Ryzen 1600 vs 8600k

[pandagains]

Currently I am debating between the Ryzen 1600 and the i5 8600k. At my local Microcenter, the Ryzen 5 1600 paired with a ASUS ROG STRIX B350-F is about $255 while the i5-8600k is about $310 including the cost of the Z370 board. From my research, the i5 noticeable gaps ryzen 1600 as well as the 1700 in many games such as GTA V, PUBG, BF1, etc. BUT, my main concern is in the future, when games will supposedly utilize more threads in favor of the 1600. The AM4 socket also has benefits with future AM*D CPU lineups when upgrading. But something about the benchmarks (8600k seems to destroy the 1600 by 20+ fps at times.) and single threaded power makes it hard to chose. In that case, the $50 or so dollars seems worth it for me, but I'm worried about the future of games that may put the heavily threaded ryzen cpus at an advantage, as i don't plan on swapping CPUs in the near 2-3 years. Please post your opinions, Thanks.

 

[sizzling]

We are only just seeing games benefit from more than 4 cores in the last couple of years, its only just getting more common. This was the same argument people made about the AMD FX series but that didn't turn out the way some people expected. I'd base any decision on todays benchmarks, none of us know the future but people gambled on the old FX series being a better buy long term and that isn't what happened.

Also I'm not convinced AMD's next gen CPU's will work with 300 series based on an article I read. Yes AMD said they were sticking with AM4 but that does not automatically mean 300 series board will definitely support next gen CPU's. Look at Intel 1151 socket, Coffee Lake uses the same socket but cannot use 100 or 200 series boards.

 

[Barty1884]

The 8600K will usually win-out in most titles, more often than not - Overclocked, 1600 can catch up some, but equally the 8600K can OC to reopen the gap. The differences lie moreso in the 'minimum' FPS.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i5_8600K/14.html

Of course, it'll depend on the GPU you want to pair it with - and the resolution you want to play at.
At 4K, for example, you'll be hard pressed to find much of a performance difference between either chip.


Yes, the AM4 socket is to be supported through 2020 but, as you stated you don't plan on swapping CPUs in 2-3 years, the chances of that being a worthwhile consideration are slim.

Also I'm not convinced AMD's next gen CPU's will work with 300 series based on an article I read. Yes AMD said they were sticking with AM4 but that does not automatically mean 300 series board will definitely support next gen CPU's. Look at Intel 1151 socket, Coffee Lake uses the same socket but cannot use 100 or 200 series boards.

Logically, AMD are still making up ground on Intel so, while they theoretically could 'pull and Intel' and require new chipsets, I highly doubt it. They've made the point numerous times than the AM4 socket will be supported through 2020. Now, that doesn't expressly mean "chipsets still compatible through 2020", but it would be a very stupid move on AMD's part to not 'truly' support it through 2020. They don't currently have the luxury to screw over their customers :lol:


Ryzen is a great gaming chip, from a "value" standpoint and is usually my recommendation but, given you're only looking at $50 or so, the 8600K would be my personal preference..... although you can't really go wrong with either, the gap is small enough that the 8600K makes sense (to me), assuming 1080p or 1440p gaming..

Today, you also have to consider the differences in RAM prices (that are all ridiculously high anyway).
Ryzen really benefits from 3000MHz or greater..... Intel platforms, not so much. You can net very similar performance with anything from 2400MHz to 3000MHz+

You're paying a minimum of $15-$20 premium for 3000MHz or greater, 2x8GB. Not a huge difference, but it's still a difference.

$255 + $180 (3000MHz) = $435 (Ryzen)
$310 + $160 (2400MHz) = $470 (Intel)
Gap gets even closer when you factor the 'complete' cost to the builds.

While it's difficult not to get caught worrying about cores/threads.... from a strict gaming standpoint, I think we're still a few years away from >6 cores being commonplace in gaming. If your workloads were more than just gaming, and the cores/threads made sense in those workloads, the 1600 would be a great buy.

 

[pandagains]

Thanks for all the answers! i'm planning on using either a GTX 1060 or 1070 with this build. If I were to choose the 8600k, which MOBO bundle would y'all recommend on Microcenter, as I am not too familiar with motherboards. The $310 bundle was the cheapest, while there were others costing roughly $340-$350. Here is a link to the page: http://www.microcenter.com/product/486089/Core_i5-8600K_Coffee_Lake_36_GHz_LGA_1151_Boxed_Processor
Note that I do plan on SOME overclocking, but not too much where I would have to mess with the voltages. Thanks!

 

[Barty1884]

I'm not too familiar with Microcenter's specifics.
I see "save $30" on the CPU when bundled with a MB and the same on the MB when bundled with a CPU? Do you save $60 off the bundle?

I'd opt for the Prime Z370-P as a good balance of features/price.
http://www.microcenter.com/product/502159/PRIME_Z370-P_LGA_1151_ATX_Intel_Motherboard

$230 Cpu + $140 = $370.... so either $340 or $310...

 

[pandagains]

It's -$30 off of the cost of the CPU+original price of MB. But thanks for your help and replies. Do you recommend I wait until DDR4 sees a decrease in price or buy the bundle, put it aside, and wait to buy RAM?

 

[Barty1884]

I'd wait. Especially with microcenter, they'll always have deals on. I you have a system that works for you now, waiting a bit longer isn't going to hurt and will likely benefit either your bank balance, or the quality of the components you can get for the same money