After comparing Intel's new Core i7-7800X and AMD's Ryzen 5 1600 in terms of productivity workloads, we're back on popular request to find out if Intel is still ahead of the game in high-end games.
Without at least two dozen games, this would not be a real showdown. So we recorded 30 games, all of which were played on the GTX 1080 Ti at 1080p. Since it makes no sense to use GPU-restricted scenarios for the gaming performance of CPUs, we didn't have the need to collect results for 1440p or 4K.
Both the i7-7800X and R5 1600 systems were configured with DDR4-3200 CL14 memory. However, the Intel system was equipped with 32 GB, while the Ryzen system only had 16 GB. Please note that this should not affect the results. Whatever it's worth, there's a reason I did this: I don't have a 32GB 3200MHz kit that works with Ryzen yet.
As you go further, note that the 7800X is currently priced at $ 415 (but has a MSRP of $ 390), while the 1600 is available for retail at just $ 215, almost half the price, entirely Not to mention that the AM4 platform also costs significantly less than Intel's LGA2066.
Ryzen system specifications
Skylake-X system specifications
Kaby Lake system specifications
World of Tanks is not a particularly challenging title, but this is about recording a wide range of games. Be aware that this game is limited to 120 fps and while it is possible to bypass this limit, most people won't care or really need to do it. Here the Ryzen 5 1600 had no problems pushing the GTX 1080 Ti to the frame cap, and it was even a few frames faster than the 7800X.
Grand Theft Auto V is a game that has never played well with Ryzen CPUs. Since this is an older title from 2015, it is a few years ahead of Ryzen, but the title still requires enough system resources to stay in our benchmark queue. The overclocked R5 1600 was only 6% slower than the 7800X and that's pretty impressive as it's also 15% lower clocked. This is also a massive improvement over the 20% margin that separates the Ryzen CPU from the 7700K.
I previously tested PlayerUnknown's battlefields in the launch area, where everyone is walking around waiting for the game to begin. This was a mistake for several reasons. Firstly, it is extremely difficult to collect reliable data here, and secondly, it is much more demanding than the actual gameplay, since you usually do not experience so many players in such a small space when playing. I now test within the game, let myself fall in the same place every time, and then follow the same path for an average of three runs for over 60 seconds.
As you can see, the R5 1600 does well in this title. It is worth noting that this version is limited to 144 fps and I am not sure if there is a solution to remove it. Nevertheless, 144 fps are sufficient and I cannot imagine that many players can use more frames than in this title. Although the game's frame rate is limited, the R5 1600 was consistently faster than the 7800X and delivered around 7% more frames when considering the minimum.
The Witcher 3 Wild Hunt plays well on both the 7800X and the R5 1600, the Intel CPU was faster. This game is not frame-capped. So if the GTX 1080 Ti could deliver over 200 fps with the ultra quality settings, we would probably see it with a CPU like the 7700K. In any case, the R5 1600 was 15% slower than the 7800X, but once both CPUs are overclocked, this latitude is reduced to only 6%, which is still an impressive result for the Ryzen CPU.