Ryzen or Kabby Lake?

[Oliver7073]

I don't know which CPU to pick for my PC build because these 2 CPUs are good and I am kind anew to PC building. I do some video editing and play a lot of games.

 

[CRO5513Y]

Depends on which CPUs you are comparing here. But for Video Editing i would lean towards the Ryzen in most situations although at the higher end, the i7 7700/7700K is probably the strongest consumer CPU on the market and still very capable of video editing. But at the middle-end i'd opt for a Ryzen 1600/1500X over an i5 7xxx for Gaming and Video Editing. Hope this helps

Just to conclude:

Higher End > My pick would be an i7-7700/7700K for Heavy Gaming + Light Video Editing.
Middle End > My pick would be a Ryzen 1600, then 1500X over an i5 7400/7500/7600/7600K.
Low End > Depends where specifically, but the Ryzen 1400 would be a good choice over i3's since it has 4 physical cores.

 

[Chugalug_]

That's about right, but for low end the best option is the G4560.
What's your budget for a list?

 

[LeKeiser]

You're right, let's totally forget the RyZen 1700, 1700x, 1800x, not worth a damn :O
Like they were thought and built just for video editing and nothing else...
Got a 1700x and it's the best of the three, IMOO. Something like 6-7% slower than a 1800x but way less expensive. No need to overclock such a beast but it's possible.

 

[Spring1898]

I think the implication that CRO was giving is that the OP seems to favor gaming over editing, which favors the 7700k over the 1700+ Ryzen in absolute FPS at the same or greater price point assuming a sufficient GPU to make the difference apparent, if not necessarily appreciable.

But between the 1700, 1700x, and 1800x, i would probably take the 1700 and use part of the money saved toward a better cooler to handle max overclock

 

[CRO5513Y]

I think the implication that CRO was giving is that the OP seems to favor gaming over editing, which favors the 7700k over the 1700+ Ryzen in absolute FPS at the same or greater price point assuming a sufficient GPU to make the difference apparent, if not necessarily appreciable.

But between the 1700, 1700x, and 1800x, i would probably take the 1700 and use part of the money saved toward a better cooler to handle max overclock

Spot on bud. I've got nothing against the Ryzen 7's I've recommended plenty of them since release but in this certain instance, it is my opinion that the i7-7700/7700K would be the better buy since it's primarily Gaming (which the i7 has proven to be better at over the Ryzen 7s) with some video editing on the side which it is more than capable of doing, although obviously probably not as good as a Ryzen 1700/1800 would. But if it comes down to Gaming vs Editing performance it looks like OP would lean towards Gaming.

 

[Chugalug_]

Still need a budget, I suspect a Ryzen 1400 with a decent OC and an RX 580 will be the best fit.

 

[Lucky_SLS]

^^ exactly, more towards gaming and light video editing? 7700k. have a solid cooler like mugen 5 or NH d15 or cryorig r1.

 

[nonsleeper]

You will hear that the 7700k is "better" than Ryzen R7, and that it "beats" the R7 range. However, while true, that is not all of the truth.
First point is that the 7700k only gives you higher FPS if you are CPU bound and in high fps range. That translates to worst case 10-20fps difference in the average range roughly above 120fps(ballpark figures). So it has more fps in one specific scenario. If you set details to a point where it brings you below that range, then there is no difference between these two CPUS. Notice that the reviews that show that slim margins in the frame differences are with 1080ti and Titan xp in 1080p.

Second point, the R7 range gives you the fps it does with power to spare, while the 7700k gives you the extra few fps and is peaked to full load, which means it has no power to spare. So if you eliminate the GPU, the frame rate that your see from the 7700k is at its peak, it won't go higher in future and as a matter of fact if games get more CPU heavy it can go down, but for the R7 it can only go higher as there is power to spare.

Third, the reviews are done in benchmarking environment, which means a clean install of windows and no background tasks, that works heavily in favour of the 4 core 7700k but in reality, you won't be in that situation, which reduces the already slim margin between R7 and the 7700k in the high fps range.

Conclusion, you should only buy the 7700k if you are purely gaming, and have a high end GPU and high refresh 1080p monitor for 144hz+ gaming and that 10-20fps difference in the already high fps range of roughly about 120+ matters to you. You should also use a clean install of windows with no background tasks running as it might occasionally bring you down to the R7 fps range, since the margin is not that wide anyway.

In any other case, for example a 1440p 144hz gaming system, having some background tasks running, doing other tasks occasionally,... it is worth trading that few fps in the high fps range for the raw computational power available in R7.

