Want to sell my Ryzen 1700 and get a 8700k. Is it stupid or greedy?

Rakanoth

n00b
Joined
Oct 6, 2017
Messages
48
Hello,

I am disappointed with my Ryzen 1700. I lost the silicon lottery and got a bad CPU. It does not overclock well. I am stuck with 3700MHz. With Nzxt Kraken x62, it is 45°C at idle and 75°C under load. My vcore is 1.25v. With anything less this vcore, the system is not stable. CPU Load line calibration is at level 2, VDDSCR_SoC voltage is 1.1v and its calibration is at level 5. I wanted to set VDDSCR_SoC LLC to level 2 but some people reported on the other forums that their CPU died because of VDDSCR SoC's load line calibration was 2 or 3.

I tried reinstalling CPU cooling system (because I thought it did not sit well onto the CPU) and also tried with the stock cooler and a Noctua cooler. Still running so hot. At least for me. Also tried to reapply the thermal paste a thousand times. Still so high temps.

Before I bought Ryzen 1700, I had read and watched some reviews and I thought that it would be fine with gaming. The difference with 7700k did not seem so high. Also, I just bought a new 165hz monitor and now I am reading 8700k reviews and it is whetting my appetite. Apart from this, I don't do video editing etc. but I run several virtual machines from time to time. So, 8700k should still be enough as my main use will be gaming.

Would it be a greedy action to sell my current CPU and motherboard and get a 8700k CPU and motherboard? Financially, I am fine with it. But still ... I don't want to be greedy.

My current setup

Asrock X370 Taichi
AMD Ryzen R7 1700
Nzxt Kraken x62 AIO water cooling
G.SKILL Trident Z (F4-3200C14D-16GTZ) DDR4 3200MHz C14
Evga 1080 Ti SC2
Samsung 850 Evo 250GB SSD
WD Desktop Black 1 TB
NZXT S340 Elite Steel
Seasonic PRIME FOCUS Modular (80+Gold) 650W
Asus ROG Swift PG278QR Monitor
 
If you are the type that gets the jitter every time something new comes out, you probably shouldn't be buying high end hardware.

Nah. The problem is that I am not satisfied with the performance and I should admit that I made a mistake by going for R7 1700 without waiting for Intel Coffee Lake. I am not sure if this is the same as "getting the jitter every time something new comes out"
 
Why would it be a greedy action? It's your money. If it would make you happier to sell it and go with something else you should do what makes you happy. I know it may lower resell value but be honest about its overclocking abilities when selling... otherwise its next owner may just try to initiate return after receiving it
 
Grab the 8700K and enjoy. It's much better than any AMD cpu for gaming. FACT.

Don't let the Ryzen "it's good enough" people persuade you if you want top performance.
 
I don't think its greedy at all. If Ryzen 7 didn't satisfy your performance needs then by all means upgrade. The only downside in your case is you will lose money by selling your current setup. But if it seems that a 8700k will get you the numbers you want, and you're fine with losing money on your current setup I don't see why you wouldn't upgrade.
 
Nah. The problem is that I am not satisfied with the performance and I should admit that I made a mistake by going for R7 1700 without waiting for Intel Coffee Lake. I am not sure if this is the same as "getting the jitter every time something new comes out"

If you were expecting to overclock to 3.9-4.0 GHz, you should have bought a Ryzen 7 1700X or Ryzen 7 1800X.

It's better binned and that's why it's more expensive.

Also, what are you not satify with? Not being able to overclock higher than 3.7 GHz?

With a Ryzen 7 1700, 3.9-4.0 GHz overclock is more of the exception than the rule.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: isp
like this
1080p is gteat for intel but above the gap closes to near equal grounds in performance. At 3440x1440 an r7 and i7 have no fps difference that is perceivable. Given a high end GPU of course.

Are you sure the inability for the chip to OC is not user error or a poor choice in board or other factors.
 
Last edited:
No one has asked what the computer is used for?

1080p gaming? Get an 8600k and save some coin

Higher resolution gaming or productivity? Keep the 1700 and figure out why it won't clock. On the HSF/AIO test system I'm using a 1700 @ 3.9 at 1.475v, your temps are a little warm but well within range, whats the ambient and what paste are you using?
 
Greedy? Are you hurting someone by buying it? Do you need the money to pay for someone else's survival? Why do you feel guilt about enjoying your hobby?

We only get so many circles around the sun. Enjoy the time as much as you can.

If you really need a justification, well, buying the CPU keeps everyone from the person who designed the CPU to the person who delivered it to your door in a job and feeding their family. If anything, spending money is a kindness.
 
