INTEL 8700K & 8600K COFFEE LAKE NOW IN STOCK AT FAIR PRICING!

[~>Dg<~]

its not ten percent where you pull them figures from.in games like pubg intel chips can be upto 30 fps different over amd.thats one main title.i have a ryzen rig at side of a row of different intel rigs.which have had the same cards in.i know what they do.

pick your amd chip you want to compare to the intel chip i mean.say the build works out 100 more. over the 3 years most will keep it thats 33 quid extra per year to have faster performance than even the top ryzen now and even released.so why would you save £100 pound or £33 a year to have less performance. its pointless unless you want the multiside.

the cpu you listed for eg is 50 less than a intel chip that can beat the highest ryzen in games.would you pay a extra £50 over 3 years to have better performance ?

 

[nashathedog]

As for how well the Ryzen refresh performs I'll do a series of tests with my 1600x and then with the 2700x once I can get one,
as it stands there's a big gap between a 1600x and a 8700k in a lot of games & I can't see that being reduced by much,
Ryzens problem when it comes to gaming is consistency, it does great most of the time and keeps close to Intel's gaming chips but there's plenty of games where it's in a completely different league, I hope they can pull a win out the bag but common sense and no bias say's otherwise.

FC5: £40
WH-V2 - £18
X-morph: £8
AOTS: £4

Assuming you wanted all, less to be able to sell them on. It's a stretch
You can't really use steam prices as it's steam keys, same thing you'd get from a reseller.

If you weren't obviously lining this up to use as "the 8700K is actually only £220!" in 2 weeks when gen 2 launches, it would be fair enough let it go

So it's £70 for those 5 games if you search key sites for them but that's still not including the value of the ingame content for Fractured Space, Warframe, Dreadnought & World of Tanks.

It also includes some software codes so as I said if you want the games you'll be saving yourself close to £100 that you can take of the initial price so no it's not a stretch.

 

[Mercutio]

how is saving £100 now to spend £100 now on something else ever related to £33 a year? That one gets another "What? "

In a years time there's a Ryzen/AMD chip that'll probably whup Intel squarely in all aspects. That's silly/speculation/similar too.

So which AMD vs which Intel has a 30 fps difference when the budget allowance for a bigger GPU is included? Which res?
Your being VERY specific then providing zero detail.

"This small chip can beat the highest Ryzen in games" yes, it can also equal the highest Intel in the same games.
The point though is it's relative performance/price vs a cheaper Ryzens performance price with the extra money spent on a bigger GPU. You keep ignoring that and throwing unrelated FUD around in response.

Maybe 3rd time the charm for stating my point:

"Take a budget. Buy Intel+GPU. Take the same budget, buy AMD+GPU. The AMD machine will OVERALL win on FPS. The minor loss in CPU will be made up by the bigger gain in GPU".

Now enough random points around it... Where does the Intel based setup win on a specific budget?

 

[GMac11]

I think the time has finally come to put my 2600k out to pasture , 7 great years I got out of it. The only issue was I needed to replace my motherboard a couple of years ago and had to fork out £100 for a 2nd (possibly 3rd or 4th!) hand P67 chipset board to accommodate the overclocking. I see an shiny new i5 8600k in my future...

 

[Mercutio]

I think the time has finally come to put my 2600k out to pasture , 7 great years I got out of it. The only issue was I needed to replace my motherboard a couple of years ago and had to fork out £100 for a 2nd (possibly 3rd or 4th!) hand P67 chipset board to accommodate the overclocking. I see an shiny new i5 8600k in my future...

Same on the 7 years with a 2600k. Mines going to pasture at a friends
Difference is a shiny 2700x is in mine

 

[Drollic]

how is saving £100 now to spend £100 now on something else ever related to £33 a year? That one gets another "What? "

In a years time there's a Ryzen/AMD chip that'll probably whup Intel squarely in all aspects. That's silly/speculation/similar too.

So which AMD vs which Intel has a 30 fps difference when the budget allowance for a bigger GPU is included? Which res?
Your being VERY specific then providing zero detail.

"This small chip can beat the highest Ryzen in games" yes, it can also equal the highest Intel in the same games.
The point though is it's relative performance/price vs a cheaper Ryzens performance price with the extra money spent on a bigger GPU. You keep ignoring that and throwing unrelated FUD around in response.

