To Ryzen or not to Ryzen, that is the question

D

DuronBurgerMan

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
1,340
At a certain point, you just hit information overload. I was set to build a Ryzen box, but now having second thoughts. There's so much back and forth about Ryzen's weird performance irregularities.

I want to build a box for, let's say 20% gaming, 20% general bullsh*t browsing & regular computing, 10% Photoshop, 20% programming/development, 20% heavy rendering (video editing/encoding & 3D), and 10% misc. multi-threaded workloads (like stacking a bazillion VSTs when doing music production). Definitely getting a high-end GPU, probably a single Geforce 1080 Ti, since Adobe sh*t likes Cuda. Definitely want 32GB of RAM (prolly 2 DIMMs for Ryzen, since it doesn't play well with 4). Going with a Samsung 960 Evo 1TB boot drive.

So I've been bouncing back and forth. Do I go 7700k? Ryzen? 6850k? Do I let Intel bend me over for a 6900k? It's really hard to decide, because each one on the list seems to have a list of pros and cons for me.

For reference, my current box is a nearly 6 year old i7 2600k with a motherboard that's on its last legs. Running a Radeon 7970 that was beat to hell and back during the Bitcoin mining days. I don't figure this machine has got much more life left in it.

So, with all that BS... to Ryzen or not to Ryzen?
 
If money is no object, then spend like a drunk sailor on intel.

Otherwise...

If you're doing any % of Photoshop/rendering, Ryzen is the way to go, and put the savings you got by not buying 6800+ into getting a high-end GPU/SSD/hookers and blow and call it a day.

Depending on your resolution, you won't even notice the slight drop-off in gaming performance compared to a 7700k.
 
noobferguson said:
If money is no object, then spend like a drunk sailor on intel.

Otherwise...

If you're doing any % of Photoshop/rendering, Ryzen is the way to go, and put the savings you got by not buying 6800+ into getting a high-end GPU/SSD/hookers and blow and call it a day.

Depending on your resolution, you won't even notice the slight drop-off in gaming performance compared to a 7700k.
Click to expand...

Money isn't quite no object. I *could* afford to let Intel bend me over. But, *ahem*, it leaves a bad taste. Seems kind of stupid to spend $1k on a CPU.

Gaming is 1080p@60, though I'm likely to upgrade to either 1440 or 4k monitors when the prices drop a little more.
 
TordanGow said:
I'd try to milk that 2600k for another 7ish months for coffee lake. Intel will be releasing mainstream 6 core chips in 2H 2017. Then you can get the best of both worlds. Good single thread performance and 2 extra cores for production.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's another monkey in the wrench right there. If this box craps out on me while I'm waiting, it'd really suck from a work/business perspective. Even a week of not billing hours because of a dead box is likely to cost me near to the entire build cost. This machine has been twitchy as hell lately. Used to have 24GB of RAM. Two sticks died a couple months back. Down to 16GB. The Radeon's fan bearings are shot -- it sounds like powering up a jet engine. Some USB ports on the motherboard died, and sometimes the machine randomly decides not to post without a BIOS reset, for whatever reason.

Can't blame Intel, or even AMD (for the Radeon)... this machine has been seriously abused. At one point, it was near to 100% load at least 12 hours/day for nearly a year, back when I was mining crypto.

But you make a good point too. A part with 7700k single core performance, but with 6 cores/12 threads instead of 4/8, at a reasonable price (under $500) would be ideal. Wish it were here now. It would suck to wait on it, have the box die, and then have Intel miss their target, or the damn thing come out around Christmas or something.

Blargh.
 
DuronBurgerMan said:
Yeah, that's another monkey in the wrench right there. If this box craps out on me while I'm waiting, it'd really suck from a work/business perspective. Even a week of not billing hours because of a dead box is likely to cost me near to the entire build cost. This machine has been twitchy as hell lately. Used to have 24GB of RAM. Two sticks died a couple months back. Down to 16GB. The Radeon's fan bearings are shot -- it sounds like powering up a jet engine. Some USB ports on the motherboard died, and sometimes the machine randomly decides not to post without a BIOS reset, for whatever reason.

Can't blame Intel, or even AMD (for the Radeon)... this machine has been seriously abused. At one point, it was near to 100% load at least 12 hours/day for nearly a year, back when I was mining crypto.

