[SOLVED] I want to go AMD but friends are telling me intel is better

[Jesse.m.niemi]

I want to build a pc and an opportunity came up where i can build it in a April.
i have been prepping my build for a while, but when i say i chose amd over intel because cost my friends start telling me how good intel is and why i should change to it. i have everything ready in my amazon basket that i can order them when its April. but now that i have done some research intel seems to be better for gaming (which is what ill be using the pc for). i downgraded the gpu from a 1070 to a 1060 and changed the mother board on pc part picker.

the amd setup https://de.pcpartpicker.com/list/2tcGgw

the intel setup https://de.pcpartpicker.com/list/dJB77W

tell me which one is better and if you like change them for it to be better.
if you want to change the items my budget is 1100 euros.
by the way this is my first build and will be guided by a professional while building. all my knowledge is from linus tech tips and other pc building or pc discussion yt channels.

tell me if you can make it better or cheaper but still good. or if one is really good. i am pretty nervous on using 1 thousand for a pc thats not good.

 

[Gam3r01]

Given that this build is set for april, and zen 2 is slated for launch shortly after, it would make sense to put this decision making on hold until more details are know.
Prices, stocks, and new hardware are all things that will change between now and the purchase date.

 

[LordVile]

Because the 9700 is overpriced and locked? You’re getting 8 cores no hyper threading for more than the 2700 which has 8/16. Zen 2 will still be less than the 9700 and beat in on every front.

 

[LordVile]

You can’t OC an 8700 it’s a locked chip.

Matx boards can be bought with adequate phases for good OCing

Why? Matx is the better platform currently as Multi GPU is pretty much dead.

 

[TJ Hooker]

If he overclocks it will cost more than 10% extra than his current budget to get the intel built but overclocking has been ruled out he was considering a better cooler than the evo 212 and also the 9700 for an extra £7 over the 8700

There is currently a 10% price difference between his amd and intel build. If he buys now the intel will have more performance if he buys amd he might have the option of buying another amd cpu released in 5 months later or holding off buying until later

but if the 2600 is fine because the monitor is only 60hz why not upgrade a the monitor if he's supposed to buy another cpu later on?

20% more for 10% of the price sounds like reasonable value and after building this system he probably won't look to upgrade for maybe 4 years and then what he could've waited 4 years for another advanced cpu by then.

No, it's not 10% more. Look at the pcpartpicker build I posted and then replace the 2600 with a 9700k, B360, and 212 EVO. Price ends up ~30% higher. If you swap out the 2600 for a 2600X, the Intel build is still ~25% more expensive. But the 9700K only performs 15% better in games on average.
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i7-9700k-9th-gen-cpu,5876-9.html

And a 212 EVO probably isn't even enough for the 9700K to even sustain its stock boost clocks. And cheap motherboards might not allow it to reach max boost either.

Edit: I missed that the OP only plans to buy parts in April. Making this whole discussion semi-pointless. No reason to plan out all the parts you want to buy months in advance, only sensible way to do it is look for what's the best deal at the time you want to buy.

 

[nobspls]

Trusting your friends is better than trusting the paid pundits here trying to sell stuff for their corporate overlords. The "better" decision should be based on your criteria and not something other people try to impose on you.

Having both AMD and Intel builds, I can tell you for a fact that you will not get the top bench score with the AMD builds, but the bang-for-buck is AMD favor, especially if you can get something like the $100 R5 1600 (which is par with the 2600) and it is up to you to decide if it is worth paying extra for bragging rights.

See:
https://www.microcenter.com/product/478826/ryzen-5-1600-32ghz-6-core-am4-boxed-processor-with-wraith-spire-cooler

And the comparison
https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-Ryzen-5-2600-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-1600/3955vs3919

BTW here is my R5 1600 with a GTX1070 for reference:
https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/12406130

And here is my old i7-2600K from back in 2011 with very similar results:
https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/1635135

In comparison here is someone's 8700K with a GTX1070:
https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/10633462

My advice would be for you to figure out your goal and don't get distracted. If you are aiming for top gaming performance don't select options that dilutes that. If you are aiming to get best bang-for-buck, don't waster money on stuff for marginal gains. Brand loyalty is just people being fooled by the marketing monkeys.

Trying to split the difference picking stuff in the in-between will just leave you with mediocre compromises and nothing satisfactory for any purpose, unless of course you like mediocre results.

 

[jankerson]

I want to build a pc and an opportunity came up where i can build it in a April.
i have been prepping my build for a while, but when i say i chose amd over intel because cost my friends start telling me how good intel is and why i should change to it. i have everything ready in my amazon basket that i can order them when its April. but now that i have done some research intel seems to be better for gaming (which is what ill be using the pc for). i downgraded the gpu from a 1070 to a 1060 and changed the mother board on pc part picker.

the amd setup https://de.pcpartpicker.com/list/2tcGgw

the intel setup https://de.pcpartpicker.com/list/dJB77W

tell me which one is better and if you like change them for it to be better.
if you want to change the items my budget is 1100 euros.
by the way this is my first build and will be guided by a professional while building. all my knowledge is from linus tech tips and other pc building or pc discussion yt channels.

tell me if you can make it better or cheaper but still good. or if one is really good. i am pretty nervous on using 1 thousand for a pc thats not good.

I recommend waiting until April to even start thinking about what to do.

That will also give you time to save up more money.

 

[TJ Hooker]

@nobspls the OP is posting links to pcpartpicker Germany. Don't think it's likely they have a microcenter nearby...

