• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

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

Really doubt i would be pushing for 5.0ghz on a 7700k. Would happily settle at 4.6-4.8 where as on Ryzen it seems to be easy enough to hit 3.9 before you need to wallop the voltage. This is all chip dependant.

My own i7 920 runs 3.8 at stock Voltage but needs serious amounts to go past it. i am happy not to push that extra bit.
 
Doobedoo said:
Just a reminder as you seem to be a little confused ;)

So I'm really on the fence between Ryzen and i7 for my next build. Looking at the 1700, and the 7700k.

Its mostly for gaming (PUBG, Rocket League, Overwatch, maybe Fortnite etc). However I'm a software developer (mostly web), so will have various IDE's, GIT / db clients open etc.

Also its unlikely I will be overclocking. I haven't OC'd since my AMD Athlon about 12+ years ago, as more concerned with system longevity, stability, etc. I want this to last for at least 5 years, but current system (i7 950) is 7 years old.
Click to expand...

Stock settings, Cinebench R15: multi-thread, single-thread

7700K: 963, 187
Ryzen 1700: 1415, 136
 
According to your numbers 4% of 7700K can do 5.2ghz and we've seen 20% of 1700s can do 4.0ghz.

Yet

voidshatter said:
According to Silicon Lottery, 3.9GHz is almost the maximum stable frequency, while 7700K can do 5.2GHz. I'd say it's easier for 7700K to achieve 5GHz stable than 1700 to achieve 3.9GHz stable.
Click to expand...

Good luck with rationalising your post. Everyone can see the BS.
 
voidshatter said:
Stock settings, Cinebench R15: multi-thread, single-thread

7700K: 963, 187
Ryzen 1700: 1415, 136
Click to expand...

Finally :) So the 1700 shows a 46.94% increase in multi-threaded and decrease of 27.27 in single threaded.

So are we now in agreement that the 1700 is the better option? It has a better overall performance than the 7700k, cheaper overall platform cost, longer socket lifespan so you can easily upgrade in the future to zen 2, zen 3, also Amd are also the more consumer friendly company.

Glad we've finally come to the right conclusion ;) :D.
 
If one was to pick a biased benchmark, then it would have been Linpack by Intel Math Kernel Library to burn the AVX instruction sets:

uhapm7F.jpg
 
Not interested we have already shown you that the 1700 is the better all around Cpu out of the 2. Your welcome :D

The only question that remains is it worth waiting for coffee lake?
 
Doobedoo said:
Not interested we have already shown you that the 1700 is the better all around Cpu out of the 2. Your welcome :D

The only question that remains is it worth waiting for coffee lake?
Click to expand...

Well he said AMD CPUs had more errors in another thread,so now is talking about extreme overclocking which increases the chance of errors,delidding and direct chip cooling which increases the chance of errors due to potential physical damage and I assume running the memory controller out of spec which will lead to more errors,and also not using ECC RAM either.

For someone so terrified of CPU errors,he sure likes taking risks with his CPUs!!
 
voidshatter said:
FIY, Linpack is the benchmark used by the Top 500 List. If you want your supercomputer to make it to the hall of fame then you have to follow their rules. In short, it solves linear equations and is relevant to many scientific computations.
Click to expand...

I don't know where you got those screens from, but this seems to disagree:-

SYdVLxj.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom