On the fence, Ryzen 1700, or i7 7700k, not overclocking

Glanza · 31 Jul 2017 at 13:01

~>Dg<~ said:
intel isnt about value.amd is. people keep making it their key debate. when its not intels selling point.they offer the quickest cpu.for whatever they sell it for because it is the fastest.in that sector.

people might not think the 10 percent gaming difference is worth the extra but its quite a bit especially on minimums which matters the most.that makes for a very different gaming experience.

currently the 7700k is the best cpu for gaming across the board wont be soon though.

Ryzen seems to have better minimums and less fps drop currently though from all the benchmarks I've seen.

gavinh87 · 31 Jul 2017 at 13:14

~>Dg<~ said:
intel isnt about value.amd is. people keep making it their key debate. when its not intels selling point.they offer the quickest cpu.for whatever they sell it for because it is the fastest.in that sector.

people might not think the 10 percent gaming difference is worth the extra but its quite a bit especially on minimums which matters the most.that makes for a very different gaming experience.

currently the 7700k is the best cpu for gaming across the board wont be soon though.

This is not what we are disputing. Void seems to think quad cores are still the best choice going forward. No matter what your team is, nobody should be looking at a quad right now.

voidshatter · 31 Jul 2017 at 13:26

gavinh87 said:
Despite hardware unboxed showing the 1600 just 9% behind at 1080p with a 1080t over 30 games.
Some people have their fingers in their ears.

G4560 every time

voidshatter · 31 Jul 2017 at 13:28

Glanza said:
though from all the benchmarks I've seen

Exactly which benchmarks? Which games?

Deleted member 66701 · 31 Jul 2017 at 13:29

voidshatter said:
G4560 every time

Not if you want to do any productivity stuff as well - which the OP has indicated they do.

voidshatter · 31 Jul 2017 at 13:29

gavinh87 said:
This is not what we are disputing. Void seems to think quad cores are still the best choice going forward. No matter what your team is, nobody should be looking at a quad right now.

Applying your logic, Pentium G4560 is good enough. Who needs a quad-core?

voidshatter · 31 Jul 2017 at 13:31

amigafan2003 said:
Not if you want to do any productivity stuff as well - which the OP has indicated they do.

For productivity I agree. Though the post I replied to was talking about gaming performance (i.e. how Ryzen is just a bit slower than a quad-core like 7700K).

gavinh87 · 31 Jul 2017 at 13:34

I give up. Keep living in your bubble.

voidshatter · 31 Jul 2017 at 13:38

gavinh87 said:
I give up. Keep living in your bubble.

Current reality is not a bubble. Delusional wishes in the unknown future is a bubble

gavinh87 · 31 Jul 2017 at 13:59

voidshatter said:
Nah, "hate" is a word carrying too much weight I'd rather say it's just "doubt", since no objective data can suggest Ryzen to be a good choice for most games yet.

The 1600 keeps up with the 7800x, at what point is ryzen not a good choice for games yet?

voidshatter said:
G4560 every time

You keep bringing up the G4560 like its the holy grail. Its a fantastic budget CPU, but not for everyone and not what the OP is asking about.
Its that good that intel are artificially limiting its sales now lol.

voidshatter said:
Current reality is not a bubble. Delusional wishes in the unknown future is a bubble

If we all thought like you then we would be on core 2 duos.

voidshatter · 31 Jul 2017 at 14:13

gavinh87 said:
The 1600 keeps up with the 7800x, at what point is ryzen not a good choice for games yet?

You keep bringing up the G4560 like its the holy grail. Its a fantastic budget CPU, but not for everyone and not what the OP is asking about.
Its that good that intel are artificially limiting its sales now lol.

If we all thought like you then we would be on core 2 duos.

I never said the 7800X to be a good CPU for gaming. You'll need the 7820X for gaming.

If you insist on productivity, then you should recommend ThreadRipper 16C32T to the OP.

Xeon X6550 seems to suit your needs well, if your goal is to not upgrade for a decade

You can get it for £10 as of today I think.

gavinh87 · 31 Jul 2017 at 14:15

voidshatter said:
I never said the 7800X to be a good CPU for gaming. You'll need the 7820X for gaming.

If you insist on productivity, then you should recommend ThreadRipper 16C32T to the OP.

Xeon X6550 seems to suit your needs well You can get it for £10 as of today I think.

You have contradicted yourself here, earlier in the thread you were saying that quads are enough, now you are saying an octo is needed.
You have no idea of my needs.
Troll somewhere else.

voidshatter · 31 Jul 2017 at 14:20

gavinh87 said:
You have contradicted yourself here, earlier in the thread you were saying that quads are enough, now you are saying an octo is needed.
You have no idea of my needs.
Troll somewhere else.

