Can someone shed some light between these CPUs?

[tamz_msc]

Lots of qualifications you had put on that. Sorry, but problem free for "most" situations isn't good enough. If your new car was problem free for most of the things you used it for, would that be good enough for you?

But it *IS* problem-free for most cases, except virtualization, which is somewhat expected because it is a brand new platform.

FYI if all I cared about was commuting to and from work and contributing less emissions, then a Prius would be good enough, because it is problem-free for the situations I'm going to use it for.

Now obviously I would not expect it to do Nurburgring in 7 minutes, would I?

 

[Bouowmx]

wait for the new i5 with 4 cores and 8 threads. It should be a drop in upgrade with your current motherboard and cost less than $300.

An Intel Coffee Lake Core i5 may be 6 cores (no Hyper-threading) and 9 MB L3 cache: http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=thread...ng-august-2017.2428363/page-401#post-38860820

 

[Topweasel]

Get a 6 core 12 thread 1600x and a b350 motherboard. You can do that for under 300 usd in total. It Will continue to be stellar value whatever happens.
If you oc get a 1600 or 1700 model. Dirt cheap compared to Intel. An oc 1700 will last 6 years. A b350 board is fine.
Save for some good ram for Ryzen. 14 14 14 36 samsung type at 3200 MHz.
Intel is just way to expansive and totally irrelevant in this pricerange. Bad value.
And waiting for that to change is stupid. The change in value for 200 to 400 usd cpu have happened.
Its an excellent time to buy a cpu if you dont care it have the amd label.

What this guy said.

Don't under any circumstances get a i5. Clock speed only matters so much. Right now 4c4t is the bare minimum for gaming. Some games are CPU starved at that level now and in the future it will only get worse. So the bare minimum should be an i7 7700k since its 4c8t. But as many have pointed out its great in clockspeed and is going to be the best in current games given its extra 4 threads and it's really still a baseline when developing. But it's also the EOL for the configuration. The next one will have 6 cores and 12 threads. Also the next one will require a new board.

Things to keep in mind with Ryzen. They all top out at 4GHz. A lot of games do see a benefit whether it's frame stability or just actual core utilization. But as it stands even a default clocked 7700k is going to be faster that in several games. AMD is spending a lot helping developers and within a month has already gotten one game to jump up 30% when using a Ryzen since launch (AotS). This should continue and Intel's future push into consumer 6c setups should help future proof a Ryzen setup. Knowing that there is an upper end limit of 4GHz and all are unlocked, pretty much feel free to get the lowest of the configurations you're looking for. I prefer the 1700 at ~$330 but can be had for ~300 every once and awhile. The 1600 will get you a coffee lake config a year early and be ~$80 cheaper.

 

[Ratman6161]

I'd simply point out, his budget is under $350. And a 6 core, 12 thread CL will be well over that. Not to mention a more expensive motherboard. Your overclocking speculation is a bit out there as well.

Until just over a week ago, I was running an i72600K that I've been running since this time in 2011. I don't give a darn about games so I didn't even think about that. I was looking at the most cores and threads I could get cheap. Price wise, the R5 1600X is about the same as an i57600K but the AMD motherboards tend to be cheaper. I ended up going with
R5 1600 $219
Asrock AB 350 Pro4 $39 as part of a bundle deal
32 GB RAM (16x2) $220 (old RAM was DDR3 so time to upgrade that too)
Re-use all other components
Total: $478. Had I gone with 16 GB of RAM, it would have been $368 i.e. pretty close to that $350 budget

Going the i5 route would have been the same for the RAM and More for the Motherboard. And honestly, for my purposes (i.e. more cores and threads, the i5 wasn't an option). Before the R5's came out I was looking at a new i7. So this actually saved me a significant amount over that.

PS: Also have it overclocked to 3.8 GHz. That's the highest I can get without going over 1.35V which I have decided is as high as I'm willing to go. And the extra 200 Mhz up to 4.0 probably isn't worth it.

 

[Crumpet]

What this guy said.

Don't under any circumstances get a i5. Clock speed only matters so much. Right now 4c4t is the bare minimum for gaming. Some games are CPU starved at that level now and in the future it will only get worse. So the bare minimum should be an i7 7700k since its 4c8t. But as many have pointed out its great in clockspeed and is going to be the best in current games given its extra 4 threads and it's really still a baseline when developing. But it's also the EOL for the configuration. The next one will have 6 cores and 12 threads. Also the next one will require a new board.

