r7 2700x or i7 8700k

S

Sherloc09

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 22, 2017
Messages
324
Both builds are approximately the same price, with a slight edge to Intel due to memory QVL limitations on AMD side. Am on the fence and was looking to see if Intel brought anything to the market with the 9th series chips, but doesn't look to be a good value proposition. Thinking of value, am now sliding towards AMD Zen+, as the platform has room to grow with support for future Zen2 processers and maybe others beyond that, but for the price on PCPartPicker spec'd builds, the 8700k actually wins out due to the memory being cheaper.

Both builds include NH-D15, top end [non-LN2/DICE focused] motherboards, 32gb ram [3466 vs 3600 respectively], Meshify C Non-TG, 5x Noctua NF-A14 PWM, 1000watt EVGA PSU, and a Silverstone PWM Controller. Already purchased a MSI Gaming X GTX 1080 TI, which will be the GPU.

Use Cases
Primary = 4K Gaming
Secondary = Internet perusal
Tertiary = None, no streaming, content creation, etc.

Closing thoughts
Since the 8700k is marginally better in gaming applications, would it be the better choice, and if not, help me side with AMD on this one.

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
For that use situation the 8700k would be fine.

Any more multitasking, or focus more on general use, and the 2700k wins hands down .
 
Leaning towards the 2700x. Mainly because want to support AMD, and at 4K most games won't tell much a difference between 8700k and 2700x on current gen GPUs.
 
And if you want you can pick up a next generation AMD cpu after this year if you are in dire need. As it seems now the 7nm desktop cpu is going perform better a lot better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: otg
like this
Sherloc09 said:
Both builds are approximately the same price, with a slight edge to Intel due to memory QVL limitations on AMD side. Am on the fence and was looking to see if Intel brought anything to the market with the 9th series chips, but doesn't look to be a good value proposition. Thinking of value, am now sliding towards AMD Zen+, as the platform has room to grow with support for future Zen2 processers and maybe others beyond that, but for the price on PCPartPicker spec'd builds, the 8700k actually wins out due to the memory being cheaper.

Both builds include NH-D15, top end [non-LN2/DICE focused] motherboards, 32gb ram [3466 vs 3600 respectively], Meshify C Non-TG, 5x Noctua NF-A14 PWM, 1000watt EVGA PSU, and a Silverstone PWM Controller. Already purchased a MSI Gaming X GTX 1080 TI, which will be the GPU.

Use Cases
Primary = 4K Gaming
Secondary = Internet perusal
Tertiary = None, no streaming, content creation, etc.

Closing thoughts
Since the 8700k is marginally better in gaming applications, would it be the better choice, and if not, help me side with AMD on this one.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

I have a similar build including a Meshify C, evga PSU, 32GB RAM (I have FlareX though), and an MSI Gaming X. I haven't been disappointed. I've used both the 8700k and the 2700x and I really can't tell the difference between the two at 4k. It's not a scientific benchmark. I just play games and see if I can feel a difference.
 
Pieter3dnow said:
And if you want you can pick up a next generation AMD cpu after this year if you are in dire need. As it seems now the 7nm desktop cpu is going perform better a lot better.
Click to expand...
Yep, albeit at 4K we'll probably be bottlenecked by GPUs until the 3080 series or beyond.
 
Sherloc09 said:
Benchmark comparison at 2880p and 2160p, between the 8700k and 2700x.

Click to expand...


So realistically you won't notice a difference. The 2700x is about $50 cheaper and you can always drop in a new processor later to the AM4 board. Z390 probably won't get more processor support if Intel follows their chipset money grab ways.
 
Sherloc09 said:
Both builds are approximately the same price, with a slight edge to Intel due to memory QVL limitations on AMD side. Am on the fence and was looking to see if Intel brought anything to the market with the 9th series chips, but doesn't look to be a good value proposition. Thinking of value, am now sliding towards AMD Zen+, as the platform has room to grow with support for future Zen2 processers and maybe others beyond that, but for the price on PCPartPicker spec'd builds, the 8700k actually wins out due to the memory being cheaper.

Both builds include NH-D15, top end [non-LN2/DICE focused] motherboards, 32gb ram [3466 vs 3600 respectively], Meshify C Non-TG, 5x Noctua NF-A14 PWM, 1000watt EVGA PSU, and a Silverstone PWM Controller. Already purchased a MSI Gaming X GTX 1080 TI, which will be the GPU.

Use Cases
Primary = 4K Gaming
Secondary = Internet perusal
Tertiary = None, no streaming, content creation, etc.

Closing thoughts
Since the 8700k is marginally better in gaming applications, would it be the better choice, and if not, help me side with AMD on this one.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Way overkill on the PSU unless you are going to do SLI. If you're doing 4k it's going to be GPU limited most of the time so I agree with some others just get the cheaper option.
 
