alright /v/ my CPU has finally begun to crash and burn, what

>>385021053
wait till threadripper

it has more cores. only game really taking advantage of that shit is bf1 maybe qb. just get 7700k

>>385021296
>My CPU has finally begun to crash and burn
>7700K
Have you even read OP?

>>385021053
>gaming only
get an intel

>multitasking
get amd

>>385021053
I installed mine 1600 today. I got previously an ultra book. So far I dont see a difference from the speed of my ultrabook and Windows updates and driver installation were not really fast. Idk if thats the case with every cpu. Couldnt test playing yet

>>385021053
If your budget only allows you i5s, then just do yourself a favour and grab yourself an R5 1600.

File: 1480892938878.png (254KB, 532x475px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 532x475px

Will a i5 2500k bottleneck a 1080 Ti?

>He fell for the amd meme

Get a real cpu. Get the i9

File: o-BURNING-HOUSE-facebook.jpg (664KB, 2000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

664KB, 2000x1000px

>>385022253
I hope OP has insurance

File: ha7parbF.jpg (7KB, 195x195px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 195x195px

>tfw g4560 + 1050ti

>>385022253

>1200$-2000$ USD CPU
>nominal improvement over top of the line i7s

Don't fall for this meme. At least wait ~6 months and you'll get half these prices

>>385021053
R5 1600 is the best value in CPUs today.

>>385022147
Depends on the game and how overclocked it is. If you can afford a 1080ti, consider grabbing a 3770k while you're at it.

>>385021864
>AMD is better at multitasking
I don't get where this meme is coming from. What fucking software makes full use of 8 fucking cores huh ?

>>385022446
>these days Intel has the best budget cpus while amd is now the king of mainstream cpus

What the hell happened

>>385022462
>improvement
i9s are horrible. Clock speeds are dropping like a rock as core counts go up and they're only getting more and more house fiery.

File: 1494729328906.jpg (39KB, 665x574px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 665x574px

>>385022609
>what fucking software makes full use of 8 fucking cores huh?
>multitasking
>multi
Gee anon, I don't know. Maybe 8 different single threaded programs for starters.

>>385022609
Literally any media creation software scales to use tons of cores and threads.

>>385022147
As someone who had a 2500K and went up from a 770 to a 1070, yes, your games will stutter pretty bad

>>385023473

Did you OC? If so, how much?

>>385023473
The 2500K? I had it at 4.5 GHz

>>385023652
meant for >>385023570

>>385022609
You are really stupid arent you?

>>385022609
Oh you sweet summer child

My recent purchase was on a lenovo 58 with dual core 3.0 gz processor, 8gb ram and 2 tb storage for 140$ and only thing its missing is a graphics card. All the parts pop out.
worth checking out

>>385021053
R5 1600, overclocked. As fast as twice as expensive Intel 6 core
Needs fast RAM to be good though.

>>385022147
yes. 1080ti is compelte overkill for a 2500k. Especially if the 2500k is on slow RAM (1333 or 1600). On fast RAM a 2500k is still OK.

>>385021053
Get 7700K if you're going to play video games.
Get Ryzen if you're going to do advanced rendering work and video editing.

>>385022253

Lmao you a pyromaniac?

>>385022871
Not that guy, but why would you run a bunch of programs at the same time?
It's not like you can play several games simultaneously.

>>385026135

I'll bite.

If you're a twitchfag you can play your waifu romance simulator and encode without going under 200FPS.

File: bang.jpg (43KB, 345x448px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 345x448px

amd is the best bang for your buck.

>>385026321
You can do that just fine on four cores, too.
What's your point?

When do you ever run 6+ heavy programs at once?

>>385026879
>crops out all relevant info
Nice bait.

Also, Ryzen 7 is more expensive than a 7700K, which is just sad.