2600 still a better budget option than 1700?

[sgoaty]

Just wondering what people's thoughts are on the above 2 CPUs for a budget gaming build? I know there are lots of factors to consider, GPU selection, gaming resolution and refresh rate.

Most of the reviews sway towards the 2600 for the higher clocks better memory controller (and small IPC gain?)but I really struggle to look past the extra 2 cores of the 1700 though especially as the consoles now use 8.

I understand that 6 fast cores are better than 8 slow ones ( thinking 5600x but that's in a different league) what would you guys chose if they could both be had for the same price and had to last you another 3-5 years?
Thanks
Scott

 

[sgoaty]

Second hand parts around £80

I'd go for the 2600, but if you want 3 - 5 years I'd up the budget, because if buying new, it isn't much of a discount from a 3600 or 10400F.

Basically all the information says 2600 but I want to be convinced the 1700 is a better bet

 

[sgoaty]

The current best bang for buck gaming CPU is the 10400F.

My basket at Overclockers UK:

• 1 x Intel Core i5-10400F 2.90GHz (Comet Lake) Socket LGA1200 Processor - Retail= £139.99

Total: £148.69 (includes shipping: £8.70)
​

Still significantly over the £80 and not sure I could get it to work in the b450 motherboard lol

 

[sgoaty]

I did mention the £80 part but not the motherboard it seems ha

 

[sgoaty]

I did think about the 3500x but hardware unboxed did a review on it that put me off that idea.

I've bought both and will sell on one of them on again after testing both. It's only for another system I'm building to mess around with/keep me entertained.
Thanks
Scott