But you make a good point too. A part with 7700k single core performance, but with 6 cores/12 threads instead of 4/8, at a reasonable price (under $500) would be ideal. Wish it were here now. It would suck to wait on it, have the box die, and then have Intel miss their target, or the damn thing come out around Christmas or something.

Blargh.
Click to expand...
Why not grab a used P67/Z68/Z77 socket 1155 board? All your problems sound motherboard related with the exception of the video card. You should be able to find one reasonably cheap... Toss the board in a closet and if yours goes belly up you aren't down for a week. You can also upgrade your video card now and move it to a new build in 7 months.
 
Gotta love the people always telling people to hold on. Hold on for another 6 months, then oh in another 6 months something else will come along that will be better and another 6 months.

If you see true value in something then go for it. If it makes you happy and know its going to satisfy to for next few years go for it.

From reading your thread if I was to base my opinion solely on what you are doing. I would say why not? Ryzen is going to do whatever you want to do. But I would recommend get the regular 1700 and OC it to 3.9ghz or 4ghz. It's easy and you save @180 compared to 1800x. Spend that money else where.

I have an intel i7 6850k. I was to build a system now I would go ryzen. I am in the same situation as you heck I might game 25%. Ryzen will only get better with time, and it delivers one hell of a value in 80% of of the things you are doing and give you great game play if not every last frame.

Build it and enjoy, There is no better chip for the money than ryzen 1700 for 80% of your workload. If you were gaming 90% of the time. I would say ofcourse go for 7700k. But I don't base my opinion on my feelings only on what I see best fitting your needs.
 
TordanGow said:
Why not grab a used P67/Z68/Z77 socket 1155 board? All your problems sound motherboard related with the exception of the video card. You should be able to find one reasonably cheap... Toss the board in a closet and if yours goes belly up you aren't down for a week. You can also upgrade your video card now and move it to a new build in 7 months.
Click to expand...

That's not a bad idea, actually. If I decide to wait, I'll definitely do that.

It really is a shame about Ryzen's weird schizoid benchmarks. This should have been a slam dunk, if Ryzen was ~10% or so away from the 7700k, that'd have been good enough. But I don't like the recent set of Geforce 1080 ti comparisons between Ryzen and Kaby Lake. It loses by 30-40%. That's not chump change. That's indicative of serious design flaws or, more charitably (and hopefully for AMD), beta-ish teething problems. Looking more like serious design flaws at this point, though. Wish I could be proven wrong, so I could just build a damn box today.

So maybe I'll give AMD a few more weeks to resolve any beta bullsh*t, and if things aren't better in gaming by then, I'll buy a backup board and limp along until Intel offers a better hybrid gaming/workstation chip at a price that doesn't suck.

Hell, it's not like Ryzen motherboards are in stock right now anyway.
 
From what I have seen Ryzen gives better minimum frame rates in some cases/ most cases, i would have to look at the benchmarks again and i am too kinda burnt out from it all, I personly think Ryzen is a steal for what is offers and if your not going to bother with really high refresh rates and stick to mostly 60Hz maybe 100Hz displays Ryzen should be extremely good for your needs.

Now there is the issue of latency of communication between the two core complexes, the L3 cache is also reporting weird values in windows 10 (i think ppl were saying is was showing like 313mb of L3 in some cases) and it also is suffering a latency communication penalty between the two L3 caches of like 180ms so right now windows is not using that part of the CPU architecture correctly but it is recognizing the SMT threads properly i have read so that is not a issue. Beyond that the MOBD's are having issue but BIOS updates are forthcoming but the issue's will most likely persist for a month or two and you have to be willing to deal with the early adopter BS, if your cool with all above I would say go for Ryzen unless you need or want a 8 core CPU with no latency communication between 2 quard core complexes because that's probably the only thing of the above monition that will remain as it was a design choice to keep cost down, but most likely future software will be programmed with that in mind when programming highly multi threaded software that most likely wont happen with older outdated software but this is only speculation on my part as I can't know what the future holds.

I personally think Ryzen is a good buy when you look at the numbers, it's gaming performance is decent any only being behind by a small margin in most cases of course there are extreme examples of performance issues in some game benches like Hitman DX12 but they are related to issues with the new CPU and will get most likely ironed out as updates get release.

