Question Ryzen 5 1600, 2400G and 2600 - 3D app and Gaming

[feemonts]

I'm setting up a 2 new RIGs with AMD and just want to know, wich one will perform better.... I know that R5 2600 it's the killer, but wait...

GPU: GTX 550Ti (will be upgrade)
RAM: 16GB DDR4
Mobo: ASRock A320M-HD (good enough)

Know...to the Thread:
For a 3D applications, like AutoCad, Revit and Etc,

The R5 1600 will be better than the 2400G and 2200G, right?
1600 has more cores and threads than the other 2, being more efficient to this applications and not SO recommended to gaming
(The GPU it's an old GTX 550Ti, i'm going to upgrade this later, but for now will do)

This one is for my Sister, she's a civil Engeneer

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The GAMING PART (My Desktop)
R5 2600 it's way better than 1600 and 2400G, right?
I know that the 3000 series is coming out, but will every launch is expensive here in Brazil, so my expectations is that the 2600 become a little cheapier,
So a R5 2600 + GTX970 4GB + 16GB DDR4, will do alright to play in 1080p 60Hz in High Settings or Ultra with shadows on med, low, Blur off...
And later on upgrade to a 1660Ti.

Or
However like in other thread I published earlier, maybe the best choice right know is ppgrade first to 1660Ti than the new rig AMD CPU + Mobo + RAM if necessary.
My actual rig is in the signature

EDIT: I forget to mention, that i'm talking about 2 desktops, one for 3D application (my sister) and the another one, the gaming part, the last one will be an upgrade

 

[CountMike]

Well, there's quite a gap between 2200g/2400g and 1600/2600 Ryzen, CPU wise. Not so much between 1600 and 2600, 15 -20% at most. For those jobs, requiring more cores and even single thread performance. 2200g and 2400g have a great CPU/GPU ratio made so they don't bottleneck each other but are behind in raw CPU power comparing to full Ryzen like 1600 and 2600. Given a choice i would pick 2600 (specially 2600X because of better turbo speeds) + a mediocre GPU for non gaming and low gaming jobs.
I have also a bone to pick with A320 MBs as choice for anything above 2400g. Although they are cheap, they are also non overclockable with limited VRM for any serious expansion. Even cheapest b450 will do much better job and pay for itself when you want to upgrade, They will be compatible with Ryzen 3000 while A320 is very questionable.

 

[feemonts]

Well, there's quite a gap between 2200g/2400g and 1600/2600 Ryzen, CPU wise. Not so much between 1600 and 2600, 15 -20% at most. For those jobs, requiring more cores and even single thread performance. 2200g and 2400g have a great CPU/GPU ratio made so they don't bottleneck each other but are behind in raw CPU power comparing to full Ryzen like 1600 and 2600. Given a choice i would pick 2600 (specially 2600X because of better turbo speeds) + a mediocre GPU for non gaming and low gaming jobs.
I have also a bone to pick with A320 MBs as choice for anything above 2400g. Although they are cheap, they are also non overclockable with limited VRM for any serious expansion. Even cheapest b450 will do much better job and pay for itself when you want to upgrade, They will be compatible with Ryzen 3000 while A320 is very questionable.

Yeah, thanks, I also forget to mention that this will be 2 desktops haha.

One for my sister the R5 1600 part and down the line my desktop the R5 2600 part

 

[CountMike]

Yeah, thanks, I also forget to mention that this will be 2 desktops haha.

One for my sister the R5 1600 part and down the line my desktop the R5 2600 part

Either way, keep away from A320, they have no future.

 

[M.AGamer]

I'm setting up a 2 new RIGs with AMD and just want to know, wich one will perform better.... I know that R5 2600 it's the killer, but wait...

GPU: GTX 550Ti (will be upgrade)
RAM: 16GB DDR4
Mobo: ASRock A320M-HD (good enough)

Know...to the Thread:
For a 3D applications, like AutoCad, Revit and Etc,

The R5 1600 will be better than the 2400G and 2200G, right?
1600 has more cores and threads than the other 2, being more efficient to this applications and not SO recommended to gaming
(The GPU it's an old GTX 550Ti, i'm going to upgrade this later, but for now will do)

This one is for my Sister, she's a civil Engeneer

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The GAMING PART (My Desktop)
R5 2600 it's way better than 1600 and 2400G, right?
I know that the 3000 series is coming out, but will every launch is expensive here in Brazil, so my expectations is that the 2600 become a little cheapier,
So a R5 2600 + GTX970 4GB + 16GB DDR4, will do alright to play in 1080p 60Hz in High Settings or Ultra with shadows on med, low, Blur off...
And later on upgrade to a 1660Ti.

Or
However like in other thread I published earlier, maybe the best choice right know is ppgrade first to 1660Ti than the new rig AMD CPU + Mobo + RAM if necessary.
My actual rig is in the signature

EDIT: I forget to mention, that i'm talking about 2 desktops, one for 3D application (my sister) and the another one, the gaming part, the last one will be an upgrade

Man don't ever buy a A320 mobo it doesn't support ryzen new gen so getting a cheap b450/b350 is better
and for gpu gtx 970 is really good and enough for 1080p 60hz high (most games) and later upgrade for rtx 2060 not a gtx 1660 ti
for cpu you better wait for the new gen but if you don't want to wait go with ryzen 2600 or ryzen 1600 don't touch ryzen 2400g/2200g
don't buy a cheap power supply spend 70$ or something on power supply get at least 550w so you can upgrade later to a good gpu
ram 3000mhz or 3200mhz don't go below 2666mhz