Simply How A lot Quicker are Intel CPUs for Gaming?

Today we're going to compare the Ryzen 7 3700X and the Core i5-10600K in a number of games, but we'll do so with low or sporty quality settings in games like Fortnite, World of Tanks, Rocket League. and about half a dozen other competition titles.

This differs significantly from the game tests in our CPU test reports, where we test with high and high quality presets in modern and often very demanding titles like Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Battlefield V and Red Dead Redemption 2, to name just a few . And although we use a GeForce RTX 2080 Ti graphics card in these tests and test it with both 1080p and 1440p, the GPU's performance is in many cases even more limited.

We're not talking about a hard GPU bottleneck, but the GPU is often the more performance-restricting component. That doesn't matter much, of course, since using an RTX 2080 Ti at 1080p is already somewhat unrealistic since most players with a graphics card over $ 1,000 would play these AAA titles at 1440p and high quality settings.

For example, when reviewing the Core i5-10600K, we found that the Ryzen 7 3700X was 5% slower at 1080p in lower margin game scenarios, e.g. B. when playing Fortnite with competitive quality settings, but this margin could increase slightly. This prompted us to recommend the Intel processor for those who need to have every possible last frame, but for everyone else, the 3700X is just a better, more rounded product.

Still, it would be good to know how much more performance you can get with the Intel processor and whether you can actually use that extra power. For this test, let's look at out-of-the-box performance with XMP loaded with CL14 DDR4-3200 memory, but we're not limiting the 10600K to performance. In our test, we found that overclocking at 5.1 GHz could improve game performance by up to 12%. So keep that in mind.

We also thought about adding overclocking results for both CPUs, although we didn't ultimately think that this would make this article better considering what we've found in the past when rotating AMD and Intel CPUs for maximum gaming performance. Intel CPUs typically enjoy more headroom when it comes to core frequency, but the AMD CPUs benefit massively from memory optimization, which ultimately leads to similar increases in performance.

For testing, we put together 9 games, all of which were tested at 1080p and 1440p using low quality settings with both an RTX 2080 Ti and an RTX 2060 Super.

Benchmark time!

Starting with Battlefield V at 1080p using the low quality preset, we manually removed the 200 fps cap and set it to 600 fps. The results with the RTX 2080 Ti look like they are still limited, but we assure you that this is not the case. The 10600K reached a maximum of 211 fps in this test.

Interestingly, both CPUs maximized the RTX 2080 Ti at just under 200 fps, and we see similar results when using the RTX 2060 Super. For example, when you stand still and look up at the sky, the frame rate increases to around 250 fps, but when you actually run the benchmark pass frame rates, they rarely go above 200 fps.

Although we use the RTX 2060 Super, we see very similar results, which is interesting because the 2080 Ti is ~ 50% faster by default for ultra quality, although this is based on our 1440p data that we are now looking at will.

If we switch to 1440p, we see a certain separation here. These results actually suggest a frame cap for the 1080p test, but that wasn't the case. In any case, the 10600K with 1440p was up to 6% faster than the 3700X with the RTX 2080 Ti installed, although the 1% low performance was practically identical.

What is really surprising are the margins expanded with the slower RTX 2060 Super, here the 10600K was 9% faster. You would expect the edges to close with the slower GPU, but this wasn't the case in Battlefield V with the DX11 API. Some strange and unexpected results in Battlefield V for sure, but it's not worth it, that while it's slower, it's almost impossible to tell the difference between the 3700X and 10600K.

Next we have Fortnite and to test this title we set everything to low except for the train distance, which was maximized with the "epic" quality setting. We also use the DX12 API in a 20v20 team rumble before closing the first circle.

Fortnite is a very difficult game to test with, at least if the goal is to report accurate data, since Epic interrupts older reps when updating the game once a week, forcing me to do a similar replay. However, we have found that, even when recreating the exact same benchmark pass, the results may differ significantly from the previous iteration, depending on where the other players are and what they are doing.

In the past, this difference was not as noticeable when using the epic quality settings, but with the low quality settings, the results could vary up to 100 fps, which is crazy. For these tests, we created a repetition on the Intel test system and then copied it to the AMD system and ran all the benchmarks on the same day so that we can make a comparison between apples and apples.