Now that I'm done with my rant if your still not sure and want 100% working and optimized system right now and cost is not a issue go with a 8 core Broadwell-e or Haswell-e if your in to heavy over clocking and you won't be disappointed from what i hear :)

I was thinking of getting a 6 core Braodwell-e but i ended up getting a R7 1700 and probably saved my self 1k+ as even the MOBD were pushing 600-700$ and lets not even talk about the quad channel DDR 4, unless i when cheap of course but if you going to get a 750$ CPU you better get equivalent hardware to put it in lol.

anyway I hope this helps if you want to go with Ryzen all the power to ya but you need to be satisfied with you systems completely so if you don't wan't any part of this new architecture and early adoption BS you might be happier with the offering of intel just be prepared to payyyyyy


Hopfully everything i said was mostly accurate, I'm doing this all from memory and I dont want to mislead as misleading is bad.

Thanks for reading
 
Last edited by a moderator:
NKD said:
Gotta love the people always telling people to hold on. Hold on for another 6 months, then oh in another 6 months something else will come along that will be better and another 6 months.

If you see true value in something then go for it. If it makes you happy and know its going to satisfy to for next few years go for it.

From reading your thread if I was to base my opinion solely on what you are doing. I would say why not? Ryzen is going to do whatever you want to do. But I would recommend get the regular 1700 and OC it to 3.9ghz or 4ghz. It's easy and you save @180 compared to 1800x. Spend that money else where.

I have an intel i7 6850k. I was to build a system now I would go ryzen. I am in the same situation as you heck I might game 25%. Ryzen will only get better with time, and it delivers one hell of a value in 80% of of the things you are doing and give you great game play if not every last frame.

Build it and enjoy, There is no better chip for the money than ryzen 1700 for 80% of your workload. If you were gaming 90% of the time. I would say ofcourse go for 7700k. But I don't base my opinion on my feelings only on what I see best fitting your needs.
Click to expand...

Yeah it's tough. For me every purchase comes with a serious downside:

1. 6850k - slower than 7700 in games, slower than Ryzen in workstation sh*t, and still $650
2. Ryzen - crappy gaming performance
3. 7700k - multithreaded workstation performance sucks
4. 6900k - costs more than your first-born child

I have a feeling that no matter which one I buy, I'm going to have some regrets.

And you know, I feel like when I built this 2600k box, things were much more clear in the CPU market. I mean, everybody knew, that was the CPU to buy. Now? It's like every high-end CPU is 'tarded in its own unique way.
 
Last edited:
DuronBurgerMan said:
That's not a bad idea, actually. If I decide to wait, I'll definitely do that.

It really is a shame about Ryzen's weird schizoid benchmarks. This should have been a slam dunk, if Ryzen was ~10% or so away from the 7700k, that'd have been good enough. But I don't like the recent set of Geforce 1080 ti comparisons between Ryzen and Kaby Lake. It loses by 30-40%. That's not chump change. That's indicative of serious design flaws or, more charitably (and hopefully for AMD), beta-ish teething problems. Looking more like serious design flaws at this point, though. Wish I could be proven wrong, so I could just build a damn box today.

So maybe I'll give AMD a few more weeks to resolve any beta bullsh*t, and if things aren't better in gaming by then, I'll buy a backup board and limp along until Intel offers a better hybrid gaming/workstation chip at a price that doesn't suck.

Hell, it's not like Ryzen motherboards are in stock right now anyway.
Click to expand...

I don't see many places its 40% slower. You have to ask yourself, after how may frames are you getting diminishing returns? and the 20% of the time you game is it worth those extra frames you may not see.

Also at 4k its pretty close if you see variety of games even with at 1080ti if you are planning on upgrading, and at 1080p you wont see a difference. Plus it will do admirably at 80% of the tasks you are doing. Obviously if you are going to be bothered by not getting every last frame after the 130th frame than yea you should spend the extra money and go for whats going to keep you happy.
 
