New PC Build Help

[teamkiller]

The i7 7700k is 100$ cheaper then the Ryzen 1600????? I would like to see a link to that

I'm really starting to think there are many people on this forum who post without any research.... and then proceed to post false information. The 7700k will remain in the 300$ range. Unless Intel decides to drop its price to compete better (very unlikely). The 1600 will remain the Midline-budget processor until at least coffeelake.

P.S. Hate to break it to you c0rnel AMD hasn't always been behind Intel. If you mean in the last 8 years sure. AMD has caught up to Intel's current line up outside of single core operations. AMDs 1700 will beat any of Intel's mainstream line up for workstations. When it comes to gaming streaming and other multitasking, the 1700 can beat the i7 7700k. The only reason the i7 7700k is still top dog for gaming is because it can be OC'd to a higher clock speed and does have a higher IPC. This makes it stronger for gaming because many games still do not look past 4 cores.

[Lathais]

The 7700k is $100 cheaper and slightly faster chip. No reason to buy AMD's Ryzen. AMD has always been behind Intel in performance.

Say what?

Here's the cheapest 7700K I could find, it's actually out of stock so you'll really pay more than that:
$308.87: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MXSI216/?tag=pcpapi-20

Here's the cheapest R5 1600 I could find, it's in stock:
$197.98: http://www.outletpc.com/ay9499-amd-r...AMD%2B-%2BzOOS

Which one is $100 cheaper than the other? Maybe you are talking about the 1800X, but it's kind of ridiculous to do so. The 7700K is a 4c/8t CPU. The 1600 is already 6c/12t with the 1800X being 8c/16t. If you want to compare something from intel to the 1800X compare it to their 8c/16t CPU:

$599.99 https://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...D=3938566&SID=

$419.99 https://www.amazon.com/dp/B06W9JXK4G/?tag=pcpapi-20

Which one is almost $200 cheaper? Not the intel.

Going back to 7700k vs 1600, because it's really stupid to compare to the 1800X, with the 7700k you also need to buy a cooler. K series intel CPUs don't come with them. The R5 1600 does. Average cost of a B350 Motherboard for the 1600 is also lower than the average cost of a Z270 Motherboard you need for the 7700k.

So really, the 7700k is cheaper? Hell, a Ryzen 1600 Build is actually about $25 cheaper than an i5-7600K build, and you are gonna try to say that the the i7 from this gen is cheaper than the i5?

R5 1600:
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD - Ryzen 5 1600 3.2GHz 6-Core Processor ($197.88 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: ASRock - AB350M Pro4 Micro ATX AM4 Motherboard ($77.98 @ Newegg)
Total: $275.86
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-07-21 09:40 EDT-0400

i5-7600K:
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel - Core i5-7600K 3.8GHz Quad-Core Processor ($224.68 @ OutletPC)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master - Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($24.88 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: ASRock - Z270 Pro4 ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($93.49 @ Amazon)
Total: $343.05
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-07-21 09:40 EDT-0400

Really? The i7 build is gonna be cheaper than that?

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel - Core i7-7700K 4.2GHz Quad-Core Processor ($323.89 @ OutletPC)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master - Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($24.88 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: ASRock - Z270 Pro4 ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($93.49 @ Amazon)
Total: $442.26
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-07-21 09:41 EDT-0400

Yeah, sure looks like intel is cheaper.

I'm convinced your comparing to the 1800X though, which again, is stupid. If you want to compare to the 1800X, you compare it to it's competition:

To be fair to intel, I've stepped up to a nicer cooler for the 1800X than I gave the 7600k/7700k and stepped up from B350 to X370.
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD - Ryzen 7 1800X 3.6GHz 8-Core Processor ($419.99 @ Amazon)
CPU Cooler: be quiet! - Dark Rock 3 67.8 CFM Fluid Dynamic Bearing CPU Cooler ($64.88 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: ASRock - X370 GAMING X ATX AM4 Motherboard ($111.98 @ Newegg)
Total: $596.85
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-07-21 09:43 EDT-0400

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel - Core i7-7820X 3.6GHz 8-Core Processor ($678.75 @ Amazon)
Total: $678.75
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-07-21 09:44 EDT-0400

