As a video editor, should I want for Intel's response to Ryzen?

[zijin_cheng]

I currently have a pretty old gaming computer that I want to upgrade because I use this same computer for video editing.

I live in Canada so I'm currently looking at the Ryzen 1600X as the CPU I'm building around in order to achieve the best render times below a $300CAD price point and do some gaming as well.

I'm hearing some rumours that Intel is going to respond with lowered prices on their parts, and if the most important thing in my build is video editing, should I wait? Or should I just take the plunge and start my build with the 1600X?

I'm in no rush as my current computer still works, I'm going to be purchasing parts on sale over the next few months.

And speaking of which, I have a secondary question, if I purchase a CPU and/or motherboard, is there any way to test whether it works if I don't purchase the rest of the items before the return period runs out?

 

[scannall]

Nothing coming from Intel, at that price point will work as well as the 1600X. Perhaps get your CPU and motherboard last, at the same time would be the best way to make sure everything works. Though, by that time the AM4 bios should be pretty solid.

 

[ddogg]

Get the 1600x or the 1700 if you can afford it. Both are great workstation CPUs. I recently upgraded my HTPC from an i5 4590 to a 1700x and couldn't have been happier.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

[Keljian]

Because the 1700 has a heatsink included, it is a better buy than the 1600x for your use.

 

[zijin_cheng]

Thanks everyone, and that's a good idea, getting my Mobo/CPU last. That way I can test hard drives, video cards on my current computer. I'm not taking anything out though because the old computer is going to my sister so she can play SWTOR on high. I'm sure some of you vomited when you heard that.

That's good, you guys have cemented my thought process, I'm going with a Ryzen. Now to picking between a 1600/1700. the 1600 can be had for $280 on sale while the 1700 is $400CAD, which is a lot. Can any video editors speak to the rendering speed difference between those two? Review benchmarks don't show that big a difference.

Also I won't be overclocking at all either.

 

[nathanddrews]

I can't speak for Canada, but I've seen US-based retailers and etailers have sales on the 1700 for $299USD multiple times since launch, plus it has a nice cooler. Intel won't have a price-competitive 8C/16T chip until their volume sales are threatened.

Can any video editors speak to the rendering speed difference between those two? Review benchmarks don't show that big a difference.

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/a...2017-AMD-Ryzen-7-1700X-1800X-Performance-909/

Oops, this reviews the 1700X vs the 1800X, not the 1600X. I think you can assume similar single-threaded performance from a 1600X, but 25% fewer cores/threads will affect your multi-threaded workloads.

 

[Zstream]

I can't speak for Canada, but I've seen US-based retailers and etailers have sales on the 1700 for $299USD multiple times since launch, plus it has a nice cooler. Intel won't have a price-competitive 8C/16T chip until their volume sales are threatened.



https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/a...2017-AMD-Ryzen-7-1700X-1800X-Performance-909/

Oops, this reviews the 1700X vs the 1800X, not the 1600X. I think you can assume similar single-threaded performance from a 1600X, but 25% fewer cores/threads will affect your multi-threaded workloads.

That's actually old now. Adobe just released a new version on the 19th improving support and optimization for Ryzen.

 

[nathanddrews]

That's actually old now. Adobe just released a new version on the 19th improving support and optimization for Ryzen.

Has anyone done benchmarks on the update? This is all assuming that the OP uses Adobe...

Oh dang!

 

[zijin_cheng]

Yes I use Premiere, sometimes Da Vinci Resolve as well. Can I assume that multithreaded performance drops are perfectly linear with core count and frequency? Since the 1600X is just a 1700 with 2 cores disabled. Barring binning factors and other stuff like that of course.

And since I don't OC or go Crossfire, a B350 is more than enough right? I'm assuming there are no performance drops on B350 vs the more premium AM4 mobos

 

[ddogg]

Yes I use Premiere, sometimes Da Vinci Resolve as well. Can I assume that multithreaded performance drops are perfectly linear with core count and frequency? Since the 1600X is just a 1700 with 2 cores disabled. Barring binning factors and other stuff like that of course.

And since I don't OC or go Crossfire, a B350 is more than enough right? I'm assuming there are no performance drops on B350 vs the more premium AM4 mobos

B350 is good enough. X370 is targeted more towards gamers

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

[Chicken76]

That's good, you guys have cemented my thought process, I'm going with a Ryzen. Now to picking between a 1600/1700. the 1600 can be had for $280 on sale while the 1700 is $400CAD, which is a lot.

Keep in mind the 1600X doesn't come with a cooler, whereas the 1700 (non-X) does. When you factor in the cost of a decent cooler, the difference in price between the two is not that big anymore.

 

[zijin_cheng]

B350 is good enough. X370 is targeted more towards gamers

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Haha I'm a gamer as well, but my cheapness takes precedence, so B350 it is.

 

[zijin_cheng]

Keep in mind the 1600X doesn't come with a cooler, whereas the 1700 (non-X) does. When you factor in the cost of a decent cooler, the difference in price between the two is not that big anymore.

What! I did not know that. Guess I'll wait for the 1700 to go on sale to see how big the price difference is.

 

[Glo.]