This might just be me being miserly, but you're already on the AM4 platform; why drop the cost of a new processor and motherboard when you could just go up a couple tiers in the Ryzen lineup?
 
Yes, its your money, buy whatever you want. Asking us if we think your greedy or stupid is, well foolish.
 
Why rush with z370 and not just sit on your r7 at least until z390? If gaming is all you need - even 8400 will suffice and provide same experience. As a 6700k user, it already provides me with the same experience at 1440p in basically every game. I see no point in jumping to z370 for any 6700/7700k or 1600/1700x user at least before z390 arrives (Or Ice Lake 8-core i5/i7 which I personally decided for me), especially with current availability and if you use higher than 1080p res.
 
Good luck finding an 8700K at any kind of reasonable cost. Clock speed wise 4000mhz compared to 3700mhz is 8% faster, that also means virtually everything has less than 8% difference in performance since clock speed increases don't always give a linear increase in performance.

If you can tell the difference with Gsync in the games you play with the Ryzen and the 8700K and not limited by the GPU and it makes that much of a difference for your benefit - hell yea go for it.
 
I can't get past 1.3v on CPU because if I get past it, my CPU downclocks to 1.5GHz. If you google "downclocking to 1.5ghz", you will see lots of people experiencing the same. Also, my temps are already high. So, I don't want to push my CPU more. My RAM timings are already OK. They are according to their XMP specification timings.

Overclocking Intel was easier. That is another reason that I am disappointed with my current setup. I might go for an 8700k and delid it with in order to get lower temps. But should I get 8600k instead of 8700k? Would a 8600k overclock better and thus provide higher FPS values?
 
I can't get past 1.3v on CPU because if I get past it, my CPU downclocks to 1.5GHz. If you google "downclocking to 1.5ghz", you will see lots of people experiencing the same. Also, my temps are already high. So, I don't want to push my CPU more. My RAM timings are already OK. They are according to their XMP specification timings.

Overclocking Intel was easier. That is another reason that I am disappointed with my current setup. I might go for an 8700k and delid it with in order to get lower temps. But should I get 8600k instead of 8700k? Would a 8600k overclock better and thus provide higher FPS values?
Don't underestimate the value of hyperthreading. I know it's not apples to apples because we're taking six v four, but I bought a 7600k and wound up going to a 7700k within a matter of months. The 7600k just slogged too often. Lightly loaded it was plenty fast, but more than a few apps at once and it started flagging badly.
 
I can't get past 1.3v on CPU because if I get past it, my CPU downclocks to 1.5GHz. If you google "downclocking to 1.5ghz", you will see lots of people experiencing the same. Also, my temps are already high. So, I don't want to push my CPU more. My RAM timings are already OK. They are according to their XMP specification timings.

Overclocking Intel was easier. That is another reason that I am disappointed with my current setup. I might go for an 8700k and delid it with in order to get lower temps. But should I get 8600k instead of 8700k? Would a 8600k overclock better and thus provide higher FPS values?

Get either 8400 or go all the way for 8700k. Anything in between is not worth it.
 
I can't get past 1.3v on CPU because if I get past it, my CPU downclocks to 1.5GHz. If you google "downclocking to 1.5ghz", you will see lots of people experiencing the same. Also, my temps are already high. So, I don't want to push my CPU more. My RAM timings are already OK. They are according to their XMP specification timings.

Overclocking Intel was easier. That is another reason that I am disappointed with my current setup. I might go for an 8700k and delid it with in order to get lower temps. But should I get 8600k instead of 8700k? Would a 8600k overclock better and thus provide higher FPS values?

may want t\o check for a bios update, if you want to sell the 1700 by all means go for it, but it sounds like you really aren't getting everything out of it to make a decision
 
Get either 8400 or go all the way for 8700k. Anything in between is not worth it.

I recently bought a 7700k and a z270 at a reasonable price, right before the 8 series Intel CPUs came out.
Up until I saw the performance of the i5 8400 I didn't have a lot of buyers remorse. Neither the i5 8600 nor the i7 8700k's benchmarks made me feel bad about that purchase, as the 7700k might still be a worthy contender for the things I am doing with it, namely gaming.
In most games, the i5 8400 can carry its own weight. For half the cost of a i7 8700k you can get very very close to the same performance levels in gaming.
 
I recently bought a 7700k and a z270 at a reasonable price, right before the 8 series Intel CPUs came out.
Up until I saw the performance of the i5 8400 I didn't have a lot of buyers remorse. Neither the i5 8600 nor the i7 8700k's benchmarks made me feel bad about that purchase, as the 7700k might still be a worthy contender for the things I am doing with it, namely gaming.
In most games, the i5 8400 can carry its own weight. For half the cost of a i7 8700k you can get very very close to the same performance levels in gaming.