I don't even need to put a cooler and a motherboard. The CPU by itself is already more expensive than the CPU/Cooler/Motherboard Combo from AMD. Suppose I do though:
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel - Core i7-7820X 3.6GHz 8-Core Processor ($678.75 @ Amazon)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master - Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($24.88 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: MSI - X299 RAIDER ATX LGA2066 Motherboard ($219.49 @ OutletPC)
Total: $923.12
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-07-21 09:46 EDT-0400

Wowza. I even went with a cheap cooler, so not gonna get much of an OC out of that thing. Add another $80 or so to get one worth using on this type of hardware. Also, look how much more those motherboards are. After adding in a better cooler, we are talking about a $325 or so difference. The intel is a lot more expensive.

[c0rnel]

The Ryzen 1800 I was referring to.

[pansertjald]

The Ryzen 1800 I was referring to.

And why where you referring to the Ryzen 1800?. Non in the thread was talking about it

[Lathais]

The Ryzen 1800 I was referring to.

Ok, again, why would you compare an 8c/16t CPU to a 4c/8t? That's just stupid and pointless. The competition for the 7700k is not the 1800, it's actually the low-end R5's, since those are also 4c/8t CPUs. However, you can step up to the higher end R5's and get 2 more cores and 4 more threads and still be in the same price range as the 7700k.

[c0rnel]

Ok, again, why would you compare an 8c/16t CPU to a 4c/8t? That's just stupid and pointless. The competition for the 7700k is not the 1800, it's actually the low-end R5's, since those are also 4c/8t CPUs. However, you can step up to the higher end R5's and get 2 more cores and 4 more threads and still be in the same price range as the 7700k.

When I'm looking to compare cpus I take the best current intel and amd chips (excluding the expensive 7900 intel processor) and pit them against each other. The Ryzen's 5 competitor is the I3. Look at the benchmarks out there, don't ignore the proof. In just about any game the 7700k beats the Ryzen 7 1800. The Ryzen 1800 is the best chip amd has to offer. It outperforms the R5 in gaming and non-gaming scenarios and it is more expensive and not quite as fast as the 7700k. If this doesn't make sense to you than again I advise to check out the multitude of benchmarks out there. It doesn't make sense to compare the R5 to the 7700k if the R7 is a faster chip. Only reason why you bring up the R5 is because it's less cheaper than the r7 and you want the price to be in your favor but it's not. Just realize Intel has and has done better chips and AMD needs to come up with something better.

Bottom line: 7700k>R7>R5....

[pansertjald]

When I'm looking to compare cpus I take the best current intel and amd chips (excluding the expensive 7900 intel processor) and pit them against each other. The Ryzen's 5 competitor is the I3. Look at the benchmarks out there, don't ignore the proof. In just about any game the 7700k beats the Ryzen 7 1800. The Ryzen 1800 is the best chip amd has to offer. It outperforms the R5 in gaming and non-gaming scenarios and it is more expensive and not quite as fast as the 7700k. If this doesn't make sense to you than again I advise to check out the multitude of benchmarks out there. It doesn't make sense to compare the R5 to the 7700k if the R7 is a faster chip. Only reason why you bring up the R5 is because it's less cheaper than the r7 and you want the price to be in your favor but it's not. Just realize Intel has and has done better chips and AMD needs to come up with something better.

Bottom line: 7700k>R7>R5....

Have you been living under a rock?

It has allready been said in this thread that the Intel i7-7700k is still the king of gaming. The Ryzen 1800/1700/1600 is kings of heavy multithreaded work load

If you do more then gaming then you go the Ryzen way. If you only game, then you go the i7 7700k way. Non of the other Intel cpus are worth it

And no the Ryzen R5 is not the competitor to the i3. The R3 is the competitor to i3, and even then the R3 has 4c where the i3 only has 2

[teamkiller]

When I'm looking to compare cpus I take the best current intel and amd chips (excluding the expensive 7900 intel processor) and pit them against each other. The Ryzen's 5 competitor is the I3. Look at the benchmarks out there, don't ignore the proof. In just about any game the 7700k beats the Ryzen 7 1800. The Ryzen 1800 is the best chip amd has to offer. It outperforms the R5 in gaming and non-gaming scenarios and it is more expensive and not quite as fast as the 7700k. If this doesn't make sense to you than again I advise to check out the multitude of benchmarks out there. It doesn't make sense to compare the R5 to the 7700k if the R7 is a faster chip. Only reason why you bring up the R5 is because it's less cheaper than the r7 and you want the price to be in your favor but it's not. Just realize Intel has and has done better chips and AMD needs to come up with something better.

