Question Upgrade to Ryzen 2700X for less money or get the 3600 instead?

chestccj795

Reputable
Feb 3, 2017
5
0
4,510
0
I'm considering upgrading to 2700X or 3600 from my lackluster i3 7100. I'm choosing MSI B450 A PRO MAX as the motherboard. This way, 2700X setup ($265) would be 12% cheaper than that of 3600 ($305), saving me up to $40.
I know 3600 performs a bit better than 2700X but is it worth the $40 premium?
 

86zx

Upstanding
Nov 1, 2019
408
78
290
14
If your a video editor do a ton of multitasking or are a streamer go with the 2700x if you just play games and occasionally do some work on the pc go with the 3600
 
Reactions: JJ2012

Ravz

Great
Jan 28, 2020
100
8
95
2
I'm considering upgrading to 2700X or 3600 from my lackluster i3 7100. I'm choosing MSI B450 A PRO MAX as the motherboard. This way, 2700X setup ($265) would be 12% cheaper than that of 3600 ($305), saving me up to $40.
I know 3600 performs a bit better than 2700X but is it worth the $40 premium?
Honestly if you really want to save that 40$ premium, then go for 2700X and a better motherboard like MSI Tomahawk Max or a little expensive MSI Gaming Pro Carbon AC. You wont regret it.
 
Reactions: JJ2012

Phaaze88

Distinguished
Ambassador
I know 3600 performs a bit better than 2700X but is it worth the $40 premium?
I'd say yes. The 3600:
+is faster in games
+is faster in productivity apps - the 2700X would need to be overclocked to match the 3600 in this area... and overclocking means replacing the 2700's stock cooler, an added expense. It's only good for running those cpus at stock, and nothing more.
+does not use as much power as the latter
 
Reactions: JJ2012
Feb 19, 2020
55
7
35
1
I'd say yes. The 3600:
+is faster in games
+is faster in productivity apps - the 2700X would need to be overclocked to match the 3600 in this area... and overclocking means replacing the 2700's stock cooler, an added expense. It's only good for running those cpus at stock, and nothing more.
+does not use as much power as the latter
+is faster in games

I agree, this is true, but it is marginal, you'll see why in a moment.



+is faster in productivity apps - the 2700X would need to be overclocked to match the 3600 in this area... and overclocking means replacing the 2700's stock cooler, an added expense. It's only good for running those cpus at stock, and nothing more.
+does not use as much power as the latter

NEITHER of these statements are true.
The 2700X would be MUCH faster in productivity as shown in benchmarks because of the higher c/t count.
You also don't need to replace the stock cooler to OC. I have my ryzen 7 1700 at 4GHZ on 1.337V on the stock cooler with stable tembs under 70 full load. Secondly the 2700X has a HIGHER stock clock... Thirdly ryzen overclocking is more restricted by your VRM, than the chip itself in my experience (granted I have only built a few dozen ryzen PC's this year)
They are BOTH 65W parts, and they consume about the same power.
At the end of the day, it comes down to preference as i said, you could suggest until you're blue in the face. at this time, the difference is negligible for $5



Look into AMD's binning process to find out more. a 2700X will be a better all around chip, in exchange for like 3% ipc in gaming, or 5 fps or so, for over 10x the compute workload performance in threaded apps.

In summation:

Bang for buck, 2700X
In this direct comparison, you'd only put a 3600 in there if you hate yourself, or the pc you're building.
While it's true CPU BOUND SINGLE THREADED GAMES will run negligibly better, considering the value in the ryzen1700 in terms of future proof multithreading, any point for the 3600 become MOOT.

If you still aren't convinced, see for yourself how they compare, in real systems here:
https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-Ryzen-7-2700X-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-3600/3958vs4040
 

ohio_buckeye

Honorable
Jan 5, 2015
977
231
11,390
38
I personally upgraded from a 1700x overclocked to 3.8ghz to a stock 3600 and I'm happy with it. Feels like not quite as much stutters. The 1700x/2700x aren't bad CPUs by any stretch especially overclocked. Hard to go wrong with either option. But for gaming now, 3600.
 

Phaaze88

Distinguished
Ambassador
+is faster in games

I agree, this is true, but it is marginal, you'll see why in a moment.



