaming, but if you have a cpu with igpu (265k non-f), you should have access to quicksync.
psimwork@reddit
Others have covered other points, but to give you a nice car analogy, you should look at this as the same idiocy as someone being like, "I'm a FORD guy. Don't even SAY "Chevy" around me!!".
It's so dumb.