Things to keep in mind with Ryzen. They all top out at 4GHz. A lot of games do see a benefit whether it's frame stability or just actual core utilization. But as it stands even a default clocked 7700k is going to be faster that in several games. AMD is spending a lot helping developers and within a month has already gotten one game to jump up 30% when using a Ryzen since launch (AotS). This should continue and Intel's future push into consumer 6c setups should help future proof a Ryzen setup. Knowing that there is an upper end limit of 4GHz and all are unlocked, pretty much feel free to get the lowest of the configurations you're looking for. I prefer the 1700 at ~$330 but can be had for ~300 every once and awhile. The 1600 will get you a coffee lake config a year early and be ~$80 cheaper.

mostly correct.

R7 1800x @4.15ghz

Some chips go over 4ghz.

But yes generally speaking.

 

[Topweasel]

mostly correct.

R7 1800x @4.15ghz

Some chips go over 4ghz.

But yes generally speaking.

Yeah general. Just like the 7700 even if a healthy amount of them hit 5GHz, But almost all of them hit 4.8GHZ. I would just say they hit 4.8. It's better that way. You talk about 5.0 and they hit 4.8 they get depressed for getting a bum CPU. You say 4.8 and it hits 4.8 they meet expectations, if it hits 5.0 they are happy because it exceeded expectations.

 

[Rifter]

Before going with Ryzen, read the threads with all the issues people are experiencing. If it's a problem free computer you are looking for, Ryzen isn't fully baked yet.

Also look at the post history of anyone recommending a CPU to make sure they aren't peddling an agenda.

If you are running at officially supported ram speeds you will be fine, its only when you overclocking the ram that you can run into issues, and those will be worked out in time, as with any new from ground up platform there are ram issues when ovcerclocking(just like with x58/x99/any truly new platform). I think the fact that intel has not released a truly new platform with a from the ground up new CPU arch in over a decade has made people forget about alot of the early adopter issues that have always been present with these types of launches. Lately with intel its just been plug and play simply because its the same CPU's over and over again with minimal changes to cause compatibility issues.

My ryzen system has by far been the most stable and easy to setup PC i have built in a decade. Overclocking it was a breeze, it will let you know quick if its not stable, chasing down my 4.2Ghz OC on my i930 took weeks/months, as sometimes it would seem stable but fail after several hours or even days of burn testing, while my ryzen on the other hand has failed quickly if there isnt enough voltage, allowing me to dial it in with alot less time spent. And as soon as you reach the voltage threshold its stable as a rock. Even have my Hynix less than ideal ram running at 2933mhz no issues.

All of that said since the OP has a 170 board already that makes this a little harder of a decision. Basically this is what i would do if i was OP, nail down what you use your PC for and be honest, if its just mild office tasks and games and thats all it will ever be used for id drop in a 7700k and call it a day, maybe you will need to replace this in a few years if games make use of more cores, and they will, but you already have the MB anyways so may as well stretch it as far as you can and get the most use out of it as possible. But if it will be used for any real productivity work at all or photo/video editing work , or you want it to really last for the long haul then the ryzen is much better suited for this and the 1600(x) should really be the only CPU you are looking at in your price range, intel just plain flat out cannot compete with ryzen in price for productivity, its that simple.

 

[formulav8]

My personal experience with Ryzen has been great. I got a $195 shipped R5 1600 with hsf @ 3.5ghz all core (haven't even tried higher yet.), G-Skill Hynix ram running @ 2933mhz 14-15-15 timings on an $85 shipped Asus Prime B350. Not a single problem.

But others are not quite as fortunate trying to get over 2667mhz on their ram. Seems to be mainly motherboard related. But otherwise I'm not aware of any other issues.

 

[Stg-Flame]

Holy hell I didn't expect to see this many replies. Just got off work so I can take the time to read through everything. Just a preliminary response to some of the things I saw on the first page.

This build needs to be ordered this week and I'm really pushing for Wednesday (tomorrow) at the latest. The budget has already been met (slightly exceeded the budget by $53) and I was just hoping to squeeze a bit extra bang for my buck out of the build after I saw the comparisons for the two Intel CPUs. I honestly wouldn't mind trying out a Ryzen, but like I said, it's been almost 14 years since I last used an AMD product so I was a bit lost when I started browsing the Ryzen CPUs earlier. I assume the number after Ryzen corresponds to the generation? As in, Ryzen 5 would be an i5 equivalent CPU?