 

[Chugalug_]

Nah, CRO5513Y is right here, a for a high end gaming rig even if doing video editing on the side, an i7 7700k is the best choice hands down.
A Ryzen 7 CPU is only a good choice if the main application is rendering and editing with gaming on the side in this case.
@OP hasn't said anything yet, so no use speculating.

 

[CRO5513Y]

This is starting to get off topic. Everyone will have their opinion and if you read any of the early paragraphs including my own you would have realised i never said Ryzen was a bad choice here, in fact i recommended it at the Low/Mid end choices. Not sure why people are going out of their way to point out information we already know and have stated. The i7 7700/7700K is the faster CPU in Gaming. If you disagree then politely get off the Forums right now and go read some reviews/benchmarks/videos and come back. Now i'm in no way saying they are weak/bad choices for Gaming but in this situation, where the primary uses are and i quote "Some video editing and a lot of Gaming" the i7 is a great choice due to it's higher Gaming performance and ability to video edit modestly although of course the Ryzen is notably better at it.

Now there is no point going on with this argument, OP has all the information he needs to make his own decision by this point and that's what he should be doing. We are here to find the best solution and answers to the original question for the one who needs help, this isn't some "Which is the best!" debate/discussion.

Here is a review in a mixture of Gaming at different resolutions, a few single-threaded benchmarks, a few multi-threaded benchmarks and even in-depth discussions on price, positioning, features and all those details from a reliable source for whoever needs it including OP. Link > http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-amd-ryzen-7-1800x-review

 

[LeKeiser]

I totally agree with nonsleeper. For pure gaming and only gaming, the Intel is great. But as nonsleeper stated, one doesn't have only a clean fresh install of Windows. There are tons of softwares that are always added, many running in the background. Not saying that a 7700K (or not K) can't handle that, but I do believe it's better to have more cores nowadays and of course in the future. 8 cores are better than 4, even if they are clocked a bit under.

Cro5513y, out of curiosity, do you own this forum? Cuz the "We already know... We are here to..." "Get off the forum right now..." Seems like you do and choose what people can or can't say, as long as it goes your way... That's being patronizing and I find this insulting. I, along nonsleeper, might also have been around for sometime and might know a few things or two as well...
Just saying.

 

[Chugalug_]

Nah, he doesn't, perfectly fine imo, although I agree it could have been worded a bit better.
I think the gist of what he's saying is make sure you make an informed decision, didn't mean to come across as patronizing from what I can tell.

 

[CRO5513Y]

I totally agree with nonsleeper. For pure gaming and only gaming, the Intel is great. But as nonsleeper stated, one doesn't have only a clean fresh install of Windows. There are tons of softwares that are always added, many running in the background. Not saying that a 7700K (or not K) can't handle that, but I do believe it's better to have more cores nowadays and of course in the future. 8 cores are better than 4, even if they are clocked a bit under.

Cro5513y, out of curiosity, do you own this forum? Cuz the "We already know... We are here to..." "Get off the forum right now..." Seems like you do and choose what people can or can't say, as long as it goes your way... That's being patronizing and I find this insulting. I, along nonsleeper, might also have been around for sometime and might know a few things or two as well...
Just saying.

Of course i don't own it and i don't see how i made it appear as if i did. And i worded it as politely as it needed to be but at this point i imagine nothing i say will result in you not pointing random things out as negative. Next time you quote me consider using the whole sentence instead of including cut-off parts to make it sounds bad.

Your quote:

"Get off the forum right now..." [/b] i think you missed this out > "If you disagree then politely"

As for the "we are and we already", i was referring to everyone else you are rebutting which in this instance would be Chugalug and Lucky_SLS. Now i will say again (and it's not an order, it's a suggestion).... Can the arguing on this stop? We are still awaiting OP's response we don't need this bickering and off topic negativity here, i have a feeling you are for some reason very inclined to make sure the Ryzen 1700 is the best choice simply because you own one but i don't want to get into that. The OP has enough information to make his decision from everyone's input i don't see why this needs to continue any further and i personally won't be commenting from here on until OP does even if you decide to respond to this with more negative attitude towards my recommendations. Now i do apologise if you found anything in my previous responses insulting as i did not intend it to be.

 

[Saga Lout]

Be nice please, people. I'm putting in for having a badge to award folks who can handle these Builds advice threads without showing their tribal preferences.

We don't want to exceed budgets and we don't want to confuse folks who came here for enlightenment. It might also be worth considering that not everyone on the planet wants or needs to wring every last grain of power/speed/FPS or anything else.