+is faster in productivity apps - the 2700X would need to be overclocked to match the 3600 in this area... and overclocking means replacing the 2700's stock cooler, an added expense. It's only good for running those cpus at stock, and nothing more.
+does not use as much power as the latter

NEITHER of these statements are true.
The 2700X would be MUCH faster in productivity as shown in benchmarks because of the higher c/t count.
You also don't need to replace the stock cooler to OC. I have my ryzen 7 1700 at 4GHZ on 1.337V on the stock cooler with stable tembs under 70 full load. Secondly the 2700X has a HIGHER stock clock... Thirdly ryzen overclocking is more restricted by your VRM, than the chip itself in my experience (granted I have only built a few dozen ryzen PC's this year)
They are BOTH 65W parts, and they consume about the same power.
At the end of the day, it comes down to preference as i said, you could suggest until you're blue in the face. at this time, the difference is negligible for $5



Look into AMD's binning process to find out more. a 2700X will be a better all around chip, in exchange for like 3% ipc in gaming, or 5 fps or so, for over 10x the compute workload performance in threaded apps.

In summation:

Bang for buck, 2700X
In this direct comparison, you'd only put a 3600 in there if you hate yourself, or the pc you're building.
While it's true CPU BOUND SINGLE THREADED GAMES will run negligibly better, considering the value in the ryzen1700 in terms of future proof multithreading, any point for the 3600 become MOOT.

If you still aren't convinced, see for yourself how they compare, in real systems here:
https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-Ryzen-7-2700X-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-3600/3958vs4040
*sigh
Ok, some slight corrections are needed...
Ryzen 3600 VS 2700X:
+faster in games:
5-12% average, depending on the game and settings, with something more mainstream, like the 1650 Super.
7-12% average, but with a 2080Ti.

-slower overall in productivity apps, but it is by no means terrible at it.
Sources: https://www.youtube(dot)com/watch?v=7AbNeht4tAE, https://www.youtube(dot)com/watch?v=ke3OnFlOUnI, https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/AMD-Ryzen-5-3600-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-2700X/3481vs3238
Where the heck did you get 10x the compute workload performance from?

+uses less power overall
Sources: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-3600-review,6287-3.html, there are power consumption graphs in the previously linked videos as well
1)Nowhere did I suggest the 2700X's stock cooler needed replacing for overclocking. I AM taking into account however, that not everyone is comfortable with the AMD stock coolers; the blasted things can get loud. YOU seem to be fine with it though.
The OP is an unknown though. I figure it's better to play it safe.

2)Who actually gives a banana about BASE clocks? Next to no one, because the darn cpus don't run at those speeds anyway unless the user is doing something wrong.
Also, yeah, just go ahead and disregard Ryzen 3000's higher IPC that allowed it to rival Intel in gaming and completely stomp them in productivity.

3)Ryzen 3000 is an entirely different player in the overclocking field. Just overclock the memory, tighten the timings, and keep it cool.
Setting a static frequency hurts performance.
Overclocking the core frequency can be pretty bad, as people have actually managed to quickly degrade their chips already: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/ejgc6p View: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/ejgc6p/1325v_is_not_safe_for_zen_2/

Pushing past your chips maximum FIT voltage is not safe and will cause accelerated degradation.
Obviously, each chip is different. So you have to find your personal chip's safe FIT.
Also, do not push past the Fmax on your cpu while at maximum FIT voltage.
Fmax is set by the cpu PB and increased by PBO. So if you are at FIT or above, have high temps and are higher than FMax. Then your cpu could degrade.
2700X overclocking: Help yourself, I guess. It's got more headroom than a 3600 for it... doesn't impact the pros and cons in any meaningful way though.

4)The problem with motherboard VRMs is the cooling, or complete lack thereof, and not the power phases.
Blame the manufacturers for that one.

5)The TDP rating means jack all. Look for actual power consumption numbers.

6)Your summary-
1st line: Bang for buck - nope. The odds seem to favor the 3600 more.
The 2nd line... WTH, I'm just going to skip that.
3rd line: I think you meant the 2700X and not your 1700. Anyways...
'Future proof multi-threading'...:rolleyes: then watch as the 2700X and 3600 become obsolete in the next 5 or 6 years anyway, IF no one bails out like AMD did previously.
The only reason Intel's older cpus aged as well as they did is because of no competition for almost 10 years.
New tech comes out literally every year. 'Future proofing' is an exercise in futility.
 

ohio_buckeye

Honorable
Jan 5, 2015
977
231
11,390
38
I will say that my 3600 as opposed to the 1700x I previously owned, is slightly ahead in multithreaded performance per cinebench r20 at stock speeds.

Now when the 1700x was overclocked it was a little faster in multithreaded, but slower in single core. My 1700x was benching a little higher than my friend's stock 2700x.

Your real value could be trying to get a good overclock on the 2700x, but of course you are gambling. But either one is a good CPU. I don't regret getting the 3600 though.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS