Intel 7700k or AMD 2600?

james_2k · 24 Apr 2018 at 16:08

humbug said:
You clearly have no understanding of IPC, and what does any of this crap have to do with the OP question? he's asking 7700K or 2600. would you suggest a Skylake-X because that is no better for gaming than Ryzen 2 and 3x as expensive.

what are you talking about, IPC is irrelevant in this case, because they don't run at the same speeds (clock cycles). you could have a cpu with terrible IPC performance and runs at 10ghz, or a good IPC performer at 2GHz, they could still have the same overall performance. you wouldn't run the 10ghz one at 2 and say it sucks would you?

And i'm fully aware what the thread is about, i was replying to what you said.

and i'm sorry no, just no, Ryzen 2 is not as good as skylake x at gaming, not at decent clocks anyway. i refer you to the cinebench score listed earlier.

moogle · 24 Apr 2018 at 16:11

humbug said:
180 vs 200 is 10%, that's clearly higher but 10% is not so hyperbolic as to "dominate", its 10%, and almost all of it is down to the 8700K's 4.7Ghz single core boost vs the 4.3Ghz Boost on the 2700X.

You do understand IPC? yes? 4.7Ghz vs 4.3Ghz... do the maths.

That's why I hate reading the reviews! They should have the frequency/cores at that freq in there too, to normalise the graphs.

Then again you do have to count it if the 8700K can hit higher clocks, just like we count Ryzen winning with more cores. I'll have to go re-read the reviews and understand how the CPU's boost.

humbug · 24 Apr 2018 at 16:12

james_2k said:
what are you talking about, IPC is irrelevant in this case, because they don't run at the same speeds (clock cycles). you could have a cpu with terrible IPC performance and runs at 10ghz, or a good IPC performer at 2GHz, they could still have the same overall performance. you wouldn't run the 10ghz one at 2 and say it sucks would you?

And i'm fully aware what the thread is about, i was replying to what you said.

and i'm sorry no, just no, Ryzen 2 is not as good as skylake x at gaming, not at decent clocks anyway. i refer you to the cinebench score listed earlier.

Yes IPC is relevant, the IPC difference between the 8700K and Ryzen 2 is 3% at best, in other words nothing.

So, whats your advice to the OP or are you just here to derail the thread?

james_2k · 24 Apr 2018 at 16:15

humbug said:
Yes IPC is relevant, the IPC difference between the 8700K and Ryzen 2 is 3% at best, in other words nothing.

So, whats your advice to the OP or are you just here to derail the thread?

yes, but the intel runs at a much faster speed, so no it is not relevant, because no one will run the 8700 as slow as the 2700x is. ever. period. and nicely avoided all my points.

argh i give up. intel skewed forum this is not

moogle said:
That's why I hate reading the reviews! They should have the frequency/cores at that freq in there too, to normalise the graphs.

Then again you do have to count it if the 8700K can hit higher clocks, just like we count Ryzen winning with more cores. I'll have to go re-read the reviews and understand how the CPU's boost.

boost clocks are also fairly irrelevant for anyone who will overclock which will be a lot of people if not most due to the enthusiast target market. once its overclocked you get what you set.

humbug · 24 Apr 2018 at 16:19

james_2k said:
yes, but the intel runs at a much faster speed, so no it is not relevant, because no one will run the 8700 as slow as the 2700x is. ever. period. and nicely avoided all my points.

argh i give up. intel skewed forum this is not

boost clocks are also fairly irrelevant for anyone who will overclock which will be a lot of people if not most due to the enthusiast target market. once its overclocked you get you set.

Only when you void the warranty by pulling it to pieces and even then overclocked it pulls more watts out of the wall than a Mig Welder and run's just about as hot as the business end of one of those.

So technically yes, but practically only to those who have no use for the warranty, don't mind taking it to pieces and don't mind sitting next to it roasting, summer is coming and i would not like a toaster sitting next to me in 30+ degrees summer heat.