I'm also building this computer so that it doesn't need any upgrades for a while. The PC that it's replacing has been in use and without upgrades since 2008 and this PC will probably see a similar timeline. When I said "futureproof", I merely meant that this PC will be able to play current titles and upcoming titles on high-max settings for the next few years without any problems. Since we can't be certain what technology will be out in the future, I can only hope the current i7s (and their AMD counterparts) will suffice for a few years at least. My current PC went three years before it started showing its age and even then I was able to play current titles at the time at mostly maxed settings at 2k resolution. A simple GPU upgrade was all it took to bring my PC back into current-gen gaming and that's what I'm shooting for with this build. I'm not looking to blow away benchmarks with this PC in 2020 - just something that can still play current and future games on decent settings at native resolution (eventually upgrading the monitor from 1080 to 1440) while being able to maintain a solid 60FPS.

Lastly, this PC isn't for me. It's being built for my mom and I told her I'd have it ordered two weeks ago, but real life got in the way and now that things are finally straightened out, I'd like to get this thing shipped. That being said, I'll still go back and read through the thread and take everyone's advice into account and I do greatly appreciate all the responses. I'd absolutely hate to order a new PC and find out two days later that I could have spent less money for better hardware.

 

[Crumpet]

From your response there, i5's are well out.

I think your option is i7 7700k (and a bios update, i7 6700k if you haven't got a way to update the bios on that Z170 motherboard) or a Ryzen 5 1600 and an AM4 B350 motherboard.

My gut feeling is the Ryzen has more longevity in it (6 cores and support on the motherboard platform until 2020), but the 7700k is the absolute powerhouse for today (and 5 year old i7's can still hold their own)

We're at a turning point in the cpu market, AMD has upped the game and Intel is following suit, more cores are now the way forward, and we can only presume games will follow suit.

 

[Stg-Flame]

I can understand the mindset that since we are getting hardware with more cores that games will start developing to use more cores, but that generally takes a few years to even start seeing games that can utilize more than four cores.

I'm leaning toward the 7700k since it's only $10 more and as you said, it's incredibly powerful for gaming today. Hell, even my old 3770k is still holding its own today and I built this PC in September of 2012, so that's almost a solid five years and this CPU isn't showing any signs of slowing down (though it did take a while to reach that overclock).

 

[formulav8]

I'm also building this computer so that it doesn't need any upgrades for a while.

I would go for the AMD R5 1600 and a B350 mobo.The Ryzen 6c/12t cpu is better overall than any i5 and should get even better as time goes on compared to the i5. AMD has also claimed a longer socket lifespan for future cpu drop-in upgrades.

No matter your cpu or platform you choose, Jet has a good ordering option. If you or someone you know never used Jet.com before they have a 15% off coupon up to $30 per order. You can use the code 3 times until August. Use one order for your cpu and another order for your mobo plus other items if needed so you can get as close to $30 off each order. The code is Spring15.

 

[Hitman928]

Stg-Flame,

Have you already purchased the Z170 motherboard? People are assuming you already have it but that's not how I interpreted your post. Clarifying that would change my and probably some other posters' recommendations.

 

[Crumpet]

Stg-Flame,

Have you already purchased the Z170 motherboard? People are assuming you already have it but that's not how I interpreted your post. Clarifying that would change my and probably some other posters' recommendations.

Indeed, if the Z170 hadn't been purchased yet, my decisions would be R5 1600/1700 + B350 board / i7 7700k and Z270 board

 

[Stg-Flame]

Stg-Flame,

Have you already purchased the Z170 motherboard? People are assuming you already have it but that's not how I interpreted your post. Clarifying that would change my and probably some other posters' recommendations.

I haven't purchased anything yet. The entire build is sitting in my cart at Newegg.

 

[.vodka]

That changes everything, I thought you already had a Z170 board after reading more posts.


R5 1600 (6C12T) + a B350 board would be the ideal choice here, price/perf is unbeatable and you've got a decent upgrade path to an 8 core Ryzen if you need more cores, and future Ryzen 2 CPUs.

You can overclock that R5 1600 to almost 1600x speeds on any B350 board, too, on the stock heatsink. You can't beat that.

AM4 as a platform is being ironed out and mostly stable now, in May there will be another wave of BIOS updates with more fixes that should squash the remaining bug here and there, mostly with high speed DDR4 (>2933MHz)


If you prefer Intel, yeah, Z270 + 7700k is what you want, but you may or may not have an upgrade path in the future for that platform. Don't buy an i5, you don't want a 4 thread CPU.

 

[AMDisTheBEST]

if you can only afford i5 price tag, consider ryzen r5 1600. it trades blows with the 7600k, lower average fps but higher average minimums(smoother game play) As game is more mutlthreaded, its average fps should catch up too.

 

[Rifter]

I haven't purchased anything yet. The entire build is sitting in my cart at Newegg.

In this case i would for sure go for the 1600, 6 core vs 4 core for same money is a no brainer especially if longevity is your primary concern.

