£850-900 Upgrade advice needed

Roverno

Roverno

Roverno

Associate
Joined
24 May 2011
Posts
1,790
Location
West Sussex
Hi all, doing a little upgrade on the approx above budget. Usage is Video Editing, gaming, CAD approximately in that order. Would like to come down to Micro-atx for smaller overall size.

Will continue using:
980ti
corsair AX 860 PSU
Sapphire Vapour X cooler

Already bought:
860EVO 1TB
970 evo 500gb

Just about to buy:
My basket at Overclockers UK:
Total: £876.62 (includes shipping: £11.70)​
​

Any suggestions?
 
 
I'd go the AMD route if it was me... £90 cheaper CPU at the moment, with the discounted price at OCUK.

I've just built a new 2700X system in a Define C TG (not the mini version). I'd definitely recommend it - a really nice case for the price, and the cable management is great. I added a second 120mm X2 fan at the front to make sure it has positive air pressure. It's very quiet when idling, presumably due to the sound dampening material.
 
I vote for the amd route, anyways you can upgrade the processor anytime you like so you could sell for instance when zen 2 (ryzen 3000) come out, you sell the 2700x that is if your going with the 2700x over the 9700k and then buy a zen2 (ryzen 3000) processor to replace that.

Amd will support am4 motherboard socket until 2020 so zen 2 (3000) is next and apparently and also take it with a pinch of salt the zen 2 or ryzen 3000 processors will have higher ipc over intel ? - which i do not believe in.

So 2700 x vs the 9700k, well the 2700 has 16 threads and the 9700k has 8 so yeah but the intel has the higher ipc / single threaded performance advantage.

According to this website they say the 9700k is faster.

https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2125?vs=2258

So take my post with a pinch of salt, i wanna tread carefully here.

Well yeah 7600k vs ryzen 1600, the ryzen cannot beat the 7600k single threaded performance because the 7600k has a higher fps over the ryzen but when the game demands the utmost the ryzen 1600 wins.

Read this for 7600k 1600 ryzen comparison > https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-ryzen-5-1600-1600x-vs-core-i5-7500k-review

Classic example.

So why have i brought that up well the ryzen 2700x has 16threads which gives it a performance advantage over the 9700k so now i am gonna look for a benchmark.

So yeah the ryzen 1600 defeats the 7600k > https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-7600K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-1600/3885vs3919 which shows it and also explains the ryzen 1600 fps being higher than the 7600k due to multi core speed that is.

The ryzen 2700x is a bit faster then the 9700k - https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-9700K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-2700X/4030vs3958 in multi score score but by a bit.

If your gonna overclock then get intel it is a different ball game, because intel would win if you can overclock the chip at 5ghz speeds.

But despite that ball game, amd will support am4 until 2020 so we will see zen 2 (ryzen 3000) and zen 3 (ryzen 4000) where the intel motherboard socket will be a dead end unlike amd am4 that is.

Anyways these ryzen processors won't be getting the max frames per second where intel is king, but with minimum fps the ryzen tanks on by maintaining its consistent fps like with the ryzen 1600 over the 7600k in crysis 3 for example.

Yeah the intel processor 7600k wins with much maximum higher frames per second, but the ryzen 1600 wins with much higher minimum frames per second.

Dan.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the input. The upgrading path for AMD is quite a big selling point, but looking at my specific use case (1440p gaming) and video editing and export, the intel one still snatches the lead.

But then it also also significantly more expensive... Tempted to stick with intel because i have more familiarity with the platform too.

Dam these decisions are so hard.
 
Roverno said:
Thanks for the input. The upgrading path for AMD is quite a big selling point, but looking at my specific use case (1440p gaming) and video editing and export, the intel one still snatches the lead.

But then it also also significantly more expensive... Tempted to stick with intel because i have more familiarity with the platform too.

Dam these decisions are so hard.
Click to expand...

The lead in gaming is in the statistical errors region and can vary greatly upon all other components in the configuration. I would forget the so called gaming "lead".
 
4K8KW10 said:
The lead in gaming is in the statistical errors region and can vary greatly upon all other components in the configuration. I would forget the so called gaming "lead".
Click to expand...