Maybe 3rd time the charm for stating my point:

"Take a budget. Buy Intel+GPU. Take the same budget, buy AMD+GPU. The AMD machine will OVERALL win on FPS. The minor loss in CPU will be made up by the bigger gain in GPU".

Now enough random points around it... Where does the Intel based setup win on a specific budget?

You can buy a current i5, easily clock it to 4.8 or even 5 and likely have higher fps than the new ryzen 8 core at 4.2 with fast mem in the majority of games on same gpu. Not many would bet against that.

 

[GMac11]

Same on the 7 years with a 2600k. Mines going to pasture at a friends
Difference is a shiny 2700x is in mine

Hell of an innings. I'm normally very susceptible to the upgrade bug in the rest of my dealings, phone/laptop/even monitor feeling an itch every 12-18 months but by Jove that 2600k is/was a beast.

 

[Mercutio]

Hell of an innings. I'm normally very susceptible to the upgrade bug in the rest of my dealings, phone/laptop/even monitor feeling an itch every 12-18 months but by Jove that 2600k is/was a beast.

Far too true, mine will do 4.8 There's been nothing... SUPER worth going to.

 

[easyrider]

nice

8700K @ 299 is a good deal!

 

[~>Dg<~]

how is saving £100 now to spend £100 now on something else ever related to £33 a year? That one gets another "What? "

In a years time there's a Ryzen/AMD chip that'll probably whup Intel squarely in all aspects. That's silly/speculation/similar too.

So which AMD vs which Intel has a 30 fps difference when the budget allowance for a bigger GPU is included? Which res?
Your being VERY specific then providing zero detail.

"This small chip can beat the highest Ryzen in games" yes, it can also equal the highest Intel in the same games.
The point though is it's relative performance/price vs a cheaper Ryzens performance price with the extra money spent on a bigger GPU. You keep ignoring that and throwing unrelated FUD around in response.

Maybe 3rd time the charm for stating my point:

"Take a budget. Buy Intel+GPU. Take the same budget, buy AMD+GPU. The AMD machine will OVERALL win on FPS. The minor loss in CPU will be made up by the bigger gain in GPU".

Now enough random points around it... Where does the Intel based setup win on a specific budget?

you have it wrapped around your neck somehow.the cpu you mentioned by amd is 50 pound cheaper than the cheap i5 which will beat any ryzen now even at top or not even out across the board.there is no point in any ryzen for just gaming.unless you want warranty and are a amd fan.pubg the fps difference can be upto 30 fpd more on intel chips.

the 33 pound per year comes from the possible £100 more innitial layout of having the intel build over the cpu you selected with the same gpu.as most people keep their pc 3 years before upgrading.so my reply was why would you buy the cheaper ryzen when for 33 pound more per year for the 3 years you keep the system you can have a better gaming system.ryzen wont match the intel system at any point.

this is why people are keeping older i5/i7 rigs.as there is no point in upgrading to a ryzen system if you just game as even older cpus from intel are still faster. the only reason to touch ryzen is for multitasking side or editing.gaming no point.thats why you see people saying my i7 3770k at 4.4 is fine.in most posts.the only real upgrade gaming wise is intel.unless you a fanboy.

 

[BigV]

The more I read the more confused I become by all the options. Running a i5-6600 is not by any means a bad CPU but I want to refresh my system. Reviews and recommendations are all over the place.
I keep reading here and elsewhere that the R5 1600 over clocked to 4 ghz is all the average person needs, but when I see the benchmarks (both media and average joe clips on youtube) it seems the intel offerings blow it out of the water.

The upcoming release of Ryzen '2000' refresh seems to be bringing prices down as well. The 8600k can be had £10 cheaper than you can pre-order the 2600x. Is the 2600x going to be that much of a step up?

And I find it hard to buy into the future proof / cheap upgrade argument because from what I can tell this latest release is going to require shiny new x470 mobos to get the most out of them. Also the price for a reasonable X370 vs Z370 is very similar. Sure there are a wider option cheaper B boards for AMD but doing 4 ghz reliably on them?