Furious_Styles said:
Way overkill on the PSU unless you are going to do SLI. If you're doing 4k it's going to be GPU limited most of the time so I agree with some others just get the cheaper option.
Click to expand...
The PSU was an EVGA 80+ Gold Rated 1000 Watt PSU for $99.99. Getting it more for the great value. It's since gone up to $135, so probably going to hold off as I don't need it; have a 950 Watt non-modular Corsair.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TMCM
like this
Sherloc09 said:
The PSU was an EVGA 80+ Gold Rated 1000 Watt PSU for $99.99. Getting it more for the great value. It's since gone up to $135, so probably going to hold off as I don't need it; have a 950 Watt non-modular Corsair.
Click to expand...

You could get by with a 650 easy, even a 550 would work. Though the cheapest would certainly be to use that 950W corsair!
 
Furious_Styles said:
You could get by with a 650 easy, even a 550 would work. Though the cheapest would certainly be to use that 950W corsair!
Click to expand...
Yeah, the Corsair is a beast, have had it near on half a decade at least. Figure it's better safe to get a replacement lined up when the price is right.
 
Sherloc09 said:
Yeah, the Corsair is a beast, have had it near on half a decade at least. Figure it's better safe to get a replacement lined up when the price is right.
Click to expand...

Yep, if you're in the US some good sales should be coming up relatively soon.
 
kirbyrj said:
So realistically you won't notice a difference. The 2700x is about $50 cheaper and you can always drop in a new processor later to the AM4 board. Z390 probably won't get more processor support if Intel follows their chipset money grab ways.
Click to expand...

You could also buy a 2700 non X for cheaper, overclock it to 4.2ghz and get the same performance as the 2700x. Save over $100!
 
Can look at it this way... Cpu limitations are a thing if you want to go high hz in future. One platform has an upgrade path that will go beyond the other, likely with more cores to boot.
 
Brackle said:
You could also buy a 2700 non X for cheaper, overclock it to 4.2ghz and get the same performance as the 2700x. Save over $100!
Click to expand...
True, though the $ isn't an issue in the price range of the 2700x vs 8700k. Figure I'm going to get the 3600mhz RAM that isn't on the QVL since another reviewer mentioned it works on his x470 at 3466 mhz. So, instead of going QVL I'll save ~$100 on ram and maybe downclock it to the QVL rated kit if 3600mhz isn't stable.
 
Sherloc09 said:
True, though the $ isn't an issue in the price range of the 2700x vs 8700k. Figure I'm going to get the 3600mhz RAM that isn't on the QVL since another reviewer mentioned it works on his x470 at 3466 mhz. So, instead of going QVL I'll save ~$100 on ram and maybe downclock it to the QVL rated kit if 3600mhz isn't stable.
Click to expand...

Sometimes the clock speed of the memory can be slower than faster timings. Read around first before thinking 3466mhz will be better.
 
Ahh shit I thought this was the [H] forums.

Save $100 or more and get a bare 2700 if you're buying an AIO or aftermarket cooker, spend maybe ~20 minutes manually overclocking to same speeds as 2700x. Profit.

Spend extra on next gen GPU...
 
GabeS said:
Ahh shit I thought this was the [H] forums.

Save $100 or more and get a bare 2700 if you're buying an AIO or aftermarket cooker, spend maybe ~20 minutes manually overclocking to same speeds as 2700x. Profit.

Spend extra on next gen GPU...
Click to expand...

I sold my 2700 non X heatsink for $20 :)
 
If you don't want to go down the tweaking of overclocking the 2700x is the better option as out of the box it's already running at its near best automatically (where the 1000 cpus you needed to overclock to get best out of it)

overclocking manually actually harms single threaded performance on the 2700x

I have the 1800x right now 3.9 all cores (waiting for 3000 cpus as 2700x would be a minor upgrade from what I have, the 3700x should be a step up)
 
This is my first AMD CPU since the Athlon X2. Went with the 2700x because it was cheaper, and with 4k gaming there is basically no difference. I also like the 'install and forget it' precision boost 2. Finally, AM4 still has some life left on it, and i'm very familiar with Intel's short chipset/socket life spans.
 