Price difference between a 1600 and 2600 on pcpartpicker Germany is 20 euro.

 

[nobspls]

@nobspls the OP is posting links to pcpartpicker Germany. Don't think it's likely they have a microcenter nearby...

Price difference between a 1600 and 2600 on pcpartpicker Germany is 20 euro.

Is 20 euro worth the 3% gain? 20/180 is roughly 11% price premium for 3% gain (overclocked) or up to 9%(running stock).. But everyone well knows that the 1600 overclocks easily and AMD basically suppressed the 1600 non-OC clock speed probably to limit their liability from lawsuits.

 

[TJ Hooker]

@nobspls It only adds ~2% to the total build cost. So if it adds 3-9% to performance, yes I'd say it's a good buy. Regarding OCing the 1600, the OP has made it clear they don't want to OC. So I guess the difference would be closer to 9% based on your numbers.

 

[nobspls]

@nobspls It only adds ~2% to the total build cost. So if it adds 3-9% to performance, yes I'd say it's a good buy. Regarding OCing the 1600, the OP has made it clear they don't want to OC. So I guess the difference would be closer to 9% based on your numbers.

Moving the goal post or lying.. 2% of total cost ... this is some real cute marketing spin. Why not just say the machine can go for 10000 euro and 20 euros is just 0.2% of the total cost. Utter nonsense.

It doesn't matter what the OP said about OC. When you get a cheap $100 R5 1600, you OC it without a second thought. there is little to no risk and you can return it right away if it doesn't cut it. If goal is to maximize bang for the buck, you need to OC and you want to get the lowest prices. Doing less than that is failing and ending up with mediocre crap.

The important thing is the OP needs to figure out his goals are first. Putting down nonsense arbitrary rules like no OC is just plain silly. Why even bother with a 9700K if there is no OC.

 

[boju]

The OP is worried to overclock because their experience overclocking a graphics card didn't go well.

Overclocking a cpu is easier though imo so they may consider it. Stock base and boost performance nowadays is pretty good so it's not all that essential.

Regarding 9th gen, (besides being known the k series offer a higher base and boost speed) locked versions aren't available yet afaik.

 

[TJ Hooker]

Spoiler

@nobspls It only adds ~2% to the total build cost. So if it adds 3-9% to performance, yes I'd say it's a good buy. Regarding OCing the 1600, the OP has made it clear they don't want to OC. So I guess the difference would be closer to 9% based on your numbers.

Moving the goal post or lying.. 2% of total cost ... this is some real cute marketing spin. Why not just say the machine can go for 10000 euro and 20 euros is just 0.2% of the total cost. Utter nonsense.

Given that I hadn't previously stated any other method of judging value for money, I don't know how I could be moving my goal posts. I just presented an alternative method to what you suggested. It's fine if you disagree with it, but it doesn't automatically make it wrong nor does it mean I'm "lying". And contrary to what you're implying, I didn't just make up a budget to suit my point. I used the budget that the OP stated.

Here's an example of why I think that looking at cost relative to total build cost can be effective. Let's compare an Athlon 200GE to a Ryzen 1600/2600. The latter cost 2.5 to 3 times as much, but would only provide maybe double the FPS. If you look at perf/$ of the CPU in isolation, one would conclude that the 200GE would be the 'better' buy. But I think we'd both agree that the Ryzen 5 is well worth the extra money in most cases. Which is demonstrated when you compare the cost of the Ryzen 5 (about 100 euro extra) to the cost of a build.

At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter if we agree though. We both presented different ways of judging value for money, the OP can decide which makes sense to them.

The "better" decision should be based on your criteria and not something other people try to impose on you.
[...]
It doesn't matter what the OP said about OC. When you get a cheap $100 R5 1600, you OC it without a second thought.

You don't think you're being a little hypocritical here? I agree that the OP really ought to consider it as you're just leaving performance on the table if you don't, but it's their call.

 

[tazmo8448]

Put it this way...if you have deep pockets... go with Intel as their single core is a tad bit ahead of single core AMD...few things use single core anymore to make a difference
If you wan to save money go with AMD.....these days the difference is like arguing between BMW & Mercedes .
Better yet go to YouTube an search for that very thing...you'll be surprised at what people who do nothing but test machines say about this very thing.

 

[CanoeBeyond]

Intel is not a good platform to buy into right now, it doesn’t give enough performance to warrant its price, it’s in constant flux because they never expected AMD to be this competitive again and you’re likely to be investing in a dead socket whereas Zen2 is coming to AM4 in summer and is looking to wipe away intels IPC and clock advantage for a lower cost. Leaks are the 8c/16t Zen2 CPU is faster per core than the 9900K

I couldn't agree more. Have 5x Ryzen 7 systems running science apps and they're crazy fast compared to anything I've used previously (and that's a lot of systems). AMD is currently ahead of Intel in both price and overall performance and pulling away. Go with AMD and spend the savings on a better graphics card and larger SSD (larger SSD = longer life).

>> "I want to go AMD but friends are telling me intel is better"

Your friends are living in the past.

 

[nobspls]

...
Your friends are living in the past.

What right do you have to insult his friends and spread misinformation. Here is real data

You only see Ryzen make it to top of the lower half in all the charts, and on often they are competing just to barely beat the good old i7-2600k, and none of the Ryzen can even claim to be convincingly NOT beaten by the old Haswell 4790K.

Just a random chart:
https://www.gamersnexus.net/images/media/2018/cpus/9700k/intel-i7-9700k-fc5-1080p_1.png

Can you show me from this chart just where AMD is ahead of Intel?