 

[Hitman928]

I haven't purchased anything yet. The entire build is sitting in my cart at Newegg.

Ok, in that case, my vote would also be for the Ryzen R5. Either the 1600 if you want to overclock or the 1600x if you don't. That puts you at about $320- $360 for the cpu + mobo depending on the cpu and board you pick.

If you go intel, I think you'll need to pick a Z270 board if you want the 7700k unless you have another intel 6xxx series cpu you can use to update the Z170 bios to recognize the 7700k. I could be wrong on this as I don't have experience with the Z170 boards but I think this is right, someone else can confirm. Either way with the 7700k you're looking at about $435 - $460 depending on the board you pick.

Realistically, gaming should be very similar between the two today in typical gaming scenarios and the R5 has the possibility of being more future proof with the extra cores. It's not a guarantee, but it's more likely. If you do go with the R5, just make sure you pick RAM that is tested and shown to work for Ryzen. It's still a new platform and so RAM compatibility is something you need to make sure you're careful about. There is suppose to be an update in May to support a lot more RAM, but you don't need to worry about that if you just get a good set from the start.

 

[w3rd]

I would caution against making claims that Ryzen is going to last 6 years. Intel has been sandbagging for years but that doesnt mean they will continue to do so. If they release a CPU with a gigantic IPC burst, we will be right back where we were 5 years ago, with i3's being better than 8 core AMD. It is not at all beyond the realm of possibility that a 2020 Intel i3 might be 50% faster than current gen. Remember, with Conroe there was only 9 months between the first hints of a new architecture (Oct 2005) and release (July 2006).

We are in a new era of computing!
Do understand, that 64bit software is going to get way more efficient over the next 5 years.
Depth and back-end memory acrobatics is what the future of CPUs are about, not Ghz. Software just doesn't gain much above 4.5Ghz+ and developers are learning to make use of bit width... instead of using 32bit emulation tricks, etc.

X86 64bit Software doesn't make use of current CPU all that well. Now that nearly everything is 64bit, we are going to have new types of engineers learning to thread for efficiency. Software is about to change. How games are written, is about to change... or is changing. (ie: Vulkan)




Anyone ever hear of a 64 core server..?

*In my best Veruca Salt's imitation*: "I want a 64 core server...!"

 

[Topweasel]

W3rd, he is missing one gigantic issue with his words of warning anyways. It is simple, sure Intel could come up with some physics defying new arch that shames Ryzen. But as long as it requires a new platform from 270 then he has no point. Which it will because even coffee lake which is the old arch will require a new slightly modified but in compatible platform. As long as that is the truth their is no debating a 1600 or 1700 is better off for the future than an i5, and probably even 7700. Its not a AMD vs. Intel debate, its a CPU debate.

The 6 years become pretty academic, if there was a CPU that would last 6 years its not an i5, it's probably not a 7700, if 6c is the future of Intel for a while the 1600 is in a really good spot, and the 1700 is probably the most future proof consumer CPU right now. Even if Intel develops a new arch it doesn't send out a kill order for the old arch, people are still using C2Q's and Phenom x4 systems. It doesn't have to be the fastest to last 6 years it just needs to be competent.

 

[Gikaseixas]

OP another R5 recommendation but i recommend the 1600X as it is a better binned unit and you'll most likely get it to 3.9 - 4.0ghz stable. At those speeds, those 12 threads will be more than enough for the next few years.

 

[Shmee]

My vote would be for the Ryzen 1600 + B350, given budget and use. I have a 1700 + B350 board as well as my Intel stuff, and it does fine enough in games, have not OCed yet though. RAM will be harder to run at higher speeds, at least for now, but 2666 MHz may be fine for your usage anyway.

Honestly, if your budget was larger, I would recommend waiting for Skl-X, but with your current budget I would go with a Ryzen 6 core for sure. As I myself am coming from most of my recent builds having 6 or more cores, I would not want to go back to a 4 core, especially without HT. Intel 6 cores are great, but more expensive, but hey I still love my X58, X79, and X99, all great platforms.

 

[Phynaz]

I can't get behind a Ryzen system for your mother in the current state of the platform. Maybe if your time frame was another three months out. The platform is isn't stable yet.

 

[krumme]

I can't get behind a Ryzen system for your mother in the current state of the platform. Maybe if your time frame was another three months out. The platform is isn't stable yet.

As your own posting history shows you have never stand behind anything with the name AMD on it.

This worlds mothers shouldnt get less fast pc or use more money because of your personal opinion.

The platform is plug and play without even a single driver. 100% stable.