Alternatively, just get a proper CPU.

james_2k · 24 Apr 2018 at 16:21

humbug said:
Only when you void the warranty by pulling it to pieces and even then overclocked it pulls more watts out of the wall than a Mig Welder and run's just about as hot as the business end of one of those.

So technically yes, but practically only to those who have no use for the warranty, don't mind taking it to pieces and do mind sitting next it roasting, summer is coming and i would like a toaster sitting next to me on 30+ degrees heat.

Alternatively, just get a proper CPU.

mines not delidded, and electricity is cheap. what, £10 a year different? My gpu heats up my coolant far more the the cpu has ever done.

i will concede yet again to you though that these chips should all be soldered, its ridiculous.

humbug · 24 Apr 2018 at 16:28

It draws far more power and runs far hotter than Bulldozer, i've had one of those, they heat up your room like an oven, not nice in the summer.

They are not good CPU's, because the IPC is no better Intel have had to do a Bulldozer to stay relevant.

james_2k · 24 Apr 2018 at 16:30

humbug said:
It draws far more power and runs far hotter than Bulldozer, i've had one of those, they heat up your room like an oven, not nice in the summer.

They are not good CPU's, because the IPC is no better Intel have had to do a Bulldozer to keep relevent.

well, don't agree, the graphics card heats up the room the cpu has minimal effect (when stress testing by ityself)

and they dont have to catch up, they still are the fastest. i do have a feeling that they will pull something even faster out the bag, which wont be so good for us schlebs who have new cpus now though.

bru · 24 Apr 2018 at 16:31

rip-the-jacker said:
Hey guys,

Birthday in under 3 weeks, and decided to change my 7500 for either above.

It will be for gaming / web browsing / Spotify etc..

So would I be better, just changing the CPU and cooler with a 7700k or go down the Ryzen route?

Thanks.

ok to try and answer your question, assuming you reuse your existing ram, your choice seems to be either.

My basket at Overclockers UK:

1 x AMD Ryzen 5 Six Core 2600 3.90GHz (Socket AM4) Processor - Retail= £164.99
1 x MSI X470 Gaming Plus AMD X470 (Socket AM4) DDR4 ATX Motherboard= £119.99

Total: £295.48 (includes shipping: £10.50)

Could be much cheaper with a B350 board, but I'm not sure about currant Bios compatibility.

Or

My basket at Overclockers UK:

1 x Intel Core i7-7700K 4.2GHz (Kaby Lake) Socket LGA1151 Processor - Retail= £299.99

Total: £308.69 (includes shipping: £8.70)

Obviously could be cheaper with a 2nd hand CPU.

So I will revise my earlier comment about

Unless you already have some of the parts required, 2600 all the way.

The AMD option could very well be a better bet.

Personally I would stick with what you have and get a better GPU once NVidia finally launch their new 11xx line up.

humbug · 24 Apr 2018 at 17:03

I would spend the extra £5 on the Gigabyte X470 Aorus. https://www.overclockers.co.uk/giga...ocket-am4-ddr4-atx-motherboard-mb-56z-gi.html

gavinh87 · 24 Apr 2018 at 17:14

humbug said:
No but one can take sensible steps to mitigate potential pitfalls, like running out of compute thread by making sure you have more than enough.

You don't buy a 1L car today because its all you need when tomorrow you're revving the bolts off it to get up the hill.

Poor anology. The 1.0l ecoboost engine available now is better than a 1.6 from 2010.

easyrider · 24 Apr 2018 at 17:36

humbug said:
Right now the 7700K is a bit faster in most games but it is a quad core and IMO not future proof.

Another vote for the 2600X.

That old chestnut? Future proof? Lol

No tech is future proof...I'm not buying Ryzen 2 even though I want to upgrade my recording studio pc...I'll just wait for 8/16 thread mainstream Intel and make Ryzen 2 dead tech

4K8KW10 · 24 Apr 2018 at 17:40

bru said:
Not wanting to be picky but Intel's first 8 core chip was Aug 2014 AMD's Ryzen Feb 2017, that to me and anyone else who knows how a calendar works makes AMD the late company.