It's when that assumption cuts in is usually when thngs start to go West (in England - South in the States) so bear it in mind, please.

 

[Lucky_SLS]

Ryzen is very new. the 1700 and above r more like workstation class cpu than gaming. maybe the zen+ refresh will be more mature for oc and have good clock speeds. but as of now, its the 7700k.

ppl here would say that a 4770k is still a good cpu. upgrading it isnt worth it. almost same here. gaming primarily and video editing? no brainer. 7700k. worstation with gaming in mind? 1700X/1800X with bad-ass cooler to oc it like champ. for gaming? i wouldnt recommend the 1700. its not worth the oc to gain high clock speeds in 1700 and deal with the extra heat when 'X' version gives that in 2 cores with XFR. most games r still not optimised to use more than 2/4 cores. hope this helps

 

[Chugalug_]

UK and Aus = overpriced PSUs.
Aus = overpriced everything.
NZ = Australian prices on steroids (Probably the worst pricing i've ever seen)
India = slightly higher than average prices, poor availability.
Europe = UK or Germany w/ shipping.

 

[LeKeiser]

@Saga Lout: don't worry, this is no flame war
I just thought that Cr05513Y (hard to remember ) should say I instead of WE, but otherwise we're having a very peaceful and polite chat over those processors

I still believe that people should think about 2 things: what really runs on a computer beside a game, and the future.
People have a tendancy to install lots of things on their computer, and then they forget about them. I'm of course one of them. And those things might run in the background, people will never get all the FPS the benchmarks are throwing on their website. That's why I do believe that an 8 core CPU is better than a 4 core one, even if underclocked. And the future is multithreaded, this is a fact now. Games will be better programmed thanx to the consoles, so we can expect that RyZen will rise to be one of the best cpu in the months/years to come.
I would go for a 1700x or 1800x right away, not choosing the 1600 series. I think the price difference isn't worth it. I agree with Lucky_SLS that the 1700 wouldn't be my choice also, you have to really work on the motherboard to overclock it, and then this beast gets really hot and needs a good cooler... and it eats a lot more watts than the 1700x & 1800x, so I don't think it's such a good pick.
I'm not saying the Intels are a bad choice. But since March, we have a great CPU that has come up, and it should now be on top of all the lists for Christmas

 

[Chugalug_]

I'm going to agree with that wholeheartedly, except for the part which specifies not everyone wants every last ounce of performance out of their rig.
There's too many younger people asking for full RGB setups on a budget with Kraken x62s and i5 7500s.
What's best for them isn't necessarily what they want, but they need to be bargained with.
Although it's a consideration builders should make, factoring in aesthetics, not just raw performance.

 

[Karadjgne]

Hah, chug, go put your guilty hat on and stand in the corner. Plenty of very aesthetically pleasing 1080 builds you've mangled just to stick in a 1080ti. Etc. Everyone is guilty of just such at times. Getting the best possible performance for the budget, yet let's hide the pc under the desk cuz it's ugly as sin.
Op simply wanted to know what's better. Ryzen is. Core for core, a 1500 is the same as an i7, so will perform the same. Granted Intel has better IPC, but not by much. Move upto a 1600 and the i7 looses. 1700 roasts an i7. Core for core. In pure fps with current games, Intel has the edge, again higher IPC, but that's only maximums, on average, the Ryzen isn't far behind but yet is more versatile. And lga1151 is dead. It's seen its full share of upgrades and 'tick-tocks'. An I7 there is topped out, you'll not get a better Intel cpu. Am4 is brand new, and amd loves to beat that horse to death. You'll get this gen of Ryzen, then Ryzen +, so with a 1600 or even a 1700,thetes still going to be 4-5 (probable) cpus of a better design ahead. AMD has nowhere to go but up, Intel just came to a halt with kabylake.
So what's better? Overall, Ryzen is better, specifically right now just for games, Intel has the edge.

 

[Chugalug_]

We can't make a decision if we don't know the distribution of workload here. ;.;
I'm not saying make the PC a block of metal that runs like hell, I always try to make builds aesthetically pleasing by putting in a decent case and color scheme if possible, just that RGB detracts significantly from performance most of the time, which is why save for the motherboard by getting a Strix board or something, or an RGB LED strip in a Phanteks case, when it gets to fans and coolers the cost goes through the roof.

Anyways, too early to make a decision, as I mentioned previously, @OP hasn't even posted yet, we can't make a build list prioritizing either until we have an answer.