For content creation nothing will beat Ryzen price/performance ratio, unless Intel will tie them. 350$ 8 core CPU from Intel?

Highly unlikely. Also the cost of AM4 platform as a whole will be lower than Intels. You have to bare in mind that AM4 platform MoBos cost roughly the same as MoBos for Socket 1151. Socket 2066/2011-3 are more expensive.

 

[zijin_cheng]

For content creation nothing will beat Ryzen price/performance ratio, unless Intel will tie them. 350$ 8 core CPU from Intel?

Highly unlikely. Also the cost of AM4 platform as a whole will be lower than Intels. You have to bare in mind that AM4 platform MoBos cost roughly the same as MoBos for Socket 1151. Socket 2066/2011-3 are more expensive.

Ah that I knew but never considered. Haswell-Es are a lot more expensive than even X370s arent they. For me I always buy the cheapest ATX mobo I can find, which usually runs me $100.

 

[LTC8K6]

If you don't need the system right now, then it's logical to wait and check out Intel's offerings.

It's certainly possible that an Intel 6 core chip could be faster than an AMD 8 core chip, and Coffee Lake should be reasonably priced.

But if you need a system within a month or so, then RyZen is your logical choice. Intel's RyZen competition won't be out soon enough for you.

 

[Mockingbird]

Content creation is where Ryzen really blows Core right out of the water.

Get the Ryzen 7 1700.

Knowing Intel, it's offerings [Coffee Lake] definitely wouldn't be cheaper than AMD's.

 

[Rifter]

Yeah intel may have something better, but rest assured it will cost alot more. Intel just cannot match Ryzen for price/perf. So unless money is no object Ryzen is the way to go. If money is not an issue though a high end intel system will be faster.

 

[Jan Olšan]

If you don't need the system right now, then it's logical to wait and check out Intel's offerings.

I don't think Intel will offer superior price/performance ratio *in multithread performance*. That would go against everything we have seen so far, even with FX.

Coffee Lake will probably be about better ST, worse MT, kinda like Kaby Lake, but with less MT deficit. An exception to this could be running x265 encoding, maybe, thanks to heavy AVX2 use (which is not really replicated by any other relevant software, I'd say).

I would have to check where would a hypothetical i7-7700K with two more cores (but running around 4,0 GHz under MT load) land performance-wise, but it's not that easy to say because of the diminishing returns of 5th and 6th core compared to 1-4th. Coffee Lake hexacore could pull ahead of Ryzen 7 in this, but it still might do so while being more expensive.

 

[LTC8K6]

I don't think Intel will offer superior price/performance ratio *in multithread performance*. That would go against everything we have seen so far, even with FX.

Coffee Lake will probably be about better ST, worse MT, kinda like Kaby Lake, but with less MT deficit. An exception to this could be running x265 encoding, maybe, thanks to heavy AVX2 use (which is not really replicated by any other relevant software, I'd say).

I would have to check where would a hypothetical i7-7700K with two more cores (but running around 4,0 GHz under MT load) land performance-wise, but it's not that easy to say because of the diminishing returns of 5th and 6th core compared to 1-4th. Coffee Lake hexacore could pull ahead of Ryzen 7 in this, but it still might do so while being more expensive.

I don't think it requires that much analysis, though.

If you have time, logically you would wait for the competition to respond and see what they offer.
You would only do this if such a release is reasonably soon, though.
Obviously you can't keep waiting for each company to respond.

If you don't have time, then you buy what you need today.

 

[Hitman928]

I am going to go against some other recommendations here and suggest the 1600x. I understand you'll need to buy a heat sink, but the 1600x should do fine with really cheap heat sinks, they are quite efficient. I only recommend this versus the 1700 because you won't be overclocking and you want to game as well. You'll still have great video editing performance but the 1600x should have a 20% advantage in most games. Although, that also depends on the games you'll be playing, the settings, and how powerful your card is. Really, without overclocking, the video editing performance shouldn't be that big either due to the base frequency difference between the two.

 

[sm625]

Should you want for Intel's response? Yes. Should you wait for Intel's response? Probably not. The day they lower prices is the day pigs fly.

 

[gregoryvg]

B350 is good enough. X370 is targeted more towards gamers

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Other than support for SLI, what does the X370 have over the B350 that would make it more targeted towards "gamers"? My computer is used 99.7% for gaming and I never have used SLI. In other words, what features would gamers appreciate on the X370 (other than SLI) that the B350 doesn't have? Genuinely curious here.

 

[gregoryvg]

Unless you absolutely need something right now, I would wait for the Coffee Lake release. Yes, it will cost more than an R5, it'll probably be somewhere between R7 1700 and 1700x. If you can't afford and still want 6 cores, Ryzen is your only choice. And not a bad choice at that.

Personally, I would pay an extra $100 - $150 (MB included) for the higher IPC and easy over-clock ability of the CL 6c (assuming it overclocks like KL), should be easy to hit 4.6 - 4.8ghz over the current gen Ryzen.

 

[Midwayman]

I'd wait it out if you're not dying. If intel basically makes a 7700k with 6 core at the same price it'll be interesting. If you didn't game the decision would be easy.