Ryzen 5 2600 vs Ryzen 7 2700 for daily driver desktop

[jstanthr]

Re-building my daily driver desktop, will only be used for productivity apps, web, light coding, terminal, some very light video encoding (most of that is done on other rigs/servers)
In all seriousness the 5/2600 would be sufficient, would there be any real advantage other than bragging to use the 7/2700 ??
Motherboard is a Gigabyte Aorus Elite B450
Gskill ripjaws cl16 3400 16gb
undecided on main nvme (will be 500gb more than likely)
and probably a pair of 1tb ssds in raid for local storage (the bulk of my storage and backups are handled by my media server)
Rx580 8gb gfx card, just a standard XFX card, nothing fancy

 

[mda]

2600 is all you need. If you need more than 12 threads (doesn't seem like you do), then go 2700.

 

[jstanthr]

2600 is all you need. If you need more than 12 threads (doesn't seem like you do), then go 2700.

i was thinking the same thing. my editing rig has twin xeon's so this is more or less just my go to desk pc, will be used for web and stuff, minor coding, monitoring servers, nothing really user intensive, the only games i really play are LoL and WoW and they don't use much. Will be upgrading my editing rig this fall, thats gonna be a fun build lol.

Thanks for your input

 

[chameleoneel]

Re-building my daily driver desktop, will only be used for productivity apps, web, light coding, terminal, some very light video encoding (most of that is done on other rigs/servers)
In all seriousness the 5/2600 would be sufficient, would there be any real advantage other than bragging to use the 7/2700 ??
Motherboard is a Gigabyte Aorus Elite B450
Gskill ripjaws cl16 3400 16gb
undecided on main nvme (will be 500gb more than likely)
and probably a pair of 1tb ssds in raid for local storage (the bulk of my storage and backups are handled by my media server)
Rx580 8gb gfx card, just a standard XFX card, nothing fancy

Techpowerup seems to do more productivity tests than most other sites. You can compare each generation of Ryzen with different core counts, in this review:
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-5-3600/

 

[SmokeRngs]

If you're not using anything heavily threaded you probably won't see much advantage with the 2700 over the 2600. By the way, are these the "x" models or the base models? With the 2xxx models I'd personally stick with the "x" variant. Higher boost clocks and better included heatsinks if you're going to use the included heatsink.

I have the 2600x but wish the 2700x had dropped in price when I bought the 2600x as I would have been all over it especially since I would have gotten it for less than what I paid for the 2600x. I can and will use every single thread at my disposal.

Unless you need to save every penny (like I had to when I bought mine) I'd still recommend the 2700x with the way prices are now and that's only assuming you can't find a 3600 (non-x) for a good price. 2600x if you need to be cheap, 2700x just because you can and still want to be somewhat cheap or 3600 (non-x) if you can spare a few more bucks.

 

[Faethon]

Hello. Get the 2600. I had the same dilemma between 2600 and 2700, but what was an eye opener, was 1) a review in Tom's hardware, where it underlined that the 2700's boost when more cores are involved is much lower, 2) the fact that all reviews partially lie to the reader, because they use BENCHMARKS and not real life use of programs. By that, i mean, that the benchmarks they use are exactly that...benchmarks. They are designed to use 100% CPU or, they take a legit program but they use it in extreme conditions. For instance, x264/x265 are legit applications that behave the same as in real life, taking 100% CPU. If you use them, by all means, get 2700. But if you don't, the only way 2700 is going to be faster, is when all 6 cores of the 2600 are at 100% load. Otherwise the 2600 will always win due to the higher stable boost. Unless of course you overclock the 2700 and don't do the same to the 2600. Most programs in real life can't put a 2600 on 100% load. In all these situations the 2700 (without OC) will be slower. Or get the 2700, but OC it. WPrime, Sisoft Sandra and AIDA do NOT represent the 95% of real life "productivity" situation. They are benchmarks, useful for reviews and for justifying price difference/bragging rights.

 

[jstanthr]

If you're not using anything heavily threaded you probably won't see much advantage with the 2700 over the 2600. By the way, are these the "x" models or the base models? With the 2xxx models I'd personally stick with the "x" variant. Higher boost clocks and better included heatsinks if you're going to use the included heatsink.

I have the 2600x but wish the 2700x had dropped in price when I bought the 2600x as I would have been all over it especially since I would have gotten it for less than what I paid for the 2600x. I can and will use every single thread at my disposal.

