2700X or 8700K?

mejinks · 31 May 2018 at 08:08

I've decided to retire my X58 system and want to build something which will hopefully last just as long. I do a bit of gaming, but I'd like to do video editing/encoding and photography and even though its probably way overkill, I've been looking at 2700x or 8700K systems. I was originally leaning towards 8700k, but after Intels debacle with Kaby Lake, I'm not sure I can trust them again, whereas the AM4 will be around for a bit longer.

Please help me choose....

Daftbrown · 31 May 2018 at 08:12

With gaming as a secondary use and longevity your main concern with regards to chipset it seems to me that the 2700X is most likely the one for you.

sideways14a · 31 May 2018 at 08:14

No brainier, definitely the 2700

Glanza · 31 May 2018 at 08:41

What resolution and graphics card have you got?

If your wanting to do editing and encoding the 2700x would be the way I'd go.

mejinks · 31 May 2018 at 11:50

Currently rocking a r9 390x. Looking at comparable benchmarks, only a Vega beats it.

eddiew · 31 May 2018 at 12:15

If you're regularly maxing all cores on your current CPU, 2700X is the way to go.

If you're regularly maxing 1-2 cores, 8700K will deliver the best low-thread performance. Also consider the 8086K in 8 days time (slightly faster 8700K).

But future games will be more threaded and favour the 2700X, and if you get a good AM4 board today you can drop a 3000-series into it next year. Intel meanwhile, struggling with 10nm, don't seem likely to offer anything new until 2020, and it won't be compatible with today's boards. There are niche cases where the 8700K/8086K makes most sense, but unless you know that that case is you, the 2700X makes more sense, imo.

humbug · 31 May 2018 at 14:23

Daftbrown said:
With gaming as a secondary use and longevity your main concern with regards to chipset it seems to me that the 2700X is most likely the one for you.

^^^^

chroniclard · 31 May 2018 at 14:27

They are both great CPU's, cant go wrong with either. Would lean towards the 2700X with a decent X470 board, will be able to drop Ryzen 2 in it when they land.

bru · 31 May 2018 at 14:38

It is hard to argue against the value you get with the AMD Ryzen 2700x if there is any thing non gaming involved.
I you want to just plug and play as it were just get some decent ram and off you go, as the Ryzen is clocked fairly close to it''s top performance out of the box.

The Intel range are also good but for multi use I'd recommend the Ryzen range at the moment. Saying that if you just wanted the best for gaming then the 8700k is pretty much as good as it gets, until the new aniversary chip arrives latter this month.

humbug · 31 May 2018 at 14:45

bru said:
It is hard to argue against the value you get with the AMD Ryzen 2700x if there is any thing non gaming involved.
I you want to just plug and play as it were just get some decent ram and off you go, as the Ryzen is clocked fairly close to it''s top performance out of the box.

The Intel range are also good but for multi use I'd recommend the Ryzen range at the moment. Saying that if you just wanted the best for gaming then the 8700k is pretty much as good as it gets, until the new aniversary chip arrives latter this month.

Its just branding to get excited over, and plenty will.

The 8086K is just a binned higher clocked 8700K with the same toothpaste under the heat spreader, IMO its a lot like the FX-9590 was to the FX-8350, by the time you've spent a fortune on cooling it you'd might as well save a bit of money on the 8700K and clock it up, that's all the 8086K is.

Journey · 31 May 2018 at 15:15

mejinks said:
I've decided to retire my X58 system and want to build something which will hopefully last just as long.

What CPU is in your X58 system? i7-920-950? If so, you can just throw in a nice Xeon X5650-X5680 etc. CPU, which are 6c/12t and cost about £20-50 and clock up to 4.0-4.4GHz+ using a reasonable cooler and you'll get a nice performance boost, 50% more cores and threads, which in terms of value for money vs. performance increase in productivity won't be beaten.

