Question i5 6600k vs Ryzen 1700 Worth the Upgrade?

[richk1853]

I could buy a Ryzen 7 1700 for $200 CDN. Would also need a new motherboard and DDR4 RAM as I am using DDR3 with my Skylake. New RAM is pretty expensive, used not much cheaper. Selling off my old parts and buying the new parts when all's said and done would probably cost me about $200 out of pocket not counting time and energy. Worth the upgrade? First gen Ryzen doesn't seem to have the best gaming performance no matter how many cores and threads they pack, though that is slowly changing with games like Battlefield 5.

 

[denisrossoner]

No. Stay with i5 6600k.

 

[richk1853]

Thanks for the response. Any other thoughts?

 

[TerryLaze]

Thanks for the response. Any other thoughts?

Have you looked at battlefield 5 benchmarks?
That would clear thinks up for you.

You should overclock your CPU if you haven't already,and if you even have a fast enough GPU to max out your CPU.
Your mobo should be able to accept up to an i7-7700k (maybe needing a bios update to do it) and that's still on top of the gaming CPU lists.

 

[csangste23]

it depends on what you're doing really. I went from barely being able to play bf1 and bf5 on a 4690k overclocked because of the terrible studdering and 100% usage. I switched platforms and went with a 2700x. My experience improved tenfold but I can't say yours will because it's not as drastic of a jump.

 

[richk1853]

I have no real problems with games except BF5. BF1 has always been buttery smooth for me but there is a lot of stuttering in Battlefield 5 with drops to the 50s regardless of graphics settings. Have not tried the last two Assasin's Creed games but I imagine they would be similar to Battlefield 5.
I would pull the plug on the cheap Ryzen 1700 but I am afraid I would regret it once Ryzen 3000 arrives, like how I upgraded to the 6600k from the mediocre FX 6300 in Fall 2016 and 5 months later Ryzen came out (didn't believe Ryzen could be that good after the lack luster FX series hence why I upgraded to the soon to be obsolete 6600k).

 

[WhiteSnake91]

4c/4t is a bit lacking these days, that's unfortunate to hear you had stuttering no matter the settings. I agree with the other user, have you tried OCing your cpu? When I jumped to ryzen last year even on stock speeds it instantly smoothed out performance even while multitasking and streaming in games, I had an OC'd 2600k old sandy bridge which was still competent with the 8 threads, but, the old z68 mobo was either crapping out, or having no vrm at all was throttling and crashing it out and z68 and z77 boards are very hard to find these days that aren't all price gouged online. If you can, at this point, you could wait for ryzen 3000 series. Ryzen 1700 have been seen cheaply online recently though about 150-160. It all depends if you really want to play the demanding games and could sell your current parts to offset the cost or possibly make a profit. I personally had an i5 3570k at BF1's launch years ago and it was a stuttering mess and got eaten alive badly in 64 player multiplayer even after I tried OCing it. I mean, there's a reason 4c/4t has now been demoted to the i3 line. The cost of an i7 7700k might be more than a 1700 found cheap online and a B350 board, which, after some googling around online, people claim ryzen 3000 series will support and work on b350. I personally OC'd to 3.7 recently on the 1700 in anticipation for the new division 2 game, I figured with ryzen 1st gen topping out at like 4ghz if people could even reach that, me being 300mhz lower wasn't the end of the world.

I'm not sure if I'll get ryzen 3000 myself, I'm going to try to hold onto the 1700 as long as possible, I'd hope to get as much life out of this ryzen as I did the sandy bridge, the 2600k was over 7 years old when I moved on from it

 

[gggplaya]

Take a look at this chart: https://www.game-debate.com/news/25...ttlefield-v-pc-performance-bf5-cpu-benchmarks

As you can see, anything less than 8 threads in battlefield V will bottleneck your framerates severely. These are all with the same gpu and ram. You need 8 threads minimum these days for AAA titles. It's time to upgrade, however if I were you, I'd wait until ZEN2 releases in a few months. You'll be able to buy an 6 core or 8 core cpu very cheaply. Plus also the single core performance and clock speeds will be on par with intel.

 

[Gmoney06ss]

I definitely don't agree that you have to have a minimum of 8 threads for new titles. My 6600k plays new titles just fine. Oc to 4.6. Bf5 averages well over 80@1440p.

You mentioned still using ddr3, but not how much. 8gb,16gb? What gpu do you have?

 

[gggplaya]

I definitely don't agree that you have to have a minimum of 8 threads for new titles. My 6600k plays new titles just fine. Oc to 4.6. Bf5 averages well over 80@1440p.

