i5 8600k or ryzen 7 2700x

[csangste23]

Well i'm at a cross roads right now and I can't decide between these two CPU's. Both platforms are supporting for at least one more generation and i think AMD might be supporting two more on the AM4 socket. I have a high opinion of both CPU's and think either would perform well. I like the idea of supporting AMD and I like several things about the 2700x. For one the stock cooler is actually good and looks great as well. The 8600k of course doesn't come with one at all. AMD also has storemi which basically molds a mechanical hard drive and ssd's into one big drive giving you ssd like performance on applications you use often. The 2700x also has two more cores and TWELVE more threads. Obviously the difference here is that the 8600k's performance per core can't be touched by anything AMD. While the 2700x hovers around 4.2-4.3 the 8600k can get to 5.0-5.2 most of the time. I would like to start using blender as well so my main uses would be gaming and blender. Obviously the 8600k will have better gaming performance and it won't be completely useless in blender but as games are utilizing more threads and more cores I do truly believe it's not long until some games can scale to nearly the capacity of the 2700x core wise. both systems are similar in price so that's not really a factor. I do however have a 1440p 75hz monitor and a 1070ti which leads me to believe it doesn't really matter as much which I choose because my GPU will be the bottleneck. I like the 8600k's ability to be extremely overclocked and I like the fact that you can do a de-lid for way lower temperatures, I already have liquid metal and a de-lidding tool from my i5 4690k and could use it with the 8600k as well. What are you're guys thought's, in my situation which would you go with?

 

[agentnathan009]

While the 8600K might get you framerates at lower resolutions (720P), but the higher your resolution the closer the framerates between the two. If you intend to multi-task while gaming or stream your games etc, get the 2600 all the way, I fold at home on mine while I game and never have any issues. Games are becoming more threaded and having those extra threads will certainly help. I think that a game was recently announced that required 8 threads minimum to play. Since you are using a 1070ti, it doesn't matter which you choose since eye candy means your video card will be the bottleneck, but if you like playing at lowest detail setting and at lower resolutions then enjoy the extra FPS the 8600K will net you.

 

[cheesy_peas4]

While the 8600K might get you framerates at lower resolutions (720P), but the higher your resolution the closer the framerates between the two.

What? That makes no sense. Resolution has no effect on the CPUs workload.

 

[agentnathan009]

While the 8600K might get you framerates at lower resolutions (720P), but the higher your resolution the closer the framerates between the two.

Yes it does. Read some video and cpu reviews showing low res versus higher res gaming. At lower res the GPU outstrips the speed at which the CPU can process and you end up with a highest framerate, as you increase resolution the gpu then becomes the bottleneck with graphics processing.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_5_2600X/12.html

Versus frame rates between same Intel and AMD cpu

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_5_2600X/14.html

See how the frame rates get closer together the higher the resolution?


What? That makes no sense. Resolution has no effect on the CPUs workload.

 

[cheesy_peas4]

Yes it does. Read some video and cpu reviews showing low res versus higher res gaming. At lower res the GPU outstrips the speed at which the CPU can process and you end up with a highest framerate, as you increase resolution the gpu then becomes the bottleneck with graphics processing.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_5_2600X/12.html

Versus frame rates between same Intel and AMD cpu

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_5_2600X/14.html

See how the frame rates get closer together the higher the resolution?

"as you increase resolution the gpu then becomes the bottleneck with graphics processing."

Right. So the frame rates get close together at high resolution because the GPU is the deciding factor on performance... not CPU.

 

[agentnathan009]

Yes it does. Read some video and cpu reviews showing low res versus higher res gaming. At lower res the GPU outstrips the speed at which the CPU can process and you end up with a highest framerate, as you increase resolution the gpu then becomes the bottleneck with graphics processing.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_5_2600X/12.html

Versus frame rates between same Intel and AMD cpu

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_5_2600X/14.html

See how the frame rates get closer together the higher the resolution?

"as you increase resolution the gpu then becomes the bottleneck with graphics processing."

Right. So the frame rates get close together at high resolution because the GPU is the deciding factor on performance... not CPU.

I'll spell it out for you, if you game at low res, then you will get higher framerates with Intel, if you game at higher res then it doesn't really matter which one you get as the framerates will be fairly close given GPU bottlenecking performance. This sort of thing is used to tell which CPU has better IPC and processing capabilities, thus the higher IPC of Intel CPUs usually win when benchmarked at lower resolution, but once you raise the resolution then it really doesn't matter which one you pick unless you like having a higher thread count at a similarly priced Intel CPU. Is that clear enough for you? I think what I said was clear enough except for some vagueness in first post in one spot.


So, to answer your question again, do you stream your games or use Blender? Get an AMD. Do you want max FPS and don't care about thread counts? Get an Intel.

 

[cheesy_peas4]

I'll spell it out for you, if you game at low res, then you will get higher framerates with Intel, if you game at higher res then it doesn't really matter which one you get as the framerates will be fairly close given GPU bottlenecking performance. This sort of thing is used to tell which CPU has better IPC and processing capabilities, thus the higher IPC of Intel CPUs usually win when benchmarked at lower resolution, but once you raise the resolution then it really doesn't matter which one you pick unless you like having a higher thread count at a similarly priced Intel CPU. Is that clear enough for you? I think what I said was clear enough except for some vagueness in first post in one spot.


So, to answer your question again, do you stream your games or use Blender? Get an AMD. Do you want max FPS and don't care about thread counts? Get an Intel.

Spell it out all you want, it's still shitty advice. You make it sound like increasing resolution has a direct affect on the CPUs workload.

"if you game at higher res then it doesn't really matter which one you get as the framerates will be fairly close given GPU bottlenecking performance"

And whether the GPU bottlenecks or not depends on the game. You're not going to run into a GPU bottleneck in CSGO/Dota/LoL/WoW or any other MMO or RTS.

 

[agentnathan009]

I'll spell it out for you, if you game at low res, then you will get higher framerates with Intel, if you game at higher res then it doesn't really matter which one you get as the framerates will be fairly close given GPU bottlenecking performance. This sort of thing is used to tell which CPU has better IPC and processing capabilities, thus the higher IPC of Intel CPUs usually win when benchmarked at lower resolution, but once you raise the resolution then it really doesn't matter which one you pick unless you like having a higher thread count at a similarly priced Intel CPU. Is that clear enough for you? I think what I said was clear enough except for some vagueness in first post in one spot.


So, to answer your question again, do you stream your games or use Blender? Get an AMD. Do you want max FPS and don't care about thread counts? Get an Intel.

Spell it out all you want, it's still shitty advice. You make it sound like increasing resolution has a direct affect on the CPUs workload.

"if you game at higher res then it doesn't really matter which one you get as the framerates will be fairly close given GPU bottlenecking performance"

And whether the GPU bottlenecks or not depends on the game. You're not going to run into a GPU bottleneck in CSGO/Dota/LoL/WoW or any other MMO or RTS.

Well, how do you explain the ever increasing distance in framerates between equivalent CPUs from Intel and AMD as you lower the resolution? I think you don't understand CPUs as you keep talking about workload... Due to better IPC and other factors Intel usually manages higher framerates (efficiency in processing the things that the CPU processes for the GPU) compared to an equivalent AMD CPU at lower resolutions. I posted two pages you can look at to see the effect that I am referring to, if that doesn't make sense then flip a coin to choose. You keep focusing on one specific thing like it is some huge issue...

 

[cheesy_peas4]

Well, how do you explain the ever increasing distance in framerates between equivalent CPUs from Intel and AMD as you lower the resolution? I think you don't understand CPUs as you keep talking about workload...

Because by lowering the resolution you're removing the GPU bottleneck indirectly allowing the CPU to work on more frames, and Intel CPUs are better for games. If you had a hypothetical GPU with unlimited processing power, then resolution wouldn't make a difference at all.

Due to better IPC and other factors Intel usually manages higher framerates (efficiency in processing the things that the CPU processes for the GPU) compared to an equivalent AMD CPU at lower resolutions. I posted two pages you can look at to see the effect that I am referring to, if that doesn't make sense then flip a coin to choose. You keep focusing on one specific thing like it is some huge issue...

Yes, I'm aware Intel has better IPC and will get better framerates where a GPU bottleneck is not present. Yes, you posted pages of benchmarks that display what a GPU bottleneck looks like, but all the games used were very GPU heavy and running on max settings. Civ 6 maintains a large gap at 4k because it's a CPU limited game, which is my point.

I'm saying your advice is shitty because it's incorrect to use as a broad statement. It entirely depends on if you're going to be hitting a GPU bottleneck, and that depends largely on the game and graphics settings, even at high resolution.

 

[sr13798]

I am buying the 2700x now and upgrading in 6-9 months on the Ryzen 3000's 7nm on the same motherboard, offset some cost with selling the 2700x. At 1440p most games will have a small FPS difference. You may notice if you bought both and ran them side-by-side, but who on earth would do that?
Pay close attention to ram, I am getting the Sniper X 3400 2x8gb. Most issues have been ironed out, but I think going with G.Skill on AMD tested ram is a good idea.

 

[mdd1963]

8700K now, skip the upgrade for years to come...

If AMD's 7 nm actually delivers in 6-9 months, and *if* it suddenyl hit's 5 GHz and gives great gaming performance, it will not suddenly make the 8700K 'slow'...

 

[sr13798]

8700K now, skip the upgrade for years to come...

If AMD's 7 nm actually delivers in 6-9 months, and *if* it suddenyl hit's 5 GHz and gives great gaming performance, it will not suddenly make the 8700K 'slow'...

That could work as well. Really no wrong way to go, except that OP did not mention wanting to buy the $400 8700k. I like the idea of supporting the company making intel scurry around and put out more chips on 14nm. Probably be one more round of 14nm++++++++ from intel. I do like intel chips, but the competition is fantastic and good for consumers.
Oh, and the AMD 7nm will be on HPC vs SoC, and that will the interesting thing as single core boost will/should be much faster and keeping the chip compatible with AM4 boards will allow for 12 cores 24 threads, even rumors of 16 cores fitting on the AM4.
Either way 2019 is going to be interesting.

 

[csangste23]

I bought the 2700x with the logic that i'm using a 1440p 75hz ips panel monitor so the difference between the two wouldn't be noticeable at this moment in time. I got the 2700x for $289 and i'm happy with that price especially when it comes with a good cooler. I'm gonna try using some blender and that should be awesome with the 2700x. Both cpu's were good choices ryzen just seems like the more interesting choice atm. Hopefully Ryzen 3 doesn't disappoint. Thanks for the suggestions everyone!

 

[steelzoid]

I would always recommend to Intel, I know I know, it's an old-fashioned advice since AMD is just as good these days but I've always been with Intel and I can safely say I haven't regret using their CPU's for the past 15 years.

I would definitely go with the I5 8600K and get yourself a good high end motherboard ( https://innoreviews.com/best-motherboards-for-intel-core-i7-i5-i3-cpus-buyers-guide-2018/ ) so that you can overclock your CPU and make it even more powerful.

But then again, you probably already know this but the "K" versions don't have a cooler, and if you wish to overclock then you'll need a very good expensive cooler.

I5 8600K + High end Cooler + High End Motherboard = EXPENSIVE

For the same price or probably even cheaper I'd suggest you to go for a low budget motherboard and go with the I7 8700 (NON K) it'll be as good as a I5 8600K at 5Ghz overclock (which is quite hardcore).