Why would you do this now, you ask? Well neither the current Intel/AMD platforms are perfect, and refinements are certainly being made with AMD and in all likelihood Ryzen '2' will be the real winner starting next year, by which time you'll have the benefit of DDR4 pricing having significantly reduced, as presently it is artificially high, and will contribute a huge cost to your budget especially if you want very specific RAM.

The same can be said about Intel, complete mess at the moment, 8700K is an very nice chip, overpriced to some extent, but very good. The issue is the chipset longevity, and the imminent arrival or the 8c/16t parts, which will make the 8700K defunct in it's current position on the next couple of months. Z390, with a 8900K or whatever it maybe called will be great, but again silly high prices for DDR4.

Buy a Xeon, wait until next May-June, pick up an X570 with Ryzen 3800X (12c/24t possible!), and 32GB DDR4 RAM, less than an X470, 2700X and 16GB DDR4 costs today.

Troezar · 31 May 2018 at 18:45

Had the same thoughts here and know others on older systems. I'd go 2700X add I think it will last longer and send good value for money. I'm also considering Threadripper as much for the platform as the CPU. More expensive but should last years with plenty of upgrade potential.

bru · 31 May 2018 at 19:04

Journey said:
What CPU is in your X58 system? i7-920-950? If so, you can just throw in a nice Xeon X5650-X5680 etc. CPU, which are 6c/12t and cost about £20-50 and clock up to 4.0-4.4GHz+ using a reasonable cooler and you'll get a nice performance boost, 50% more cores and threads, which in terms of value for money vs. performance increase in productivity won't be beaten.

This is definitely worth doing if you are still running a standard i7 x58 chip.
I myself have a Xeon 5650 running at 4.4GHz with 12 GB of ram in an X58 board. It is without a doubt the best upgrade to do for any X58 board owner, seeing as the Xeons only cost £20-£30 on that popular auction site.

reef · 31 May 2018 at 19:26

bru said:
This is definitely worth doing if you are still running a standard i7 x58 chip.
I myself have a Xeon 5650 running at 4.4GHz with 12 GB of ram in an X58 board. It is without a doubt the best upgrade to do for any X58 board owner, seeing as the Xeons only cost £20-£30 on that popular auction site.

Its a decent upgrade from a standard bloomfield, but its getting on a bit now. I still have my X5650 which ran at 4.4GHz without any issue. It was a substantial upgrade on the i7 930 before it, but in encoding it was only around 10-15% faster than my i7 4770K at 4.5GHz. Anything single threaded and it was a good 50% slower. Now though, a Ryzen 2700X or i7 8700K is a decent upgrade even from that i7 4770k at 4.5GHz.

Best bet for the OP is to look for specific benchmarks on the programs he's actually using and then get the best of the two. The i7 isn't always faster in every game and the Ryzen isn't always in every encoding program. They're both good CPUs and performance between the two varies wildly depending on usage.

mejinks · 31 May 2018 at 21:19

Journey said:
What CPU is in your X58 system? i7-920-950? If so, you can just throw in a nice Xeon X5650-X5680 etc. CPU, which are 6c/12t and cost about £20-50 and clock up to 4.0-4.4GHz+ using a reasonable cooler and you'll get a nice performance boost, 50% more cores and threads, which in terms of value for money vs. performance increase in productivity won't be beaten.

Why would you do this now, you ask? Well neither the current Intel/AMD platforms are perfect, and refinements are certainly being made with AMD and in all likelihood Ryzen '2' will be the real winner starting next year, by which time you'll have the benefit of DDR4 pricing having significantly reduced, as presently it is artificially high, and will contribute a huge cost to your budget especially if you want very specific RAM.

The same can be said about Intel, complete mess at the moment, 8700K is an very nice chip, overpriced to some extent, but very good. The issue is the chipset longevity, and the imminent arrival or the 8c/16t parts, which will make the 8700K defunct in it's current position on the next couple of months. Z390, with a 8900K or whatever it maybe called will be great, but again silly high prices for DDR4.

