cpu upgrade ryzen 5 2600 or i5 9400f

Hey I'm about to upgrade my CPU and I need some help to decide between R5 2600 or I5 9400f. I've been searching and i found that R5 2600 has more possibility of upgrade relation $$$ than the i5 9400, and there is a strong probability I go for the r5 2600 platform but... I'm a little concerned about the temperature I've heard it reach around 70° very easy, while the i5 temperature rarely reaches 60°. So what you guys think? The games i'm interested playing are games like RE remakes, Lost Ark and GW 2 of course.

PS: both upgrade kits are pratically the same price here in my country buying online.

Don't upgrade your CPU based on temperature...Ryzen 5 2600 has far superior multi-threaded performance in anything not using AVX2 instructions as it has to combine two 128-bit AVX units to achieve ir. Full speed AVX2 instructions were added onto Ryzen 3rd gen.The i5-9400F has 4.1GHz boost clock and a locked multiplier (both CPUs are six cores but this one lacks hyperthreding) so it really isn't superior by much in single threaded/low thread count scenarios such as older game engines. Realistically it's about 10% in a quadcore scenario.

This review pits Ryzen 5 2600X vs i5-9400Fhttps://www.techspot.com/review/1829-intel-core-i5-9400f-vs-amd-ryzen-5-2600x/

For general computing the Ryzen 5 2600X can take advantage of multi-threading capabilities and will be considerably faster than the 9400F on heavy application workloads. Remember the 9400F is only marginally faster than the 8400, so you can safely use the older model as a measuring stick. For rendering and encoding workloads the 2600X is anywhere from 30 to 50% faster.

For those wondering about operating temperatures, using the box coolers both CPUs run at a little over 70 degrees with an ambient room temperature of 21 degrees. However where AMD's Wraith Spire is whisper quiet in our Blender stress test, the Intel box cooler sounds like a jet engine when paired with the 9400F. Therefore, you’ll want to spend at least another $25 on a decent cooler to make the thing bearable.

If you're mostly playing games on your PC, you will be happy buying either processor. Both proved to be solid options and are evenly matched with a slight advantage to the Intel chip if you don't tune up the Ryzen processor.This is a review pitting ryzen 5 2600 against i5-8400 (similar to i5 9400F but 4.0GHz instead of 4.1GHz)https://www.techspot.com/review/1627-core-i5-8400-vs-ryzen-5-2600/Moving to 1080p we see all margins reduced and here overclocking only provided a 13% performance increase and this meant the 2600 was 7% faster than the 8400 for the 1% low result and just 3% for the average frame rate.The Core i5-8400 was faster in more games out of the box but starts to lose out once the Ryzen 5 2600’s overclocked

@"Infusion.7149" said:Don't upgrade your CPU based on temperature...Ryzen 5 2600 has far superior multi-threaded performance in anything not using AVX2 instructions as it has to combine two 128-bit AVX units to achieve ir. Full speed AVX2 instructions were added onto Ryzen 3rd gen.The i5-9400F has 4.1GHz boost clock and a locked multiplier (both CPUs are six cores but this one lacks hyperthreding) so it really isn't superior by much in single threaded/low thread count scenarios such as older game engines. Realistically it's about 10% in a quadcore scenario.

This review pits Ryzen 5 2600X vs i5-9400Fhttps://www.techspot.com/review/1829-intel-core-i5-9400f-vs-amd-ryzen-5-2600x/

For general computing the Ryzen 5 2600X can take advantage of multi-threading capabilities and will be considerably faster than the 9400F on heavy application workloads. Remember the 9400F is only marginally faster than the 8400, so you can safely use the older model as a measuring stick. For rendering and encoding workloads the 2600X is anywhere from 30 to 50% faster.

For those wondering about operating temperatures, using the box coolers both CPUs run at a little over 70 degrees with an ambient room temperature of 21 degrees. However where AMD's Wraith Spire is whisper quiet in our Blender stress test, the Intel box cooler sounds like a jet engine when paired with the 9400F. Therefore, you’ll want to spend at least another $25 on a decent cooler to make the thing bearable.

If you're mostly playing games on your PC, you will be happy buying either processor. Both proved to be solid options and are evenly matched with a slight advantage to the Intel chip if you don't tune up the Ryzen processor.This is a review pitting ryzen 5 2600 against i5-8400 (similar to i5 9400F but 4.0GHz instead of 4.1GHz)

https://www.techspot.com/review/1627-core-i5-8400-vs-ryzen-5-2600/

Moving to 1080p we see all margins reduced and here overclocking only provided a 13% performance increase and this meant the 2600 was 7% faster than the 8400 for the 1% low result and just 3% for the average frame rate.The Core i5-8400 was faster in more games out of the box but starts to lose out once the Ryzen 5 2600’s overclocked

Hmm I see thanks for the info i'll do some more research.

The 9400 will generate much higher fps in GW2 than the 2600.

You waste your time when you watch reviews of other games. GW2 is an old DX9 game that benefits only from up to 6 cores and needs as much IPC performance and clock speed as possible. Both is low on the 2600. That CPU is better than the 9400 in games than can make use of its 12 threads. GW2 can't.

The resident evil remakes do also run better on the 9400 (but it doesn't matter as both CPUs reach framerates way above 60 in these games).

I can't say anything about lost ark.

@KrHome.1920 said:The 9400 will generate much higher fps in GW2 than the 2600.

You waste your time when you watch reviews of other games. GW2 is an old DX9 game that benefits only from up to 6 cores and needs as much IPC performance and clock speed as possible. Both is low on the 2600. That CPU is better than the 9400 in games than can make use of its 12 threads. GW2 can't.