Mchart said:
This is my first AMD CPU since the Athlon X2. Went with the 2700x because it was cheaper, and with 4k gaming there is basically no difference. I also like the 'install and forget it' precision boost 2. Finally, AM4 still has some life left on it, and i'm very familiar with Intel's short chipset/socket life spans.
Click to expand...
Went 2700x because... well, to be honest, I'm favoring AMD's business strategy and their attempt to provide value and innovation to the market segments that Intel has been slow to offer -- ostensibly to maximize profit. Could have gone 9900k, RTX 2080 TI this upgrade season, but ultimately NVidia's and Intel's money grab sort of put me off their top tier products. Opted for a GTX 1080 TI and 2700x, the 1080 TI was first purchased, and albeit Intel does have an analogically similar counterpart release in the 8700k, AMD seems to have made good strides to help out the average consumer. Thus purchased the 2700x to "vote" with my dollar on what I like to see in a business.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meeho
like this
8700k is better for gaming, hands down. If you are after the absolute best framerates and are stuck between those 2 CPU's, the 8700k is a little better.
 
elite.mafia said:
8700k is better for gaming, hands down. If you are after the absolute best framerates and are stuck between those 2 CPU's, the 8700k is a little better.
Click to expand...

At 4k there is almost no difference to the point where the variance could just be the motherboard, RAM speeds, etc.

Maybe if you're the 1080p or below 144hz+ twitch gamer crowd, but anyone else it's a wash. Ultimately the 2700x offers more value, and with the life of the AM4/x470 even increases that value.
 
elite.mafia said:
8700k is better for gaming, hands down. If you are after the absolute best framerates and are stuck between those 2 CPU's, the 8700k is a little better.
Click to expand...
I would have gone 9900K most likely since it would be cheaper going 9900K than buying the Zen+ 2700x, then upgrading later to a <= AMD cpu compatible with x470. If you look at it that way, 9900K is a good bargain, as you'll be getting the Zen2 or greater performance today, rather than waiting a six months+, and having to upgrade twice. Ultimately at 4K though, I can vote with my dollars on what is in my opinion a better business strategy being employed by AMD than Intel. The 9900K should have released for ~$400, and been called the I7 9700K, the 9700K the 9600K and 9600K the 9400[K]. After a few years if 4K is being held back by the 2700x, I'll see what offerings Zen2 or Zen3 have brought to the table and can make a purchasing decision at that point, or hold out for my next ~6 year platform upgrade.
 
For those that want to see the build, will be posting up pictures once all parts have arrived. Part list in signature.
 
Have to say, holy s***. Just put together the pc, and with 6x140mm + 2x150mm Noctua's installed + MSI GTX 1080 TI Gaming X, it's completely, I mean completely silent at idle. I hear my ac pumping heat through the house, but nothing from the pc. Just checked AMD Ryzen Master and seeing mid-30s on the CPU sitting in the 4.175 ghz range with its base turbo boosting it.

For those who are wondering, fan configuration is two 150mm on the D15S pointing at rear exhaust. One 140mm exhaust at the rear. Two front and two top 140mm intake. The idea is that the intakes are blasting the D15s, then the heat is pumped directly to the rear exhaust fan. The PSU is pulling air from the GPU directly down and out the case through the PSU shroud.

upload_2018-12-3_22-25-19.png
 
Go into your bios and up the EDC to 168 or just enable auto PBO.
 
AMD chips run so much cooler than Intel it's crazy. I just built a 2700X mini itx box and the thing runs cooler than a 8700K delidded with liquid metal with the same cooler...meh definitely going Zen 2 for next gaming build, tired of seeing furnace temps.
 
I bought a 2700 and went stock fan, I do like the stock fan look and it is copious for my needs, got a good deal on a ITX board so I was able to just swap it out. I am admittedly not a guy that requires max threads at max clock, I just put it in and go. I don't really notice that much difference in gaming even though some benches say the 4790K is faster, in games I did notice a difference was in Scum, the 4790K despite high FPS was stuttering more.
 
8700k is so damn hot, but then again it is slightly faster than the 2700x in single core workloads. Is your need multi-thread based, or single-thread based?

I have a 2700x and just upgraded my 8700k to a 9900k. Honestly I can't pick a favorite. The 9900k is on par with the 2700x heat wise. But per dollar, they're all great.
 
Sherloc09 said:
Benchmark comparison at 2880p and 2160p, between the 8700k and 2700x.

Click to expand...


Could you have picked a more biased and meaningless benchmark video? The 1080 is a major bottleneck at that resolution and even a 2080 Ti would be the bottleneck. I get the OP has a 1080 Ti but at 4k it is a major bottleneck which isn't indicative of cpu performance.

OP: Either wait for Ryzen 2 or get a 9700k which has the benefit of 8 cores vs HT in 8700K. This could be useful in the future as games like BF V start using more cores. You can easily OC a 9700K to 5 ghz with around 1.3v and at most a 3 avx offset if your chip isn't a silicon lottery winner. At those clocks the 2700x breaks even with it in applications like rendering while the 9700k has a sizeable lead in single core performance.

PS That 1080 Ti isnt enough for 4k 60 fps having.
 
Last edited:
OP, just wanted to say thank you for fortifying my decision on a 2700x for my next build.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top