Buy a Xeon, wait until next May-June, pick up an X570 with Ryzen 3800X (12c/24t possible!), and 32GB DDR4 RAM, less than an X470, 2700X and 16GB DDR4 costs today.

Funny you should say that, its an I7 930 and thats exactly what i'll be doing, but using it for server duties. I already have DDR4 ram, so would just need to buy a processor, motherboard and cooler (maybe a m.2 drive)

Journey · 31 May 2018 at 21:25

mejinks said:
Funny you should say that, its an I7 930 and thats exactly what i'll be doing, but using it for server duties. I already have DDR4 ram, so would just need to buy a processor, motherboard and cooler (maybe a m.2 drive)

Which DDR4 RAM do you have, since you really want something that will run on Ryzen at 3200 C14/VLL subtimings to get the most from it, otherwise, you'll end up replacing it to get the most from the platform?

bru · 31 May 2018 at 21:26

reef said:
Its a decent upgrade from a standard bloomfield, but its getting on a bit now. I still have my X5650 which ran at 4.4GHz without any issue. It was a substantial upgrade on the i7 930 before it, but in encoding it was only around 10-15% faster than my i7 4770K at 4.5GHz. Anything single threaded and it was a good 50% slower. Now though, a Ryzen 2700X or i7 8700K is a decent upgrade even from that i7 4770k at 4.5GHz.

Best bet for the OP is to look for specific benchmarks on the programs he's actually using and then get the best of the two. The i7 isn't always faster in every game and the Ryzen isn't always in every encoding program. They're both good CPUs and performance between the two varies wildly depending on usage.

Totally agree on it getting on a bit now, but if the Opening poster is still running a i7 920 or the like then a Xeon is a no brainer for around £30, it's the single cheapest and best upgrade an X58 owner can do and would possibly make other upgrades not quite so urgent.
of course it all depends on the individuals usage pattern, if nothing else it makes the x58 system worth a little bit more if your thinking of selling it.

mejinks · 1 Jun 2018 at 00:04

bru said:
Totally agree on it getting on a bit now, but if the Opening poster is still running a i7 920 or the like then a Xeon is a no brainer for around £30, it's the single cheapest and best upgrade an X58 owner can do and would possibly make other upgrades not quite so urgent.
of course it all depends on the individuals usage pattern, if nothing else it makes the x58 system worth a little bit more if your thinking of selling it.

I'm upgrading the i7 930 to Xeon and turning it into a plex / file server

The Asgard · 1 Jun 2018 at 21:21

For gaming the 8700K wins due to its high clock and low latency ring bus. If you want a more general purpose machine the AMD is the one to go for.

You won’t go wrong with either in all honesty, both great CPU’s.

wam7 · 1 Jun 2018 at 23:20

Actually for 2 out of the 3 uses you mentioned the Intel 8700k system will prove better, namely Photography and Gaming. Some people seem to be under the notion that a Ryzen 2700X system will be better for photography (Lightroom, Photoshop, DXO etc). From my own experience and photography reviews I've read, it most definitely is not. Especially if you overclock.

Photoshop with multi core processors
If the computer is mainly used for Photoshop and Lightroom it is important to understand how efficiently these applications cope with multi core processors. In order to understand this, we have undertaken testing using a range of processors from dual core right through to the huge 18 core variants. We were quickly able to conclude that both Photoshop and Lightroom are not able to take advantage of a great number of processor cores.

There are some exceptions as certain effects will have a small benefit given additional cores. On average however, we can conclude that it would be more beneficial to use a processor with fewer cores but higher processor frequency. the performance of the processors scales in a linear fashion with increased processor frequency.

The best efficiency is gained from dual core or quad core processors. We understand that most users will likely have other applications such as email, web browsers and various background tasks operating at the same time. Moving to a 6 core processor will effectively give the use 2 spare cores to run other applications. There seems to be little point moving above a 6 core product even for very high end Photography systems