The resident evil remakes do also run better on the 9400 (but it doesn't matter as both CPUs reach framerates way above 60 in these games).

I can't say anything about lost ark.

Intel always will be better than AMD but also more expensive, on the other hand AMD are WAAAY cheaper and the upgrade possibilities and better than intel. The performance of both AMD and intel are almost same the difference is just some frames depending the game, I aways was a big fan of intel but nowadays the AMD processors are very decent and the best part is the price xD.

@"ancafr.9274" said:Hey I'm about to upgrade my CPU and I need some help to decide between R5 2600 or I5 9400f. I've been searching and i found that R5 2600 has more possibility of upgrade relation $$$ than the i5 9400, and there is a strong probability I go for the r5 2600 platform but... I'm a little concerned about the temperature I've heard it reach around 70° very easy, while the i5 temperature rarely reaches 60°. So what you guys think? The games i'm interested playing are games like RE remakes, Lost Ark and GW 2 of course.

PS: both upgrade kits are pratically the same price here in my country buying online.

I wouldn't choose any of these 2 and instead opt for the much better AMD 3600 (non X). Not only the 3600 matches and sometimes beats the 9400F but it also offers 6 more threads, the price is slightly higher but totally worth it in the long run. Benchmark:

Also if you're concerned about temperatures, I'm running the older 1700X that was released in 2017 using the Wraith Prism cooler and I've rarely seen it go beyond 65 degrees. I'm not trying to sound like an AMD fanboy but the CPU's have come so far that I can hardly recommend Intel.

I haven't seen the mention but Intel current sockets are a dead platform, in the long term AMD is the better investment altogether until Intel has a answer in the coming years.

@ArmoredVehicle.2849 Nah there's no fanboyism, factually as of today AMD is superior in every segments of the market they participate against Intel. (Not counting stuff like Wifi, Optane or certain AVX instructions since they are exclusive or unsupported by AMD.)

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 isn't that much slower than the i5-9400F in low threaded scenarios because the boost clock on i5-9400F is low (4.1GHz) so you're only looking at IPC differences there. In addition, it is a sharp contrast to when the 1st gen Ryzen chips were launched because back then Intel did not have to push out security fixes for Spectre + Meltdown and other vulnerabilities which hurt their speculative execution (i.e. "guessing" to get faster effective speeds by insecure memory/cache handling practices). Clockspeeds on Ryzen 1st gen dipped drastically once loaded with more than 2 threads , whereas the 2nd and 3rd gen especially have far superior boost algorithms. Even out of the box Ryzen 2nd gen vs locked i5 ,you're talking about within 10% margin and that is across low thread count scenarios (less than four cores) and not multithreaded ones.

Ryzen chips are not another CMT (Cluster multithreaded) chip like Bulldozer (FX-9590/FX-8150/etc), so that AMD stigma of years ago should be long gone. The architecture is simultaneous multithreaded / "hyper threaded". If it were a poor CPU then major high performance computing industry giants such as Dept of energy, Oracle Cloud, Amazon web services, microsoft azure, baidu, etc would not adopt the EPYC chip (which uses Ryzen's Zen architecture). Maybe some people are too young to remember a time where AMD was faster (AMD Athlon 64) but Intel paid OEMs off just so that they could sell their Pentium 4 Netburst chips. Not surprisingly up until the Bulldozer fiasco, AMD Opterons were also used in the server space rather than just Intel chips.

Also if using GW2 as a baseline, either CPU will be more than enough so it comes down to which CPU is better overall. That includes memory costs, optional CPU cooler costs, motherboard costs, upgrade ability.In addition, specifically for GW2:i5-8400 is about 50 FPS with a GTX 1050 Ti / GTX 1060 level GPU: https://www.userbenchmark.com/PCGame/FPS-Estimates-Guild-Wars-2/3733/0.355255.0.1080p.0Ryzen 5 2600 about 50 FPS with GTX 1060 level GPU , https://www.userbenchmark.com/PCGame/FPS-Estimates-Guild-Wars-2/3733/0.476362.0.0.0

The question was between those two CPUs, not "hurrdurr Intel is better". Of course given all options, a 3rd gen Ryzen chip is faster than a 9th gen locked Intel chip because they compete with unlocked i7-9700K/i9-9900K/i9-9900KS , packing not only higher turbo than 2nd gen (and better boost algorithm) but also higher IPC.

@"Infusion.7149" said:Also if using GW2 as a baseline, either CPU will be more than enough so it comes down to which CPU is better overall. That includes memory costs, optional CPU cooler costs, motherboard costs, upgrade ability.In addition, specifically for GW2:i5-8400 is about 50 FPS with a GTX 1050 Ti / GTX 1060 level GPU: https://www.userbenchmark.com/PCGame/FPS-Estimates-Guild-Wars-2/3733/0.355255.0.1080p.0Ryzen 5 2600 about 50 FPS with GTX 1060 level GPU , https://www.userbenchmark.com/PCGame/FPS-Estimates-Guild-Wars-2/3733/0.476362.0.0.0

I'm running the game now on a i3 4160 8GB ram gtx 750 ti frame locked on 60 and I having a satisfatory gameplay experience and my processor is just a i3 not even i5, the R5 2600 combined with a gtx 1050 or rx 570 will be very nice to play many games aiming the 60FPS that is my aim. And that If i play on Ultra Full HD medium-high+, if I set to 900p or even full HD low-medium the results will be way better and get much more frames and the games are still pretty. I preffer stability over beauty.

My setting http://www.imagebam.com/image/c04b371338723595