I think you are contradicting yourself. You keep mentioning price performance ratio, but selectively ignore the Pentium G4560 every time. You are saying that the number of cores is important, yet you dismiss ThreadRipper 1950X or Xeon X6550. I'm getting confused to what point you are trying to make.

7700K is the king for most gaming as of today, but what is 1700 best for? 1700 is neither the best bang for the buck, nor the king of multi-thread programming. It's a good compromise between various things, but not a specialised choice.

gavinh87 · 31 Jul 2017 at 14:42

voidshatter said:
I think you are contradicting yourself. You keep mentioning price performance ratio, but selectively ignore the Pentium G4560 every time. You are saying that the number of cores is important, yet you dismiss ThreadRipper 1950X or Xeon X6550. I'm getting confused to what point you are trying to make.

7700K is the king for most gaming as of today, but what is 1700 best for? 1700 is neither the best bang for the buck, nor the king of multi-thread programming. It's a good compromise between various things, but not a specialised choice.

Show me where I mentioned price. I have not selectively ignored the g4560, I even commented on it earlier.
I dimiss the thread ripper and xeon. Neither of those are required for gaming. Whatever advantages they bring over the mainstream desktop will be minimal for gaming. At the same time a quad core is not enough going forward. A 6/8 core on the mainstream platform is the way to go. No matter who your team is.
The 1700 is the best for people that do more than game, it's more than adequate for gaming and for productivity and it destroys the 7700k in streaming. A 10% performance deficit in gaming a small price to pay for the increases you get over the i7 elsewhere. Add the fact that a z170/z270 is looking like a dead end platform add more points to the ryzen system. I've not even spoke about heat/power consumption which is another joke on the i7.

voidshatter · 31 Jul 2017 at 14:53

gavinh87 said:
Show me where I mentioned price. I have not selectively ignored the g4560, I even commented on it earlier.
I dimiss the thread ripper and xeon. Neither of those are required for gaming. Whatever advantages they bring over the mainstream desktop will be minimal for gaming. At the same time a quad core is not enough going forward. A 6/8 core on the mainstream platform is the way to go. No matter who your team is.
The 1700 is the best for people that do more than game, it's more than adequate for gaming and for productivity and it destroys the 7700k in streaming. A 10% performance deficit in gaming a small price to pay for the increases you get over the i7 elsewhere. Add the fact that a z170/z270 is looking like a dead end platform add more points to the ryzen system. I've not even spoke about heat/power consumption which is another joke on the i7.

Applying your own logic, the Xeon X6550 is more than adequate for gaming and for productivity and it destroys the 7700K in streaming. You can now buy it for £10 from the internet.

~>Dg<~ · 31 Jul 2017 at 14:57

gavinh87 said:
This is not what we are disputing. Void seems to think quad cores are still the best choice going forward. No matter what your team is, nobody should be looking at a quad right now.

i wouldnt buy any quad core now but i do more than just game.i also wouldnt buy a ryzen chip at this moment when i know in august you will have 6 core intels.which will be better than ryzen and have the cores. amd is still a great option though. so its win win for all.also you will get the next ryzen with a better speed bump later in year.probably only another 200mhz on top but hey it how it is.

gavinh87 · 31 Jul 2017 at 15:03

voidshatter said:
Applying your own logic, the Xeon X6550 is more than adequate for gaming and for productivity and it destroys the 7700K in streaming. You can now buy it for £10 from the internet.

Except it's not is it. That's not going to get the most out of your £500-600 GPU.

gavinh87 · 31 Jul 2017 at 15:05

~>Dg<~ said:
i wouldnt buy any quad core now but i do more than just game.i also wouldnt buy a ryzen chip at this moment when i know in august you will have 6 core intels.which will be better than ryzen and have the cores. amd is still a great option though. so its win win for all.also you will get the next ryzen with a better speed bump later in year.probably only another 200mhz on top but hey it how it is.

Exactly this. There is only 2 sensible options at the moment. Either get a 1600/1700 or wait for coffeelake.

voidshatter · 31 Jul 2017 at 15:11

gavinh87 said:
Except it's not is it. That's not going to get the most out of your £500-600 GPU.

You don't get the most out of your £500-600 GPU with 1700 either, since in most games you get lower fps than 7700K does.

voidshatter · 31 Jul 2017 at 15:12

gavinh87 said:
Exactly this. There is only 2 sensible options at the moment. Either get a 1600/1700 or wait for coffeelake.

Sensible to you, but there are always options like the 7820X, which you can buy binned & delidded for about £400 in other countries.

Competitor rules

On the fence, Ryzen 1700, or i7 7700k, not overclocking

Deleted member 66701

Deleted member 66701