Here we see that the 10600K was 8% faster on average than the 3700X and reached 352 fps. The Intel processor was also 12% faster when comparing the 1% low data, but it's worth noting that both are pushing well over 200 fps in our benchmark at all times. Nevertheless, we are heavily tied to the CPU in both scenarios, since when we drop down to the RTX 2060 Super we find that the frame rates drop only slightly by 5%.

It is also very interesting to note that the margin between 10600K and 3700X actually increases slightly with the slower GPU. Now the Intel processor is 12% faster compared to the average frame rate and 18% faster compared to 1% low data. This is a significant delta, although we still see well over 200 fps with the Ryzen processor. For those of you who rock a 144 Hz monitor, this will likely not be a problem for you.

At 1440p, things change quite a bit, and now we're seeing GPU-bound results when we use the RTX 2060 Super.

The 10600K was still up to 14% faster with the RTX 2080 Ti and although both CPUs deliver well over 200 fps at all times, this is a decent performance advantage for Intel. For those using slower GPUs like the 2060 Super, expect a margin of up to 8% in favor of Intel and the numbers. I think it's fair to say that even professional players can't tell the difference.

On to the Counter Strike: Global Offensive. For this test we do not use the Steam Workshop FPS benchmark, but a custom benchmark pass on the & # 39; Vertigo & # 39; against some bots. Full disclaimer: I don't play CSGO, but those who tell me the FPS benchmark do not give any indication of the actual game performance. Hopefully this custom pass will be more useful.

When testing with 1080p, we noticed a strong CPU bottleneck in both the 3700X and 10600K, since the results of the RTX 2080 Ti and the 2060 Super are practically identical. What is interesting here is that the 3700X is faster than the 10600K and delivers 8% better average performance and 22% stronger 1% lows with both GPUs.

The 3700X was also able to keep the frame rate above 200 fps at all times, while the 10600K dropped to 184 fps. We're not sure how much of a difference it really makes, but we see CSGO players often claim that they need at least 300 fps in this title for a competitive game. Again not a CSGO player, so I have no idea how true that is. For casual gamers, however, we are sure that 180 fps will still contribute.

At 1440p we see similar margins and here the 3700X was up to 14% faster.

This is a somewhat surprising result, although we knew that CSGO is a title that 3rd generation Ryzen is extremely capable of, but it is nice to see what we saw earlier based on the "very high" quality settings to validate.

Rainbow Six Siege was featured in our 10600K test. Using the ultra quality settings, the 10600K and 3700X were very evenly matched. The Ryzen CPU was slightly slower when comparing the average frame rate, but 5% when comparing the 1% low data.

Here we see in the settings for low quality that the performance is practically identical to that of the 2080 Ti. The 3700X was only 3% faster compared to the average frame rate, but that's also within the margin of error.

We see a 7% performance advantage for the 3700X when we use the slower 2060 Super, not a big margin, but this shows that the Ryzen CPU is slightly faster in this title. It's worth noting that with these competitive settings, every CPU activates above 250 fps at all times.

The CPU utilization can be increased by increasing the resolution. Here the 10600K value drops when using the RTX 2080 Ti and is 17% behind the 3700X when comparing the 1% low data, although the average frame rate is more even. If we then use the 2060 Super, we find results that are largely tied to the GPU.

PUBG is a title that we know works better with Intel CPUs if the high quality settings are used. It is therefore not surprising that Ryzen loses with very low quality when the default setting is activated. The 10600K was up to 17% faster when using the RTX 2080 Ti with 1080p and kept the frame rate above 200 fps at all times.

If you fall back on the RTX 2060 Super, the results are limited to the GPU and now there is no difference between the processors.

We basically see the same margins at 1440p for both GPUs. The 10600K was up to 20% faster with the RTX 2080 Ti and only 4% faster with the 2060 Super.

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare frame rates with the low quality settings are very competitive, the 10600K was 5% faster at most.

At 1440p we see almost the same thing. The 10600K was up to 7% faster compared to the 1% low data versus the RTX 2080 Ti, but the overall experience was similar.

