Ryzen 1600/1700x or 7700k for 1440p 144hz gaming?

So i only use my PC for gaming. Currently use a 2500k @4.5ghz and it's showing its age with low min fps paired with 1080ti @ 1440p/144hz. Doing some browsing I see the general consensus is 7700k for 1080p 144hz gaming and ryzen for 4k bc it's shit the same. What about 1440p 144hz?

Really wish I'd have bought a 6700k for $260 at microcenter around black friday!!! Figured that'd be normal price by now.

7700k I'd say, high framerates requires high performance CPUs.

If I was building a rig today there would be zero chance I'd go with a 4/8 processor and zero chance I'd go with Intel. At absolute minimum I'd go 6/12, and AMD's price-performance ratio right now is kicking Intel's ass in everything except gaming (and then not by much).

If minimum framerates in gaming is all you want, then yes - Intel still has the better single core performance, which is what many gaming engines still like the most. So if you're just gaming and doing nothing else significant on that rig - go with Intel.
However, if you tend to do a lot of multitasking and use your rig for things other than gaming (like rendering, encoding etc), go with AMD. I think that's a fair assessment right now.

I'm really happy I picked up my 5820k last year. Runs cool, overclocks like a dream, no high voltage needed, and at 6/12 oc'd does great in single core and multithreaded apps. I'd never go back to 4/8 again.

Strictly for gaming? 6700k/7700k hands down. Most game engines still do not care about multi cores. Especially more than 4.

7600k from microcenter, and I say that as a 7700k owner. I wouldn't run an AMD if it was free - time is too valuable these days and I don't want to deal with weird incompatibilities or bugs, or gotchas with finding out the chipset doesn't support a feature that Intel does.

odditory said:

7600k from microcenter, and I say that as a 7700k owner. I wouldn't run an AMD if it was free - time is too valuable these days and I don't want to deal with weird incompatibilities or bugs, or gotchas with finding out the chipset doesn't support a feature that Intel does.

Click to expand...

7700k all the way. there are some pretty big fps increases with some games on the 7700k. theres very little price difference between the two so its a no brainer.

Yea

Gabe3 said:

7700k all the way. there are some pretty big fps increases with some games on the 7700k. theres very little price difference between the two so its a no brainer.

Click to expand...

Yea im not even considering another i5. Its either ryzen or 7700k

odditory said:

7600k from microcenter, and I say that as a 7700k owner. I wouldn't run an AMD if it was free - time is too valuable these days and I don't want to deal with weird incompatibilities or bugs, or gotchas with finding out the chipset doesn't support a feature that Intel does.

Click to expand...

Please tell me why you would recommend a 7600k at this point? Because all it has is "intel stability" (the ryzen 1600 spanks it overall) and if I were going Intel, I'd just pay the $330 (or less if u get a deal at Microcenter) for a 7700k.

Maybe consider getting a G-sync monitor instead of doing a total rebuild? I am running a [email protected] at 3440x1440 on a 1080ti and I don't notice any dips in FPS at all.

Blade-Runner said:

Maybe consider getting a G-sync monitor instead of doing a total rebuild? I am running a [email protected] at 3440x1440 on a 1080ti and I don't notice any dips in FPS at all.

Click to expand...

I have a 1440p IPS 144hz GSYNC. Doing a fresh install of windows. Seems like something weird happened when I installed the 1080ti bc I had better performance with the 980ti in BF1. Maybe MSI afterburner or driver mixup. Gonna test it out tomorrow and report back.

I got 30-50 more fps in battlegrounds going from a 2500k at 4.5ghz to a 7700k stock with a gtx 1070. running 1440p 144hz

Drexion said:

If I was building a rig today there would be zero chance I'd go with a 4/8 processor and zero chance I'd go with Intel.

Click to expand...

I'd actually agree, if I weren't like the OP and looking for far more than 60FPS solid, territory where Ryzen does not yet tread.

Of course, if what I had today worked- I'd be waiting for Intel's consumer-oriented 6/12 solution in the Coffee Lake i7. That will be the gaming CPU to get until at least AMD gets an architecture update to Ryzen shipping, hopefully one that addresses IPC as much as clockspeed.