A good Ryzen Benchmark and review:

I don't think Gamer Nexus is misleading in anyway as they do not recommend the 1800X as the 1700 can get pretty much the same performance depending how well you silicon over clocks, anyway this is one of the many reviews I looked at before buying and paints a pretty clear image of Ryzen's current performance
 
Last edited by a moderator:
NKD said:
I don't see many places its 40% slower. You have to ask yourself, after how may frames are you getting diminishing returns? and the 20% of the time you game is it worth those extra frames you may not see.

Also at 4k its pretty close if you see variety of games even with at 1080ti if you are planning on upgrading, and at 1080p you wont see a difference. Plus it will do admirably at 80% of the tasks you are doing. Obviously if you are going to be bothered by not getting every last frame after the 130th frame than yea you should spend the extra money and go for whats going to keep you happy.
Click to expand...

This was what spooked me. Honestly, I was all set to go Ryzen until I read this (hell, I probably would have ordered this morning if newegg had X370 boards in stock):

http://www.hardocp.com/news/2017/03/13/gtx_1080_ti_test_on_ryzen_intel_kaby_lake

That looked really bad. Not the 10-15% little bit of FPS loss, which like you say, doesn't really matter. It looked like the CPU would be obsolete in gaming in a few years.
 
I say flip a coin. Meanwhile ive already got a Ryzen and ill be set with future software and until sometime in the future when i might decide to drop in another AM4 socket compatible Ryzen processor. Or maybe ill drop in Raven Ridge to play araound with. :)
 
I just got my Ryzen chip, I'm digging it. Only done gaming benchmarks so far, but it holds up. Will test Visual Studio compilation and some other stuff, but overall it seems fine.

From what I've read gaming performance is not 7700K level, but it's not bad. I'm still getting over 60fps at 4K res maxed in some games (GTA V, RE7, DOOM) w/ a 1080 Ti. Other games are struggling somewhat, but that is more of a GPU bottleneck than anything.

I would say the gaming performance on 1800X + 1080Ti is on par with another machine I have w/ a 4790K + Titan XP. This was about what I was expecting, and is acceptable performance (even if it could be slightly better).
 
This one is easy... which ever one helps pay the bills the best for a reasonable amount of money.
job first, fun second.
Taking a chance and waiting with a failing system that your income depends on is not very smart.
 
DuronBurgerMan said:
This was what spooked me. Honestly, I was all set to go Ryzen until I read this (hell, I probably would have ordered this morning if newegg had X370 boards in stock):

http://www.hardocp.com/news/2017/03/13/gtx_1080_ti_test_on_ryzen_intel_kaby_lake

That looked really bad. Not the 10-15% little bit of FPS loss, which like you say, doesn't really matter. It looked like the CPU would be obsolete in gaming in a few years.
Click to expand...


lol thats what I saw. But seriously testing two games and one of them is thief? That just makes me shake my head when reviewers do that.

I was referring to the same review actually, you see it getting 130fps at 1440p and matching at 4k. I have no doubt in the future games will become better SMT optimized. if you see reviews 7700k gets shit load of performance with HT on in watch dogs 2, and ryzen gets nothing. That shows a great deal how optimized a game is on intel platforms. I think SMT Is seeing early pain as HT did when it was launched.

But again like I said ryzen does have its advantage of you just having to drop in Zen+ chip that does not happen with intel. Only upgrade path you need to take is sell old chip and get a new one.
 
I'm still leaning toward the i7-7700K but this is really for a gaming only rig. It's cheaper and comes out ahead in all of the gaming benchmarks. It also supports higher memory speeds. The memory speed thing is what's tipping me to Intel at this point. Ryzen seems to have an issue with dual rank dimms and memory speed. This alone sometimes makes a significant increase in frame rates. I want to buy Ryzen but there are too many issues at the moment. I'm waiting for somebody to find a stable board and DDR4-3200+ memory combo that easily overclocks to 4ghz without any Windows 10 issues. I'm thinking another month of waiting to see how things flush out.
 