Rocket League has a cap of 250 fps. However, you can remove them by editing a configuration file. That's exactly what we did for testing. The 10600K destroyed the 3700X in the Rocket League, with the limits removed, and increased the performance by 1% with the RTX 2080 Ti by almost 40% and the average frame rate by 24%.

If you use a more realistic GPU for this title, the edges are neutralized, and now the 3700X and 10600K deliver the same performance as the RTX 2060 Super.

The margins at 1080p with the RTX 2080 Ti close significantly at 1440p and now the Intel processor is up to 22% faster. The 10600K is clearly the faster CPU in the Rocket League, with the limits removed. However, we are asking how useful this extra power is, especially given the fact that the game has a cap of 250 fps by default.

Next we have World of Tanks that use the HD client, but with minimum quality settings enabled. Here we see a strong CPU bottleneck because both the RTX 2080 Ti and the 2060 Super have the same performance level. We watch over 200 fps at all times, which makes the 10600K up to 13% faster. This is another game where I'm not sure if anyone can benefit from hitting more than 200 fps. Therefore, the distance between these AMD and Intel processors can be irrelevant.

The 1440p results show how tightly the CPU was bound in the previous set. They show practically the same numbers, whereby both CPUs enable over 200 fps at any time.

There is not much more to say on this topic. As we understand it, World of Tanks is a relatively slow tank shooter, so driving well over 200 fps may not be entirely beneficial.

The last game we tested is War Thunder, which shows some pretty wild frame rates with either GPU or CPU. In both cases we are CPU-bound and always see well over 350 fps.

Nothing changes at 1440p. Here the 10600K is up to 14% faster, but the 3700X has dropped to just 348 fps, so the edges are largely irrelevant at this point.

This last graphic shows the performance of both CPUs on average of the 9 games tested. With the RTX 2080 Ti, the 10600K was 10% faster than the 3700X when comparing the 1% low data, but only 2% faster with the RTX 2060 Super. We think it's fair to say that for most of you, the difference in gaming performance between these two CPUs will be close to zero.

Closing remarks

There were certainly some surprising results, but overall, we think this comparison went as expected. In our Core i5-10600K test, we found that the Intel processor was 6% faster on average than the Ryzen 7 3700X. Presets of high to highest quality were used. In this test, we found the margin increased to 7% or 10% when we focus on the 1% low data when low quality settings are run in a number of competition titles.

This does not change what we said in our review. For those of you who missed it, we basically said that if you want to get maximum performance in most games, you will get 10600K, but for the most part you won't be able to tell the difference. In this case, we have recommended the 3700X for its higher productivity performance, which you will often benefit from, and we also expect the two additional cores to be useful later.

Looking back at the results, we saw comparable performance in Battlefield V and Call of Duty Modern Warfare, while the 3700X was faster in Counter-Strike, where we averaged well over 300 fps, and a little faster in Rainbow Six Siege, where we looked over were an average of 400 fps.

Likewise, the 10600K was faster in Fortnite, another title in which both CPUs allowed an average of over 300 fps. In the Rocket League, both hit more than 300 fps at all times, just like World of Tanks, and then PUBG, where both were well over 200 fps on average. How important is this additional service really?

For example, if you switch from 300 to 330 fps, which is a 10% increase, you will see a 0.3 ms increase in latency. Once you exceed the refresh rate of almost all modern monitors, the only benefit is input latency, and we would say that 0.3 ms is imperceptible to virtually everyone.

The bottom line is the Core i5-10600K is a pretty good gaming CPU. You may pay a little more for the cooler and motherboard, but in terms of value, it does pretty well in a game-only scenario. However, if the 10600K is a good gaming CPU, so is the 3700X, and there is literally no chance that the 10600K will be the faster gaming CPU in 3 years. In the worst case for AMD, the margins remain the same. So choose your favorite platform and keep playing!

Purchasing links:
  • AMD Ryzen 7 3700X on Amazon
  • AMD Ryzen 5 3600 on Amazon
  • Intel Core i5-10600K at Amazon (soon?)
  • Intel Core i7-10700K at Amazon
  • Intel Core i9-10900K at Amazon
  • AMD Ryzen 9 3900X at Amazon
  • GeForce RTX 2060 Super on Amazon
  • GeForce RTX 2080 Ti on Amazon

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *