A.R.S.E.

I ahve a PC build coming and I'm looking at trying to keep costs down but getting the best bang for buck. I'm kind of stuck at the moment on a CPU and GFX pairing. I save $100 if I go for the i5 7600k instead of the i7 7700k and a GTX1080. Would the extra $100 be worth the extra threads and lower power consumption for the i7? My PC is a gaming machine and doesn't do much else other than harass the ARSE Facebook chat.

I was banking on the Ryzen chips assisting my purchase but the prices for the same frequency seems about similar and the savings seem to only come at the top end.

I keep flip flopping (ha!) on the i5 vs i7. please help!

I'm looking at a new workstation build and I'm struggling with CPU choice too. I feel like CPU tech has been stagnant for a long time.

I'd say for gaming and if you aren't overclocking, the i5 would be a good way to go. Have you looked at benchmarks? I can't imagine you'd see a massive improvement between those CPUs.

Righteous wrote:I'm looking at a new workstation build and I'm struggling with CPU choice too. I feel like CPU tech has been stagnant for a long time.

I'd say for gaming and if you aren't overclocking, the i5 would be a good way to go. Have you looked at benchmarks? I can't imagine you'd see a massive improvement between those CPUs.

i5 is generally a better solution to the i7 for gaming. I think I might hold off on the purchase and wait for some benchmarking to come out for th Ryzen and prices aimed at the i5. Ryzen is due on 3rd March.

Santaria wrote:

Righteous wrote:I'm looking at a new workstation build and I'm struggling with CPU choice too. I feel like CPU tech has been stagnant for a long time.

I'd say for gaming and if you aren't overclocking, the i5 would be a good way to go. Have you looked at benchmarks? I can't imagine you'd see a massive improvement between those CPUs.

i5 is generally a better solution to the i7 for gaming. I think I might hold off on the purchase and wait for some benchmarking to come out for th Ryzen and prices aimed at the i5. Ryzen is due on 3rd March.

Yeah, I've kept my eye on those. Unfortunately for me, I need more PCIe slots than what's in the first lot of Motherboards. I need at least 4 slots and I've only seen motherboards with 3. Otherwise I'd be all over them.

As mentioned, for games, you're not going to notice the difference between an i5 and i7. It's really nothing. Only if you're doing other workstation type loads is it going to be remotely worth the extra investment in cpu power. Far better spent on the 1080

The more I read into new the AMD CPUs the more I like. I'm almost tempted to build a pure AMD machine just to see how it runs. It could really do wonders for the PC market if Intel and Nvidia finally have some competition.

Righteous wrote:The more I read into new the AMD CPUs the more I like. I'm almost tempted to build a pure AMD machine just to see how it runs. It could really do wonders for the PC market if Intel and Nvidia finally have some competition.

AMD GPU's aren't out for a long while yet. AMD's haven't had any GPU success since the 9 series in my opinion. I need to wait for the mid-range CPU's to come out because I can't justify the extra cost for a gaming machine atm when the frequencies are lower than the i5's. Here's hoping!

Santa, as Pinger mentioned, you wont know the difference between i5 and i7. You wouldn't use an i7 to its full potential. i5's runs like a bloody train. I have a 4th gen i5 4670K and I haven't looked at overclocking it. It's on an MSI Z87-G45 gaming mainboard and when I put in my old Sapphire 6870 GPU I was amazed! It ran so well.

As for AMD GPU's. Only now I would consider an upgrade over my 7970. That would mainly be to go VR. It's not that the new AMD is bad it's just that the 7970's had some punch to them and it's now that the new range of cards are worth getting.

I played Wow, Overwatch, Elder Scolls Online, AC, PCars, Dirty rally and it's always nailed at 60 fps. They wont go over 60 fps.

Ryzen bang for buck, seem to be right up there.

New GPU, still unsure about atm.

Every time I've decided to try something different and give AMD/ATI GPU's a go I've ended up regretting it for one reason or another.

Cursed wrote:Every time I've decided to try something different and give AMD/ATI GPU's a go I've ended up regretting it for one reason or another.

AMD was kinda back in the day and the Intel has held supreme for quite a while now. Same with AMD GPU's. The Ryzen chips are released on the 3rd of March so will keep an eye out on benching when they come out. I can afford to wait a couple of weeks before my PC build considering the new tech.

I'm waiting as well. Hoping the amd chips will drive down the 7700 prices a bit
I am not a fan of amd otherwise. I had only problems back when i tried them.

ysu wrote:I'm waiting as well. Hoping the amd chips will drive down the 7700 prices a bit
I am not a fan of amd otherwise. I had only problems back when i tried them.

I'm hoping on the prices coming down too. I was always an AMD/ATI fanboy but they really dropped the ball. Have been Intel/Nvidia for a long time now.

Well I'm lying. Back around the 386/486/pentium days I had amd cpus. They were ok. But later (last 15 or so years) AMD has really slipped, in my opinion.

oh, oh, good stuff is on the horizon! The 1080 Ti is coming.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11172/nvi ... t-week-699

Good times. I'll have a monster of a computer built this year

The first reliable tests are coming in for Ryzen. Seems good bang for buck, but it's not unseating Intel off the top just yet.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11170/the ... nd-1700/23

Edit: the 1800x may not be that good bang for buck in fact...

Edit: more reviews. Lots of it around now. eg
http://hothardware.com/reviews/amd-ryze ... and-review
http://www.techspot.com/review/1345-amd ... 00x-1700x/

Seems like cache latency is causing a bottleneck in games that are sensitive to that in Ryzen. There is evidence of this in the fact that power consumption is lower in those cases were it is unexpectedly slow because there is a bottleneck somewhere... and the cache latency is horrible (double Intel), they are using some excuse that the measurements aren't measuring it right but I find that hard to believe.

To answer your question I would go i7, more things are liking 8 threads more and more and the i7s appear to be overclocking consistently higher than the i5s for what ever reason. Don't forget to get 3000+ RAM, with CPUs this fast RAM bandwidth is important.

ily

It seems people are pointing fingers at the inconsistency and the new architecture, lack of drivers and software updates needed.
I've read someone drawing a parallel between this new architecture and the early hyper-threading problems.
It may yet get sorted out and provide a more consistent - and higher - performance. In some areas it's pretty darn impressive.

One thing is sure; it is clocked pretty aggressively by default, so you can't really get anything out of it there. On the other hand it's very good at power consumption, so I guess heat isn't an issue.
Edit: scrap that, I've seen tests where it was well above the 7700k.

i7 77000k will remain the CPU to get for a while it seems. oc it a bit and you're set for a couple of years.


Edit again: Some say that this is an intel killer - just not for the gaming market.

I looked at some benchmarks and with what I need it for, it didn't quite fit the bill for me.

If I was building a machine purely for 3D work, it's a real bargain. It's faster and significantly quicker than the intel alternative.

But I tend to use single threaded applications too.

So I've gone with a compromise and picked up a 6850k. More of my stuff is leaning on GPU these days. The 2011 architecture gives me more PCI slots that I need for expansion cards.

I might revisit the AMDs in 12month as I tend to do a rebuild every year. I make a living off these machines so any time I can save with better hardware is worth the cost.

Really interested to see what they come up with their quad core stuff they are releasing later in the year. Maybe some crazy high core frequencies?

Righteous wrote:I looked at some benchmarks and with what I need it for, it didn't quite fit the bill for me.

If I was building a machine purely for 3D work, it's a real bargain. It's faster and significantly quicker than the intel alternative.

But I tend to use single threaded applications too.

So I've gone with a compromise and picked up a 6850k. More of my stuff is leaning on GPU these days. The 2011 architecture gives me more PCI slots that I need for expansion cards.

I might revisit the AMDs in 12month as I tend to do a rebuild every year. I make a living off these machines so any time I can save with better hardware is worth the cost.

Really interested to see what they come up with their quad core stuff they are releasing later in the year. Maybe some crazy high core frequencies?

I was reading their i3 buster will be 4 core, but the i5 buster will be 6 core.

To say I was disappointed is an understatement. The i7 and sometimes the i5 are still significantly ahead in the gaming and single thread applications. The r1700x which I had my eye on isn't as good as I'd hoped for the price. I really want to dive in and get one for the hope that BIOS and driver optimizations fix up the shaky start, but my 2500k and GTX760 are really starting to show their age now and I'm not sure how long I can wait. It's the risk of buying 1st gen I guess.

So conflicted! Still none-the-wiser! For gaming, i7... but what if games start shifting towards multi-threading? It's difficult to future proof yourself right now but when I bought the 2500k I didn't think it would last as long as it has either.

Yeah, it's a tough choice. I totally get the hesitation.

My machine is on the fritz at the moment so had to pull the pin and just get something. It's maybe a case of waiting 12months on the AMD to see how they go for support.

I guess there just needs to be a userbase for them. Considering the PS4 and XBOX both use AMD tech that's 8 core, you'd think it wouldn't be too far removed to optimize PC stuff.

I remember seeing some benchmarks somewhere for Codemasters F1 2016 that showed it performed much better on higher core machines.

You can never future proof yourself with computers. 2 years is the most.

ysu wrote:You can never future proof yourself with computers. 2 years is the most.

I dunno mate. My 2500k and GTX760 have lasted nearly 4 years.

I've decided to take the plunge on an R1700x and GTX1080. Mostly in the hope that AMD will get updates and games will become optimized for the processor. If Intel release something int he future then it's really only a CPU and MOBO to replace. I do tend to run the servers etc from my PC when playing with mates/wife so extra multi-tasking power will be good.

You can use a computer longer, but if you want to keep within a certain level (be it the top or the next level) I think you need to upgrade more often.
Having said that, I'm sitting on my current computer for a good while (at least the mobo+cpu) which is a 3570k (!) But the gfx card, memory, and monitor got upgraded.

Below is the build I'm going for with a $3k budget. I have some brand loyalty to Corsair and Gigabyte so I've picked them even though there may be cheaper choices. I'm happy to be challenged on components though if anyone has had good experiences?