Unless you need to save every penny (like I had to when I bought mine) I'd still recommend the 2700x with the way prices are now and that's only assuming you can't find a 3600 (non-x) for a good price. 2600x if you need to be cheap, 2700x just because you can and still want to be somewhat cheap or 3600 (non-x) if you can spare a few more bucks.

Originally was only looking at the non-x models, but now that the price has really dropped I may go for the X, as far as the hsf is concerned, i've never used an oem heatsink for my desktops and probably never will. I'll stick to my trusty towers and downdrafts.

Hello. Get the 2600. I had the same dilemma between 2600 and 2700, but what was an eye opener, was 1) a review in Tom's hardware, where it underlined that the 2700's boost when more cores are involved is much lower, 2) the fact that all reviews partially lie to the reader, because they use BENCHMARKS and not real life use of programs. By that, i mean, that the benchmarks they use are exactly that...benchmarks. They are designed to use 100% CPU or, they take a legit program but they use it in extreme conditions. For instance, x264/x265 are legit applications that behave the same as in real life, taking 100% CPU. If you use them, by all means, get 2700. But if you don't, the only way 2700 is going to be faster, is when all 6 cores of the 2600 are at 100% load. Otherwise the 2600 will always win due to the higher stable boost. Unless of course you overclock the 2700 and don't do the same to the 2600. Most programs in real life can't put a 2600 on 100% load. In all these situations the 2700 (without OC) will be slower. Or get the 2700, but OC it.

as soon as i can source a solid deal on the 2600 i'll probably go ahead and pull the trigger, i will put a "light" overclock on it, but nothing huge. of course i'll beat it up at first just to see the limits and how i done in the silicon lottery. but for daily use i usually don't add much, i usually just take it to what i can get stable at normal voltages, than back it off a bit for stability.

 

[Faethon]

Originally was only looking at the non-x models, but now that the price has really dropped I may go for the X, as far as the hsf is concerned, i've never used an oem heatsink for my desktops and probably never will. I'll stick to my trusty towers and downdrafts.

as soon as i can source a solid deal on the 2600 i'll probably go ahead and pull the trigger, i will put a "light" overclock on it, but nothing huge. of course i'll beat it up at first just to see the limits and how i done in the silicon lottery. but for daily use i usually don't add much, i usually just take it to what i can get stable at normal voltages, than back it off a bit for stability.

For desktop use, i am not really sure that it's worth to overclock at all. The CPU boosts to 3.9Ghz all the time and runs really cool. This is under Prime95, stock, using a simple 130W aftermarket cooler and well, 16C ambient , because i am ventilating the room currently. Bust just to show, if your cooling is good, the CPU really clocks high by default, with the extra benefit that it runs very cool too. The motherboard doesn't break a sweat. It seems a joke compared to the FX series, where the mosfets were melting.




I mean, i don't think you will notice 200-300Mhz difference in desktop use. In games you will miss a few FPS, but other than that... I am also tempted to grab a 2700 too, just because i want to stay with Win7 and i already have the parts to make a 2nd Ryzen build, but it's more "core greed" than logic. Logic says i should either grab another 2600 or... wait for 3000 go EOL and grab a 3600 and pray that USB will work fine in Win7. But a part of me also says to "just grab a 2700 and be happy, just in case i do video encoding in the future again". LOL! PC dilemmas! They never end, do they?

 

[mda]

Are you in the USA? If yes, the 1600 AFBOX model is great for cheap. It's basically a 2600 with 200mhz lower clockspeed or something.

 

[Faethon]

Are you in the USA? If yes, the 1600 AFBOX model is great for cheap. It's basically a 2600 with 200mhz lower clockspeed or something.

Good suggestion. Yes, it's an ever so slightly underclocked 2600, which in real life wouldn't give any noticeable difference:

 

[crazycrave]

Newegg says $134.99 with a free game on 2700 .. (for me) and the 2600 is $ 119.99 no free game .. then Amazon has 1600 AF now at $99.99 which is plus $15 more than I gave for mine ..

I would get the 2700 and with a new bios the memory speed is closer to 3200Mhz now and up from 2933Mhz .. So you can get better performance without overclocking just running the more stable better bios then before as what they learned in Gen 3 they applied it to Gen 2 with last bios AGESA 1004 Beta b .