Mostly all the RAM out now is optimized for Intel. There is new RAM coming, like the Flare X later this month, that will hit 3200+ on AM4.
 
mlcarson said:
I'm still leaning toward the i7-7700K but this is really for a gaming only rig. It's cheaper and comes out ahead in all of the gaming benchmarks. It also supports higher memory speeds. The memory speed thing is what's tipping me to Intel at this point. Ryzen seems to have an issue with dual rank dimms and memory speed. This alone sometimes makes a significant increase in frame rates. I want to buy Ryzen but there are too many issues at the moment. I'm waiting for somebody to find a stable board and DDR4-3200+ memory combo that easily overclocks to 4ghz without any Windows 10 issues. I'm thinking another month of waiting to see how things flush out.
Click to expand...
There is already tests at 3200mhz. I forgot which site though. Higher speed memory really helps Ryzen probably resulting in more bandwidth between ccx. Sure amd has a lot of work to do on memory side of things. Looks like it got put on the back burner.
 
With so much of your usage being multi threaded you'll be better off with the 1700. The higher end AMD chips are practically the same after overclocking, you don't do enough gaming to justify the 7700K and the higher end Intel chips can't match the price/performance.
 
Most of the gaming performance arguments seem to be about a few FPS in some twitch FPS shooter at 1080p, that already runs at 200 FPS anyway.
Ryzen performs just fine in games. When you consider the clock speed disadvantage of especially the 1700 compared to the 7700K (typically a full GHz depending on boost speeds), I can't see that anything appears to be wrong or unexpected behavior.

Compared to my 4770K @ 4.5 GHz, the vast majority of tasks are faster on my 1800X. I can multi task more, I can use more virtual instruments in my DAW, file compression/backups are faster and don't bog the system down as much, 3D rendering is insanely fast (I'm no 3D artist, I just ran a few synthetic benchmarks). From what I've heard, compilation and other development related tasks are also much faster on an Octa-Core. Maybe I'm getting 78 instead of 84 FPS in some game, and maybe that would bother some people, but I just can't seem to care. Everything I've thrown at the system so far has worked great.

The biggest issue with Ryzen is perhaps the mobo/RAM situation. I guess I was just extremely lucky, but my system has been stable since March 4:th when I first fired it up. Many have had stability issues, or even ended up bricking their systems, so that's something to keep in mind. With 32 GB RAM, you'd probably have to use dual-rank modules, which might limit RAM speeds. Maybe higher capacity modules will get certified for higher speeds in the future. Maybe pick up a Ryzen in a month when the situation is clearer. By then prices might have gone down too.
 
Here's the verdict. I'm going to wait another month or so, and see if there are any improvements with Ryzen. There are so many weird anomalies that I just have to wonder if this is at least partly a case of a beta platform getting released a bit too early. This will also help provide more motherboard choices as the stock recovers. I have to wait for the 1080 Ti to come back into stock too.

At the end of that month, if Ryzen has recovered to within 10-15% of 7700k in 1080p gaming performance, on average, I will go Ryzen. If it remains where it's at today, I will go Intel -- hopefully the 6850k drops in price as a result of all this. If so, I'd go with that. If not, would go with the 7700k.

Hopefully Ryzen benefits from an extra month of BIOS updates and motherboard revisions, and whatever else AMD can do. I'd really like to nab a 1700 on the cheap and get it up to 3.8-3.9.
 
Outside of gaming, Ryzen performs superbly. There is a lot of back and forth surrounding Ryzen and how it is handled in games and Windows itself. It's got nowhere near the software development time as Intel chips, and will improve with new titles going forward. By how much is unknown, and will not be known for a few years, when Zen+ is out.

The best thing about AMD is socket unity. When Zen+ hits, if it offers substantial clockspeed, IPC or memory improvements, it's a $300-$500 upgrade. No need for a motherboard or memory swap!
 
Just a 3rd option. Buy an asrock X99 extreme 4 new -- i got mine for $126 after rebate from newegg. buy whatever xeon processor is cheap (i got an 8 core 2620 V4 for $115) threw a $20 Hyper 212 on it -- then you get a mature platform, quad channel memory, its good enough at everything. I built mine 2 weeks before ryzen came out -- but i couldnt resist so i bought a ryzen 1700. Mind you, i only surf the web, casual gamer -- I was getting by JUST fine on a dual processor nehalem 2.4ghz. The new intel 2620 is miles faster then the nehalem at everything -- the ryzen is even faster --- but to get my memory to run at its rated speed, occassionally when i power on the system i get an overclocking failed message, i press f1 - save and exit and runs completely stable at rated speed.