You mentioned still using ddr3, but not how much. 8gb,16gb? What gpu do you have?

I have a Vega 64 GPU, and a Ryzen 1600. BFV has no bottlenecks coming from my CPU. It's always buttery smooth, especially with freesync. I also Alt-tab to my other monitor to type stuff in discord while I play. I play full screen windows at 1440p on my 27" monitor as well. I play with max settings, except for AA which I use AMD's 8xEQ AA override setting. I also use 130% render scaling, so I'm actually rendering above 1440p, then downscale to 1440p. I get about 80-100fps depending on the scene. My CPU maxes out 6 cores for just the game, then uses some of the extra threads to run the rest of the system. That's why I think you need 8 threads these days.

This guy agrees that the 6600k was limiting his BFV and he's running a 1080Ti. He upgraded his system to an 8700k and now his system runs smooth. From this video, it definitely has problems with cpu bottlenecking, and menu stutter. CPU core percentage is low, but so is gpu percentage. I'm not sure why that is, perhaps battlefield is just coded to need more threads, so some threads wait in queue?

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLlRvBX8Vt4

 

[Gmoney06ss]

I agree, if cores are available bf5 will most definitely use them. My cpu is constantly running 100%, but for some reason, still have smooth gameplay. 99% of my other games run flawlessly as well. I don't see a need to upgrade, just for one game. I should probably mention I only play single player, no multiplayer.

I also think bf5 chews through ram as well, so if OP only has 8gb, that may be another bottleneck.

I'm patiently waiting to see if the hype of ryzen 3xxx is what they say. If not I'll probably grab an 8700k/9700k. Though I do like the price to performance of amd, for my use(strictly gaming) Intel still wins, imo.

If upgrading solely to run one game better, I would wait and see what ryzen 3 is all about. I'm guessing they'll be a lot of people upgrading at that point, further lowering prices of 1st and 2nd gen variants.

 

[gggplaya]

Yea, I bought my Ryzen in 2017, so it'll be nice to just plop in a new CPU when the time comes. At the time, you could buy a 4 core i5 or a 6 core Ryzen 1600 for the same amount of money. I chose the Ryzen and I'm glad I did as my CPU isn't maxed at at 100% right now and everything is smooth. I don't like Intel, they're so greedy, they make minor changes to motherboard chipsets nearly every other year, which requires a whole new motherboard to upgrade your CPU. With Ryzen 3000, I'm just going to plop in more cores, clockspeed and iPC. Literally a 60 second upgrade.

 

[Flawws]

Why not go for the 2-Series chips?

 

[gggplaya]

I considered it, but since I'm already overclocked, I'd only be gaining about 200mhz in clock speed and 3-5% in IPC gains if I went for the 2600x. Also, i'm not feeling bottlenecked on any games, especially with Freesync turned on. Framerates are high(>80fps) and everything is smooth at max graphics. It just not worth the upgrade from the ryzen 1 series, and decided to wait until the 3000 series ZEN2 chips come out.

 

[richk1853]

I definitely don't agree that you have to have a minimum of 8 threads for new titles. My 6600k plays new titles just fine. Oc to 4.6. Bf5 averages well over 80@1440p.

You mentioned still using ddr3, but not how much. 8gb,16gb? What gpu do you have?

Sorry, haven't checked in a while. I have 16gb DDR3 1600 mhz, 1070ti and CPU is overclocked to 4.3 ghz (cannot clock higher no matter what voltage I throw at it, lost the silicon lottery).
I decided to wait for Ryzen 3000 unless I find a 6700k or 7700k for the cheap (highely unlikely, they want crazy prices for them).

 

[Gmoney06ss]

I decided to wait for Ryzen 3000 unless I find a 6700k or 7700k for the cheap (highely unlikely, they want crazy prices for them).

Exactly my plan for now. See if the 3000 series is worth it, if not I'm going 8700k.

And yes very highly unlikely, best I've found was $300 for the 7700k used, 6700k I did find for $289 new on eBay. Just to much to justify the cost.

 

[richk1853]

Exactly my plan for now. See if the 3000 series is worth it, if not I'm going 8700k.

And yes very highly unlikely, best I've found was $300 for the 7700k used, 6700k I did find for $289 new on eBay. Just to much to justify the cost.

On eBay people are bidding almost as much for a used 7700k as for a brand new retail 8700k. Why the heck are these people throwing so much money for an obsolete product? In what universe is a used 6700k/7700k a collector's item? I don't understand what is going on in those people's heads.