Exactly. I'm still running my 6700k and with 1080 at 1440p I don't see any performance gains in gaming from 8700k over it. I'm surprised why would anybody rush with z370 when z390 should be released around the same time as CFL will be more available and should support at least another future cpu generation with potentially 8/16 options. Z370 is the real downside of that whole release and will be even more short-lived chipset than z270.
 
Lately, my Ryzen system (the one in the original post) started to crush with any ram speed above 2666MHz. More sadly, it cannot go above 3.7GHz recently (probably as a result of degradation), even with 1.4volt.
I already had an inch to switch to Intel since 8700k came out, as you have read in this thread. Now that 9900k is released, I have decided it is time to upgrade and yesterday I ordered Gigabyte Aorus Z390 Master with 9900k from Amazon.de.

Op1hPz4.png
 
I would have went with a 2700x. But to each thier own.
What????! With a 165hz monitor NO WAY. The 9900k for gaming only maybe too much but the 8700k would be great for his needs.If he was doing 4k 60hz gaming then the 2700x would be an option.
 
What????! With a 165hz monitor NO WAY. The 9900k for gaming only maybe too much but the 8700k would be great for his needs.If he was doing 4k 60hz gaming then the 2700x would be an option.

I have a 2600x and a 2950x and a 240hz panel. Both can push games in excess of 200fps.

Its yo money big dawg.

I am absolutely against the 9900k. 8700k is a far better choice money wise. 2700x is even better.
 
I have a 2600x and a 2950x and a 240hz panel. Both can push games in excess of 200fps.

Its yo money big dawg.

I am absolutely against the 9900k. 8700k is a far better choice money wise. 2700x is even better.
lol its ok man...whatever you choose to believe is fine with me ;)
 
Should have just waited for the new processors from AMD coming out, would have been a simple upgrade for ya. Hope you got serious cooling for the 9900k otherwise it will throttle so keep that in mind when building your new system.
 
lol its ok man...whatever you choose to believe is fine with me ;)

It's not what I believe. I literally own a 240hz panel.

Not about belief. Insee what these chips can do. 9900k is only 11% faster in games than 2700x. At like 300% premium price.
 
Lately, my Ryzen system (the one in the original post) started to crush with any ram speed above 2666MHz. More sadly, it cannot go above 3.7GHz recently (probably as a result of degradation), even with 1.4volt.
I already had an inch to switch to Intel since 8700k came out, as you have read in this thread. Now that 9900k is released, I have decided it is time to upgrade and yesterday I ordered Gigabyte Aorus Z390 Master with 9900k from Amazon.de.

View attachment 126931

Lemme know.if you want to part with that gimped 1700
 
I am absolutely against the 9900k. 8700k is a far better choice money wise. 2700x is even better.

9900k has more cores. If you are doing anything which can benefit from a higher number of cores, 9900k is a better choice, of course if you are financially well enough to afford it.
 
Should have just waited for the new processors from AMD coming out, would have been a simple upgrade for ya. Hope you got serious cooling for the 9900k otherwise it will throttle so keep that in mind when building your new system.
lol the exaggerations about the cooling never end and usually from people that dont have the chip or are AMD owners...
 
lol the exaggerations about the cooling never end and usually from people that dont have the chip or are AMD owners...

No, the cooling thing is from reviews, it's a hot chip. I would have personally gone with the 9700/9600k, or 2700x if you didn't want to switch platforms :p

My delid/relidded 8700k hits 80 on cores @ 4.8ghz with relatively low voltage on a Kraken x61.
 
lol the exaggerations about the cooling never end and usually from people that dont have the chip or are AMD owners...

Your signature belies the truth to trying to cool that chip and reviews quite clearly show it's a hot chip. Not even hard to find people having issues with that chip hitting 100c.
 
lol the exaggerations about the cooling never end and usually from people that dont have the chip or are AMD owners...

What if you own both? You done being a judgemental foot in mouth kinda person yet? 9900k is a hot damn chip when you push all cores to 5. Look at the friggin numbers. 8 cores on intels tiny ass little heat spreader. Surface area is small. Ryzen is in a larger package thus cooler.
 
9900k has more cores. If you are doing anything which can benefit from a higher number of cores, 9900k is a better choice, of course if you are financially well enough to afford it.

Of course it has 8 cores but its hella expensive for a desktop chip. Also it's package is too small and it hasn't enough surface area for proper thermal transfer to a cooling solution. It's another knee jerk core war product reaction. 8700k is a far better solution for a gamer period. My opinion. Nothing more.
 
Back
Top