That is true unless the bottlenecks are eliminated so both products have their full glory.
 
I will be overclocking whichever it is that I go with. I know intel OC more than AMD but I won't be pushing for the very max as I have to maintain pretty good reliability.
 
Well if you go with intel, since i think the intel processors give you more headroom for an overclock then it is a no brainer when compared to amd processors which have much less headroom to overclock with from what i have gathered by from people overclocking ryzen processors over the intel equivalent.

Yep well with a overclocked intel processor it will be a stonker as have said changes the ball game here.

So i recommend to you this day to go with intel over amd, but if zen 2 or zen 3 beats your processor even when overclocked then it was worth going with amd.

But if you say intel has a new chip in the future just remember that intel does not do what amd do, which is support the motherboard socket for 3 years so you save £150-250 by not buying a new motherboard for the new processors only a bios update, if you was to buy a new motherboard all the time for new releases of processors.

As you say it is a tough decision.
 
The one thing thats bugging me in this decision is about crashing and problems in Adobe premiere CC. I remember Hardware Canucks did a video about it with the 1800X and they swapped back to intel. Is this sort of thing still floating about or is the day to day stuff cleared up now on the AMD side?
 
Journey said:
Wait about 10 days to see what new CPU's AMD announce at CES, or at least what they outline in terms of IPC/Cores/Clock speeds
Click to expand...

But what they announce won't affect what I buy now, also if AMD is still the best option regardless of upgrade path then it also doesn't matter what they announce, it just makes it even better. Also, I don't think I would wait for the release (unless they release early Jan too, but that's unlikely right?)
 
Roverno said:
But what they announce won't affect what I buy now, also if AMD is still the best option regardless of upgrade path then it also doesn't matter what they announce, it just makes it even better. Also, I don't think I would wait for the release (unless they release early Jan too, but that's unlikely right?)
Click to expand...

Yes it will effect what you buy now, since you may have some sort of indication of the power requirement from the motherboard, so if you choose to go with AMD then you might spend more on a board than previously suggested to allow maximum forward compatibility with future processors. It's hardly a huge ask any how is it, waiting 10 days. Also I didn't say wait for the release, that won't be for several months.
 
Journey said:
Yes it will effect what you buy now, since you may have some sort of indication of the power requirement from the motherboard, so if you choose to go with AMD then you might spend more on a board than previously suggested to allow maximum forward compatibility with future processors. It's hardly a huge ask any how is it, waiting 10 days. Also I didn't say wait for the release, that won't be for several months.
Click to expand...

Ah i see, ye good idea, thanks.
 
orbitalwalsh said:
X570 q2, display at computex from road maps
Nice if they do release details but would also take away from great Ryzen + sales
Click to expand...

Harming sales is inevitable regardless, as they have to announce something to show what Ryzen2 is going to offer that puts it clear in the lead of Intel while they are still suffering shortages and missing the 10nm parts.

Also X570 announcement has nothing to do with the CPU reveal, as if you watched the EPYC Rome/Radeon Instinct event you would have seen the only needed to show the performance and the maximum core count of the new CPU's and what level of power they needed.

If at CES AMD announce (up to) 16c/32t desktop AM4 parts coming H1 '19, then you know if you want to get the most from them you'll need a board with a good VRM on X470, or be buying a new board if you went low end B450. Obviously X570/B550 will be required for PCI-E 4.0 etc. but as the OP said he's not waiting that long.

Speaking of the OP, it is of my opinion that the best move for the short term would be 1.) See what happens at CES, 2.) If as expected they are going to be on par/clearly ahead of Intel, buy a £130 Ryzen 1600(X), pop it in a board that you are comfortable with, 3.) Keep it for X months until Ryzen 2 drops, 4.) Buy 8/12/16 core Zen2 based CPU, and sell 1600X, and overall probably have spent less than you would on an Intel CPU, but have more cores and performance. 5.) Profit??? :)

If you buy Intel now, you are buying into a done deal, dead end no where to go. I'm not saying the Intel system is poor, just a bad decision while we are on the precipice of a shift change in the CPU space. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom