cryoburner :
Might there be any B350 boards there that cost substantially less than B450? I'm just wondering, since the 1600 could overclock to similar (or perhaps slightly better) performance levels as a stock-clocked 2600, provided it was paired with an overclocking-capable motherboard. And the 1600 should actually include a better boxed cooler than the 2600, the same one that's included with the 2600X. That was what made the 1600 arguably the best value option from the first-generation Ryzen lineup, since it could be overclocked to 1600X performance levels even with the included cooler. The 1600X didn't include a cooler at all and cost more, which made it less of a value, something they changed for the second-generation, where the X-parts now come with the better coolers.
If it cost less for a Ryzen 1600 + B350 board than for a 2600 + A320, then the first-generation CPU on the unlocked motherboard might arguably be the slightly better option for the money. You didn't mention B350 though, and I'm not sure how the prices might compare where you are. Having an unlocked board would also leave open the possibility of overclocking a newer Ryzen CPU in the future, since supposedly these boards will be supported with new processors for the next CPU generation or two.
On that note, it might be worth simply waiting to see what next year's CPUs have to offer though. The i5-6600 is still a pretty capable CPU in nearly all games, after all. The extra cores and threads might help for streaming and editing, but in most of today's games they won't help much if you're not live-streaming, since games still tend to be optimized to run reasonably well on recent quad-cores. It sounds like next year's Ryzens will likely offer even greater performance and efficiency gains, as they are to be built on the 7nm manufacturing node, a pretty substantial shrink compared to the 14/12nm nodes used for current processors. There is no word yet on exactly when those will be out, but I suspect it should be within the first half of the year, and my best guess would be around the second quarter. Intel also has CPUs coming out on an improved process as well, but that might not be until near the end of next year, if not early 2020.
I feel really bad for you writing all of this in the same day I bought the CPU. It was the Ryzen 1700. But I won't ignore what you wrote and at least we get a good discussion.
So, the B350 are not doing so well in price either, and some of them are just a tuned up a320 from what I heard. In the end, I found this gigabyte, https://www.gigabyte.com/br/Motherboard/GA-A320MA-M2-rev-10#kf, wherever I looked, with a great price. Some people said that the 4+3 something was good on that board and it was definitely one of the best a320. The only b350 in that range of price only have two slots for ram, and I prefer to keep that a mobo with more slots than the possibility of OC, since I never really had interest in doing it. In another forum, people got really intense saying to me to spend more and that I would regret not being able to overclock (after 2 years with this pc, never missed it) and people go really crazy sometimes when involve someones elses money. I though that the Wraith Stealth was good (and proably is better than intel's) but I heard that the Wraith Spire was better as well. The 1600 would have been a good choice, but the sale ended and the price difference went from 50 to 10 dollars, so that's why I didn't buy it. But If ended up buying the 1700, I would have done it still with the 1600 on sale. But if the Ryzen 7 wasn't on the competition, the 1600 was more appealing indeed.
Also, as I said, I don't care too much about OC, so a good A320 is better cost benefit for me. Even if I had chosen the 1600, I would probably pare it with a a320 anyway, because you get it.
I though about wating for the next gen, but I remembered that the 3700 wouldn't come out at the same price of the current 1700, obviously. The 2700 is 150 dollars more expensive already, and the 1700 was on sale. Alsom, I would have to wait until the end of next year, and by them, the valeu of my CPU could have dropped even more, you know?
But it's good to see you say that it's still a capable CPU. I mean. I think so too, but I sold it to my friend and I'm a little afraid of that, of them regreting the decision of something and saying: 4 cores are not so good. Of course it's their responsibility, but still... haha The i5 6600 gets good framerates in lots of games, and my performance will remain mostly the same, but I realised that it's not so much 50/50 and I spend a lot of time editing. The 2600 would've been very good for my needs too, but I decided to go nuts and have a lot of free room in threads, even though 12 are great, as I said lots of times (at least in other forums). The performance of the Ryzen 7 is 6% inferior in comparison to the mainstream second gen, but I think it was a small price to pay, even more when you consider the inconsistency of benchmarks. For example, I saw a benchmark of shadow of mordor with my setup: avg fps: 94, min: 60. Then I watched with the ryzen 1700. avg: 88, min:60. THEN, I tested myself: avg: 88, min: 50. Another two tests. Gta 5 on one channel: (with 2080 ti) i7 8700k 150fps, 2700x 150fps (both using 90% or more of gpu); other channel: (with 1080 ti) i7 8700k 180fps (70% gpu), 2700x 180fps (60% gpu), 1700x 150fps (50%). These things will never add up. i didn't think they were real, but there are sites that change the results? I was so hung up on these benchmarks that I must have seen +30 videos without couting forums and sites, and they don't represent reality, they just give you an idea.
I'm not a hipster, I swear, but one game that makes a lot of success in my channel is Dying Light, and from what I saw, the Ryzens 5 keep at 55% of cpu usage and the 7 keeps at 40%. I wanted to livestream the game and I like to make videos of it, but with the i5 the usage is 90% 90% of the time. I can even record if I turn on v-sync because the cpu holds it self at 60, but with OBS active pushes back to 100%. So I really wanted to make this upgrade now, which I kind of did already, right?
If AMD keeps their promises and provide compatibility for the 300 motherboards until 2020, my plan is to keep this processor and then upgrading to a Ryzen 4700 or something without changing the mobo. I'm really looking foward to the new ryzens. And yes, I think they are coming out in the first trimester actually.
Thank you for the time you put in the message even though I bouth the cpu already. I don't care, if it's a almost 2 year old CPU, I'm going to say that I have a high end one, ok? Indeed ryzen 5s are best value for money than ryzen 7, but in this case they were the same price. If the 7 was 50 dollars more expensive I would have bought the 2600 no doubt 9or the 1600).
Just one last question. Do Ryzen bottleneck a little easier than Intel's high end CPUs? I though the difference in games was more about the power of the cpu it self, not because it was limiting the gpu. I also thought that hyper threading helped there. Anyway, with a 1060 it won't make any difference. and when I upgrade for a 1070 ti, if it's until next year of course, I won't be comparing benchmarks every second. I will already get +30fps on average, I guess. That's the thing, I don't know, and I think a lot of people get that wrong, if the lesser fps on ryzen side is from the cpu itself of from bottlenecking the gpu. I always thought that a cpu only bottlenecks when it's at 100% and the gpu is not. The games that the ryzen got the gpu at 100% is was on par with intels.
Anyway, I;m just rambling at this point.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram