Upgrading cpu Ryzen 5 or i7 6700k any suggestions?

[sergifq]

Hey guys I recently got like 400$ for my birthday and was wondering which cpu I should get Ryzen 5 1600x or i7 6700k maybe someone else can recommend better cpus also would prefer a cpu that can run Fortnite very well btw my gpu is a 980ti 6gb

 

[Nicholasashton6425]

I'm going to give the most unbiased opinion, I would recommend going for a AMD Ryzen 5 1600x because you get great performance for the price. It is less expensive and you can put more money towards the RAM, since Ryzen is picky when it comes to RAM speeds.

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

depends on your monitor mostly. If it's 1080p 60-144hz, and only just gaming (not streaming too) then for pure FPS prob the 6700k. FOr a better gaming experience all round with better min FPS, and a highly capable CPU for gaming/streaming - multitasking and practically anything else you care to mention then the 1600x is the way to go. I have one, it's awesome.

The 6700k is still a great performer. Has a higher clockspeed and better IPC than the Ryzen. It has about a 5-10% lead in FPS over the Ryzen in most games. Games that can take advantage of more cores/thread lean to the Ryzen. At 1440p and above the two CPU's are neck and neck, so the choice for me would be the Ryzen, because of more host processing resources for other tasks as well as gaming.

Fortnight will run like a dream with either CPU.

editL big consideration would be upgrade path for the future. Limited options with 6700k/z170/270. Longer options with Ryzen/B350/X370. More core for less with AMD at the present time.

 

[EpIckFa1LJoN]

With that kind of money I would get an 8600k.

The 8600k is going to FAR surpass a 1600x in gaming performance and almost match it for heavy multi-tasking.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-core-i5-8600k-cpu,5264-3.html

A tad over that $400 but imo, totally worth it.

 

[sergifq]

depends on your monitor mostly. If it's 1080p 60-144hz, and only just gaming (not streaming too) then for pure FPS prob the 6700k. FOr a better gaming experience all round with better min FPS, and a highly capable CPU for gaming/streaming - multitasking and practically anything else you care to mention then the 1600x is the way to go. I have one, it's awesome.

The 6700k is still a great performer. Has a higher clockspeed and better IPC than the Ryzen. It has about a 5-10% lead in FPS over the Ryzen in most games. Games that can take advantage of more cores/thread lean to the Ryzen. At 1440p and above the two CPU's are neck and neck, so the choice for me would be the Ryzen, because of more host processing resources for other tasks as well as gaming.

Fortnight will run like a dream with either CPU.

editL big consideration would be upgrade path for the future. Limited options with 6700k/z170/270. Longer options with Ryzen/B350/X370. More core for less with AMD at the present time.

Nice I mainly play fps games (non 4k) like csgo as I am in esea open, do you play csgo and if so how is your fps. Same goes for fortnite, what settings do you play with and what does your fps look like? (btw i dont play 4k on either games, I dont have a 4k monitor only 1080p FeelsBadMan)

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

I don't play fortnite. But with either CPU and the 980ti, at your 1080p res you should be pushing 100fps perhaps more, Don't forget though, with your 1080p monitor (most likely 60hz) although your GPU can push out more frames, you don't get to experience that on the 60hz monitor. Your monitor can only display 60fps. The rest is lost. You may run something like Rivatuner with an on screen display telling you your getting 100FPS+ but thats only at the end of the GPU pipeline, and is not whats displayed on screen (at least on a 1080p 60hz monitor). If you don't stream whilst gaming, and the cost is low, then the 6700k system will still serve you well for a time. If you want some longevity and a system capable of driving a high end card into the future for another 2-3 years, then I'd opt for the 1600x. All you would need is a GPU upgrade down the line (and maybe a nice monitor too! ) and you will still have an awesome system for gaming.

edit: for CS:GO my system pushes 220+ pretty much all the time, and upwards of that. But like i said that's irrelevant. Similarly my monitor is 1080p 60hz, so only displays 60fps in reality.

 

[sergifq]

I don't play fortnite. But with either CPU and the 980ti, at your 1080p res you should be pushing 100fps perhaps more, Don't forget though, with your 1080p monitor (most likely 60hz) although your GPU can push out more frames, you don't get to experience that on the 60hz monitor. Your monitor can only display 60fps. The rest is lost. You may run something like Rivatuner with an on screen display telling you your getting 100FPS+ but thats only at the end of the GPU pipeline, and is not whats displayed on screen (at least on a 1080p 60hz monitor). If you don't stream whilst gaming, and the cost is low, then the 6700k system will still serve you well for a time. If you want some longevity and a system capable of driving a high end card into the future for another 2-3 years, then I'd opt for the 1600x. All you would need is a GPU upgrade down the line (and maybe a nice monitor too! ) and you will still have an awesome system for gaming.

thanks for the feedback but there already is an in game fps counter for fortnite also that 60hz arguement is complete bs, might be true in some games but when you get higher fps even if you have a 60hz it is true you will only see 60 fps but fps past 60 is not lost if this argument was true you wouldn't notice a 60fps cap in most games there is a diffrence playing uncapped rather than locked to 60 fps. Dont believe me, try it yourself with a 60hz monitor play a game like gta/csgo/pubg limit your fps to 60 play for like 10 min then switch to uncapped and you will definitely notice a change so this argument is false and skewed.

 

[GoldenGrenadier]

I'd recommend upgrading to Ryzen since the AM4 platform will be supported longer than Intel's lga1151 allowing for a better upgrade path in the future. Single core performance is also becoming less and less important for gaming so Ryzen's superior multithreaded performance should come in handy when games start to utilize more cores.

 

[sergifq]

Update to this thread, found a i7 7700k on r/hardwareswap for 240 and just purchased it thanks for all the suggestions guys!

 

[mdd1963]

With that kind of money I would get an 8600k.

The 8600k is going to FAR surpass a 1600x in gaming performance and almost match it for heavy multi-tasking.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-core-i5-8600k-cpu,5264-3.html

A tad over that $400 but imo, totally worth it.

Bingo! (+1!)

 

[mdd1963]

7700K is hardly a slug either, enjoy!

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

I don't play fortnite. But with either CPU and the 980ti, at your 1080p res you should be pushing 100fps perhaps more, Don't forget though, with your 1080p monitor (most likely 60hz) although your GPU can push out more frames, you don't get to experience that on the 60hz monitor. Your monitor can only display 60fps. The rest is lost. You may run something like Rivatuner with an on screen display telling you your getting 100FPS+ but thats only at the end of the GPU pipeline, and is not whats displayed on screen (at least on a 1080p 60hz monitor). If you don't stream whilst gaming, and the cost is low, then the 6700k system will still serve you well for a time. If you want some longevity and a system capable of driving a high end card into the future for another 2-3 years, then I'd opt for the 1600x. All you would need is a GPU upgrade down the line (and maybe a nice monitor too! ) and you will still have an awesome system for gaming.

thanks for the feedback but there already is an in game fps counter for fortnite also that 60hz arguement is complete bs, might be true in some games but when you get higher fps even if you have a 60hz it is true you will only see 60 fps but fps past 60 is not lost if this argument was true you wouldn't notice a 60fps cap in most games there is a diffrence playing uncapped rather than locked to 60 fps. Dont believe me, try it yourself with a 60hz monitor play a game like gta/csgo/pubg limit your fps to 60 play for like 10 min then switch to uncapped and you will definitely notice a change so this argument is false and skewed.

sorry to rain on your parade!! BS, no. You need to look into that a bit more.

Good luck with your build.

 

[J_E_D_70]

Keith12, I agree with you in general but there does appear to be something with CSGO having an advantage at idiotically high framerates even on 60hz monitors. Seen a couple of videos explaining it that seem to make the case. Whether real or not, the CS community is convinced it’s a thing and you can’t convince them otherwise. You’ll notice a lot of them have nice setups but intentionally run at 720p low just to max frames.

 

[EpIckFa1LJoN]

That defies all logic and reasoning.

Anyone who thinks they are benefiting from higher frame rates on a 60Hz monitor are fooling themselves.

The literal only reason I can think that having 60+ fps would be good is to minimize fps drops.

Literally science is on the side of reason. A 60Hz monitor cannot display more than 60fps. Otherwise they would market it as some other refresh rate.

 

[beinik6]

I will give you my opinion:

I had the Ryzen 5 1600x for like 5 months now, and somehow I had a really bad experience (In some games, not all).
It is a good CPU, but I think for gaming, Intel is still better. I never had an Intel before, but after I got some money again, I bought a I7 8700k and EVERYTHING runs sooo butter smooth.

Thats my opinion, I think Intel is better for gaming (at least with the 6700k). If you wanna stream/edit something too, ryzen would of course not be bad, of course if you would have more money, the I7 8700k would still beat it.

 

[jr9]

For gaming right now the 8600k is the best for under $400. If it's just for light games like CSGO I'd get a cheaper i5 8400. It's better than all Ryzen processors in gaming. I would not upgrade to a 6700k or a 7700k because Intel has already moved on from those platforms.

 

[EpIckFa1LJoN]

For gaming right now the 8600k is the best for under $400. If it's just for light games like CSGO I'd get a cheaper i5 8400. It's better than all Ryzen processors in gaming. I would not upgrade to a 6700k or a 7700k because Intel has already moved on from those platforms.

I agree, but technically speaking, the 8700k is also under $400, if only barely and not including tax

 

[jr9]

I usually work in CAD which is why I was over $400. Forgot to set my Newegg to US prices. If it's for gaming I'd still opt for the 8600k unless you're doing something that can take advantage of hyperthreading such as content creation. In gaming/general computing only the two processors perform about the same.

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

Keith12, I agree with you in general but there does appear to be something with CSGO having an advantage at idiotically high framerates even on 60hz monitors. Seen a couple of videos explaining it that seem to make the case. Whether real or not, the CS community is convinced it’s a thing and you can’t convince them otherwise. You’ll notice a lot of them have nice setups but intentionally run at 720p low just to max frames.

hmmmm. like EpIckFa1LJoN mentioned, this is a hardware limitation. 'If' the CSGO community or individual players 'feel' like there's a benefit, then each to there own. I couldn't say if it's just a perception thing, or otherwise, and wouldn't make a comment on that either way.

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

That defies all logic and reasoning.

Anyone who thinks they are benefiting from higher frame rates on a 60Hz monitor are fooling themselves.

The literal only reason I can think that having 60+ fps would be good is to minimize fps drops.

Literally science is on the side of reason. A 60Hz monitor cannot display more than 60fps. Otherwise they would market it as some other refresh rate.

Cha-ching! Completely agree!

 

[J_E_D_70]

I agree as well but csgo players do not. Here is an almost-technical explanation of why they believe faster is better.

https://youtu.be/hjWSRTYV8e0