 

[subbytna]

The more I read the more confused I become by all the options. Running a i5-6600 is not by any means a bad CPU but I want to refresh my system. Reviews and recommendations are all over the place.
I keep reading here and elsewhere that the R5 1600 over clocked to 4 ghz is all the average person needs, but when I see the benchmarks (both media and average joe clips on youtube) it seems the intel offerings blow it out of the water.

The upcoming release of Ryzen '2000' refresh seems to be bringing prices down as well. The 8600k can be had £10 cheaper than you can pre-order the 2600x. Is the 2600x going to be that much of a step up?

And I find it hard to buy into the future proof / cheap upgrade argument because from what I can tell this latest release is going to require shiny new x470 mobos to get the most out of them. Also the price for a reasonable X370 vs Z370 is very similar. Sure there are a wider option cheaper B boards for AMD but doing 4 ghz reliably on them?

If you're staying with the same cores (that 8600k has) then you're looking at the 2600 Ryzen chip...no need for the 2600X chip as you can overclock the 2600 yourself. The 2600 non X will be cheaper than the 8600k

https://hothardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-2600-overclock-benchmarks

That's a bit of info on the 2600 non X

 

[subbytna]

The more I read the more confused I become by all the options. Running a i5-6600 is not by any means a bad CPU but I want to refresh my system. Reviews and recommendations are all over the place.
I keep reading here and elsewhere that the R5 1600 over clocked to 4 ghz is all the average person needs, but when I see the benchmarks (both media and average joe clips on youtube) it seems the intel offerings blow it out of the water.

The upcoming release of Ryzen '2000' refresh seems to be bringing prices down as well. The 8600k can be had £10 cheaper than you can pre-order the 2600x. Is the 2600x going to be that much of a step up?

And I find it hard to buy into the future proof / cheap upgrade argument because from what I can tell this latest release is going to require shiny new x470 mobos to get the most out of them. Also the price for a reasonable X370 vs Z370 is very similar. Sure there are a wider option cheaper B boards for AMD but doing 4 ghz reliably on them?

Also worth nothing the 8600k is a 6 core 6 thread cpu....the 2600 and 2600X cpus are 6 cores 12 threads. You get more processing power with the extra threads. The 8600k has to try and make up for that by running faster.

https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/ryzen_5/2600x

Ryzen 4*** Mobos are still on the AM4 chipset. Intel you'll have to buy a new mobo and cpu when upgrading as INTEL are known for forcing buyers to do just that. AM4 is here for another couple of years anyway.

 

[BigV]

Also worth nothing the 8600k is a 6 core 6 thread cpu....the 2600 and 2600X cpus are 6 cores 12 threads. You get more processing power with the extra threads. The 8600k has to try and make up for that by running faster.

https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/ryzen_5/2600x

Ryzen 4*** Mobos are still on the AM4 chipset. Intel you'll have to buy a new mobo and cpu when upgrading as INTEL are known for forcing buyers to do just that. AM4 is here for another couple of years anyway.

Yeah but people will need a 4XXX mobo to get the full features of the latest CPU. That goes against one of the big arguments for going Ryzen in my mind. Yes of course the latest chips will still work on the old boards but what enthusiast wants to pay out £200+ to get something they can't fully use?

As for the benchmarks like geekbench I have to confess they don't really mean much to me because I struggle to relate it to anything I do. I much prefer the reviews where they show various CPUs going head to head using games and programs that I am likely to use myself.

Plus we don't know how they will OC for sure yet. Maybe there is a bigger gap between them this time or maybe it is like before where they all seem to OC to roughly the same performance level.

It looks as though the 2600 or 2600x is roughly where the 1800x is now??

 

[HeX]

Yeah but people will need a 4XXX mobo to get the full features of the latest CPU. That goes against one of the big arguments for going Ryzen in my mind. Yes of course the latest chips will still work on the old boards but what enthusiast wants to pay out £200+ to get something they can't fully use?

The only feature you don't get on 370 boards Vs 470 is precision boost 2.0, and if you are overclocking you'd disable that anyway!

 

[subbytna]

Main argument is that it is 6core 6 threads (INTEL) v 6 cores 12 threads (AMD)

Board settings are almost a moot point anyway if you, as you say,

As for the benchmarks like geekbench I have to confess they don't really mean much to me because I struggle to relate it to anything I do

...don't really use the boards for anything other than gaming.