If you dont want to deal with any teething issues of the am4 get an X99 + used xeon or a cheapish 5820k. It appalls me to see so many people say ryzen sucks for gaming. They don't have a clue what "sucks for gaming" is. an athlon Xii 370 sucks for gaming, a pentium G620, and so on. Sucks implies that its a BAD experience, right? My nehalem 2.4ghz quads and my FX-8320e gave me FLAWLESS gaming experiences -- my AMD a10-5800k though would sometimes stutter and frequently cpu utilization was pegged at 100% -- it was still decent most of the time. The ryzen is head and shoulders above 4ghz FX-8320e my overwatch FPS on epic settings 1080p went from 130s to 180s Cpu utilization went from 65% to 25%

CS:GO on low settings
Nehalem quads - 102fps
FX-8320e non overclocked 154fps
Intel Xeon 2620 V4 - 274 fps
Ryzen stock clocks 312fps
 
If I were building a work PC I actually would not buy an AMD rig right now. They're going to be tweaking BIOS and crap for a while , let them do it. Let this first wave of motherboards get worked over by people with time and energy who aren't praying nothing bad happens because they have a deadline.

A 7700 is fine. we're not talking hours of difference to do things here even in highly multi threaded apps.
 
Personally I am waiting a bit. Right now my biggest issue with the Ryzen chip is the memory penalty. I want to put in 64GB in the system but that needs 4 DIMMs so for me that speed penalty is a big problem. I probably won't buy one till they can clear up the memory speed issues w/ 4 DIMMs installed. That said, the Ryzen chip is probably about equal to a i7-4770k in gaming so IMHO it would still be an upgrade for me. Like the op I will be using the system for other things other than gaming so the Ryzen chip 8/16 will help out much more in basically everything else I do. Remember there are also other advantages to having more cores and threads available to you like multitasking while things process in the background. To me that makes Ryzen more than worthy to buy into.

Just wanted to mention that remember the gaming benchmarks you see are always compared to the previous/current generation processors. You have to always adjust that to you current rig because unless you are upgrading nearly yearly you are going to actually get a better system than you currently have. So while gaming wise I am essentially making only a minor upgrade, for everything else I am getting a major upgrade. So unless you are only building a Gaming only rig, then there is no real good reason not to go Ryzen given the price/performance ratio if you are in the market to buy a new system now especially if you system is 5 or more years old.
 
For what it is worth I found a Xeon E5-1660 V4 on ebay for 375 from China. Seller seems legit. That is the same chip as the 6900k, and from what reading I found it is also unlocked. I Considered it, but It would be a waste for me even at that price. I am going to just go with Ryzen most likely, and I'm waiting for a 6 core option to see how it overclocks. Overall, if it can overclock better than the 8 core can, then it may be nearly the same/better performance for even less.
 
It's a tough time to buy right now, that's for sure. I'm on the fence myself between the 6800k and ryzen 1700. The cost difference isn't that much honestly, a high end ryzen motherboard with a 1700 is within a few bucks of an x99 and 6800k. It comes down to an extra hundred bucks for Intel due to 2 extra sticks of ram.
 
dgacioch said:
It's a tough time to buy right now, that's for sure. I'm on the fence myself between the 6800k and ryzen 1700. The cost difference isn't that much honestly, a high end ryzen motherboard with a 1700 is within a few bucks of an x99 and 6800k. It comes down to an extra hundred bucks for Intel due to 2 extra sticks of ram.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it is. I guess I shouldn't bitch about having more options. But it's hard to make a decision given the current climate.
 
A few extra bucks? The motherboard is about the same for a cheap X99 vs. the more expensive X370. The 6800K is about $30-50 more than the 7700. You need twice memory modules for quad channel. And you end up with something that isn't much faster in games and has two less cores for other work.

IMO the 6800K is no slam dunk over the 7700. If you can go with a B350 then 6800K is even less attractive vs. the 7700.
 
I have been flip flopping myself due to so many options. I keep wondering how will the performance be of a Ryzen 7 once the little issues are ironed out(we've seen it has some serious potential even in gaming if settings are right). I also wonder if I am looking at a 5-7yr build if the extra two cores will pay off down the road with DX12/13 with better threaded performance.