Bottom line: 7700k>R7>R5....

False. 7700k>R5>=R7 for gaming. The R5 chips specifically the 1600 and 1600x are literally the 1800x (1600x) and the 1700x (1600) chips with 2 cores turned off/disabled. The 1800x sure will show improvements in non-gaming but in gaming the difference will be under 1%. The 1800x has only one real buyer in the market. Content producers who do not want to bother with overclocking and want to keep their budget low. The 1600x will be beat by the 7700k no one is arguing that. What we are arguing is your comparison of an 1800x (not worth it for gaming as your paying a premium for 2 more cores that will not improve gaming performance) vs the 7700k when the real comparison would be a 1600(x) to the 7700k (i list the 1600 as you can overclock it to within 50mhz of the 1600x overclocked).

As per http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare...00X/3916vs3920

You will see the 1800x and 1600x are in fact within 1% of each other. This is why we compare the 1600x to the 7700k paying $190 for a 1% increase is not worth it. (gaming right now cares about single core and sometimes quad core speeds)

As i posted in another thread, The 7700k is a 67% increase in cost $330 for the chip and 130+ for the MoBo while the 1600 is $210 and $70-90 for the MoBo. This increase in cost on average only gives a gain of about 20-25% in gaming (This is only during very heavy single core loads and DX11.) This gain is seen as a theoretical improvement of 10-18 FPS. Most of your heavy loads such as wow, you will see an improvement from 40 frames on a ryzen to 50 frames on the 7700k. The saved money can be used for getting an improved GPU. This can often times have a larger net gain on streaming and newer gaming titles.

I realize you like the 7700k, most people will not debate that it is the top of the line chip right now for gaming. What people will debate however is if its worth the cost difference. You're locked into a dying platform as intel is moving to a V2 of the same motherboard (money grab) that will be backwards compatible but is still not out. AM4 however will be out for at least the next CPU lineup from AMD. So paying more money that your locked into and can never upgrade or a system that will have expand-ability in the next 5 years that may surpass the 7700k. I would say surpass it, but as X299 has shown that may not happen as IPCs may stagnate or drop off as with speeds as Intel and AMD both shift to higher core count processors.

[Lathais]

When I'm looking to compare cpus I take the best current intel and amd chips (excluding the expensive 7900 intel processor) and pit them against each other. The Ryzen's 5 competitor is the I3. Look at the benchmarks out there, don't ignore the proof. In just about any game the 7700k beats the Ryzen 7 1800. The Ryzen 1800 is the best chip amd has to offer. It outperforms the R5 in gaming and non-gaming scenarios and it is more expensive and not quite as fast as the 7700k. If this doesn't make sense to you than again I advise to check out the multitude of benchmarks out there. It doesn't make sense to compare the R5 to the 7700k if the R7 is a faster chip. Only reason why you bring up the R5 is because it's less cheaper than the r7 and you want the price to be in your favor but it's not. Just realize Intel has and has done better chips and AMD needs to come up with something better.

Bottom line: 7700k>R7>R5....

Ok, so will exclude the 7820x, which is the competition for the 1800x, but not exclude the 1800x. Ok. Gotcha. Basic intel fanboyism.

Also, no, the the R5's are 6c/12t and 4c/8t. I3's are 2c/4t. In what worl do thosr compete? The competition for the i3s are the R3s, which are 4c/4t. You obviously have no clue.


Also, noone is saying that the 7700k is not still the king of gaming. However, unless you have a monitor better than a 1080p@60hz, your monitor is not capable of dispkaying the difference between a 1600 and a 7700k. The difference in gaming is there, but it us pretty minimal. In nearly all other tasks besides gaming thougb, the 1600 will blow any intel 4 core CPU out of tge water. With games lime BF1 already starying to use more cores, and AMD APUs in modern consoles, you can bet that in the coming years, games will start running better on AMDs.