Battlefield V i5 8600K vs. Ryzen 5 2600X

37

Video is ready, Click Here to View ×


AMD Ryzen 5 2600X vs. Intel Core i5-8600K performance comparison.
GPU MSI GeForce GTX 1080 Ti GAMING X 11G.

Benchmark rig specs #1
● CPU: Intel Core i5-8600K 4.8GHz, Hexa Core / Coffee Lake
● Cooler: Corsair Hydro Series H55
● GPU: MSI GeForce GTX 1080 Ti GAMING X 11G
● Motherboard: MSI Z370 GAMING PRO CARBON
● PSU: MODECOM VOLCANO 750W 120mm 80 Plus
● RAM: G.Skill Trident Z RGB DDR4 16GB (2x8GB) 3000MHz CL16 1.35V XMP 2.0
● SSD: Samsung SSD 960 EVO NVMe M.2 250GB
● System:…

Share.

About Author

37 Comments

  1. I would love to see this with quicker ram! I'm curious if it would affect the results. With DX 12, I believe my 2600 runs better than this with a RX 580 and 8GB 3200 Mhz ram. I would need to do the same test to know for sure, though.

  2. I built a i5-9600K (which is just a 100mhz higher clocked 8600K with a soldered stim) and the entire build was only $40.00 plus tax more than the Ryzen 2600X build I did for a family member at the exact same time. Clock for clock 4.8 GHZ on the exact same cas 15 3000 MHZ RAM and exact same Video card the i5-9600K stayed ahead the entire time. Then I swapped in some Corsair Dominator Platinum 3200 MHZ RAM with looser timings than the low timing Gskill that was meant for the Ryzen system and the i5-9600K pull ahead even further, the 2600X didn't like the looser timings and the 9600K just didn't care. Both CPUs at 4.575 GHZ the 9600K versus the 2600x with CAS 15 3000MHZ RAM = 17% on average better performance with 11% gains lowest for the 9600K over the 2600X and right around 20-25% better on best with cas 15 3000MHZ Gskill..   Both CPUs clocked at 4.8 GHZ with Dominator 3200 MHZ with cas 16 the i5-9600K again pulled ahead a bit more lowest gain was 14% and the highest gain was 27% according to my results.. Now this doesn't represent every game title out there, I had what was in my Nephew's Steam Library and mine, only the same titles were tested, 8 titles total. These were brand spanking new builds both High end Asus boards, not the mid range.

  3. Intel fanboys bashing AMD fanboys … So what? They are both processors, they both cost money, they both have different advantages. Bashing one "group" is really pointless and just proves you're an immature twat. If anything, thank AMD for the 9900k because it would not be here yet if not for Ryzen.

  4. One interesting thing is that Ryzen CPUs were showing higher FPS numbers on VEGA cards than GTX/RTX cards (think this was tested by hardware Unboxed). Not a deal breaker, but an interesting thing

  5. Оставь частоту процессора в стоке, память можно и разогнать, вот тогда и сравни, тут банально частота зарешала, как не крути, а игры до сих пор нормально не научились в многопоток. Кто будет писать что райзен слил подсчитайте стоимость каждой из платформ, райзен гонится любой и даже на недорогих мамках, а вот интелу переплати за проц с буквой К, купи дорогую мамку на Z которая стоит как вся платформа на АМД. Псдц

  6. I've owned Intel CPU for several year and decided to buy my first AMD CPU. Purchased the R5 Ryzen 2600, MSI B450 Tomahawk, and 16GB G.Skill 3200 CL16 rams for $195 (sold old hardware). First impression was wow AMD CPU is amazing. I've gain even more FPS when tightening the timing on the ram depending on game averaging 6-15+ FPS with stock CPU speed. Overclocked the 2600 to 4.3Ghz and it really shine. At this point I'm averaging 100-200+ FPS on my 1080P 144hz freesync monitor. If I do decide to upgrade when Ryzen 2 is release I'll only need to spend money on the CPU since it's still using the AM4 socket. This was the biggest deciding factor when I upgraded last month. I'm a fanboy of money! I would love to keep using intel but the cost of the CPU and motherboard due to a new socket would drain me of my hard earn money. If you have a money tree in your back yard then by all mean Intel is the way to go, If you don't, AMD CPU will provide more than adequate gaming performance for your money. My 2 cents.

Leave A Reply