AMD released their 8-thread FX-8150 way back in 2011, https://www.google.de/search?q=amd+...hrome.0.0l6.4519j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

TrixP10 said:
Ok, First dual core?

If it wasn't for AMD then Intel would still be pluggin MONO core

Yes, this is the absolute truth - mono core and 32-bit at that

easyrider · 24 Apr 2018 at 17:51

My favourite chip of all time was the AMD X2 3800 then followed by the Opteron 170 CABYE stepping....basically an AMD FX 60 in disguise.

Faster in games than Intel...but things change...I love what AMD are doing but a 6 core Intel shouldn't be beating a 8 core AMD in a recording studio DAW environment....but it is so You makes ya choice.

iakhtar · 24 Apr 2018 at 18:11

Intel's performance in x86 is linked directly to their process lead and if that 8/16 part is 14nm still then Intel are going to be in abit of trouble.

bru · 24 Apr 2018 at 18:13

4K8KW10 said:
AMD released their 8-thread FX-8150 way back in 2011, https://www.google.de/search?q=amd+...hrome.0.0l6.4519j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Yes, this is the absolute truth - mono core and 32-bit at that

Really you do know Intel had an 8 thread CPU back in 2008.
In fact I had one the i7 920 4 core/8 thread CPU back in 2008.

Don't get me wrong AMD have made some very good CPU's and have introduced a lot of innovations into the CPU market and they have even been first at some things, but none of the things you have mentioned have been first's.

Zeebedy · 24 Apr 2018 at 18:16

Thanks for all the input guys

I think I will probably go down the Ryzen route..my current 1151 mobo, was a budget option

(Gigabyte H110M-H)

So im guessing I would need a new mobo anyway to run the 7700k effectively? If so, looks like a 2600..

Klo · 24 Apr 2018 at 18:21

easyrider said:
My favourite chip of all time was the AMD X2 3800 then followed by the Opteron 170 CABYE stepping....basically an AMD FX 60 in disguise.

Faster in games than Intel...but things change...I love what AMD are doing but a 6 core Intel shouldn't be beating a 8 core AMD in a recording studio DAW environment....but it is so You makes ya choice.

Obviously Intel works best for you with your music thing, but 99% of people don't know what DAW is let alone use it, so I wouldn't really use it as an arugment for people to buy Intel over Ryzen.

Gaming perhaps, but even then it's fairly close and there might be other reasons for going with AMD, aka future proofing (yes it is a thing), price, cooler in box, ethical/moral reasons etc.

orbitalwalsh · 24 Apr 2018 at 18:41

rip-the-jacker said:
Thanks for all the input guys

I think I will probably go down the Ryzen route..my current 1151 mobo, was a budget option (Gigabyte H110M-H)

So im guessing I would need a new mobo anyway to run the 7700k effectively? If so, looks like a 2600..

Ryzen 2600+ X470 Aorus Ultra/Asus Strix + 16GB 8 Pack 3200hz ram and sorted . Crank that ram Hz as bios matures and it will .

Roar87 · 24 Apr 2018 at 18:51

humbug said:
Only when you void the warranty by pulling it to pieces and even then overclocked it pulls more watts out of the wall than a Mig Welder and run's just about as hot as the business end of one of those.

So technically yes, but practically only to those who have no use for the warranty, don't mind taking it to pieces and don't mind sitting next to it roasting, summer is coming and i would not like a toaster sitting next to me in 30+ degrees summer heat.

Alternatively, just get a proper CPU.

This post is comedy gold. Apparently taking a heat spreader off to apply some liquid metal is taking it to pieces, and temperatures of 50c is roasting. Why are you so desperately exaggerating so much in your post?