I also have been looking at getting a used unlocked xeon for an x79/x99 build. There are a ton of options that seem to lead to around the same price/performance barrier right now. Nothing is really sticking out as a major performance per dollar stand out except for the Ryzen 7 with non-gaming things. I do very little with with that. This will be primarily a gaming system, and I would like to support AMD.
 
Gideon said:
You know I find it funny when people ask if they should try AMD or not or what processor is best we get tons of responses from people that are pro AMD or pro Intel. Yet some poor bastard asks a question about a 7700k in the Intel forum and is pretty much left in the cold. https://hardforum.com/threads/noctua-nh-u14s-with-7700k-5ghz.1927158/
Click to expand...

I do not go to the Intel forums, so what is your point? How many folks around here actually have a 7700k running a 5 Ghz as it is? My suggestion for him is to PM Kyle, he is usually very good about getting back to specific questions.
 
ManofGod said:
I do not go to the Intel forums, so what is your point? How many folks around here actually have a 7700k running a 5 Ghz as it is? My suggestion for him is to PM Kyle, he is usually very good about getting back to specific questions.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry did I hurt your feelings. My point was so many take the time on the AMD side to give someone processor advice and yet on the Intel side almost no one told him anything. I just find it funny so many rush over to the AMD forum to give advice but those same people dont help others on the Intel side. Yet the whole point of a forum is to ask advice and discuss things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NKD
like this
DuronBurgerMan said:
Here's the verdict. I'm going to wait another month or so, and see if there are any improvements with Ryzen. There are so many weird anomalies that I just have to wonder if this is at least partly a case of a beta platform getting released a bit too early. This will also help provide more motherboard choices as the stock recovers. I have to wait for the 1080 Ti to come back into stock too.

At the end of that month, if Ryzen has recovered to within 10-15% of 7700k in 1080p gaming performance, on average, I will go Ryzen. If it remains where it's at today, I will go Intel -- hopefully the 6850k drops in price as a result of all this. If so, I'd go with that. If not, would go with the 7700k.

Hopefully Ryzen benefits from an extra month of BIOS updates and motherboard revisions, and whatever else AMD can do. I'd really like to nab a 1700 on the cheap and get it up to 3.8-3.9.
Click to expand...

I suggest getting the R7 1700 with a Asus Prime X370 Pro. Just make sure that the ram you purchase is on the QVL list or it may only run at 2133 speeds. Otherwise, if you are truly going to wait, just pick up the 7700K with a decent board ASAP because your machine may not last even another month. I have 2 Ryzen systems, both using the Asus Prime X370 Pro and other than long bios boots times of up to 22 seconds, I have had Zero issues with either one.
 
Gideon said:
I'm sorry did I hurt your feelings. My point was so many take the time on the AMD side to give someone processor advice and yet on the Intel side almost no one told him anything. I just find it funny so many rush over to the AMD forum to give advice but those same people dont help others on the Intel side. Yet the whole point of a forum is to ask advice and discuss things.
Click to expand...

Well, of course you hurt my feelings. :D ;) LOL Your post was not clear until you explained it further down and by that point, it was too late to change what I said. Besides, I rarely do go over to the blue forums, just not much there for me to see. Seriously though, how many folks around here actually have a 7700K running at 5 Ghz? That is why a PM to Kyle may get a faster answer, at least in this case.
 
I don't really get the "side" of things. Never was much into brand loyalty. And as far as I'm concerned, both AMD and Intel have kind of screwed us, in different ways. AMD just suddenly gave up on the enthusiast market for what seems like no reason. Then Intel used the opportunity to get lazy about performance, and greedy with pricing. AMD appears to be making an effort to comeback, for which I applaud them -- we need both companies in the enthusiast space to keep competition flowing. But I'm also still kind of pissed they left in the first place.

I've no loyalty to either brand. For me, it's strictly a question of which is the better buy in my circumstances. I kind of envy straight-up gamers in one respect: your decision is easy. Buy an i5-7600 or an i7-7700k, depending on budget, and pair with nastiest GPU you can afford. Done deal. For us enthusiast mixed-use users, the answer is not anywhere near so clear, and Ryzen appears to be a viable product in that space -- but not the only viable product.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top