Speaker1264

7700k is crap for streaming

$1000 is a little low budget for all the tasks described.  I would at minimum get an R7 1700, 32 GB of ram, and a 500 GB m.2 SSD.  Right there alone is like 75% of your budget.  Also what games and resolutions is he playing games on?  Does he want 4k 60fps or 1440p 144fps at ultra settings?  In that case he would need something like a 1080 Ti as well, which puts the budget already at $1500 without PSU, case, and motherboard.

How about the blue snowball ice?  Pretty popular for only $50.
 
https://www.amazon.com/Blue-Snowball-iCE-Condenser-Microphone/dp/B014PYGTUQ/ref=sr_1_12?s=musical-instruments&ie=UTF8&qid=1499328992&sr=1-12&keywords=Cardioid+Condenser+Microphone

I personally would try to push your budget and get an R5 1600 and overclock it, and overclock your ram as well.
 
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
CPU: AMD - Ryzen 5 1500X 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor  ($176.99 @ SuperBiiz) 
Motherboard: Asus - PRIME B350-PLUS ATX AM4 Motherboard  ($95.74 @ B&H) 
Memory: G.Skill - Ripjaws V Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-2133 Memory  ($106.88 @ OutletPC) 
Video Card: Asus - Radeon RX 580 4GB Dual Video Card  ($209.98 @ Directron) 
Total: $589.59
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-06-26 04:42 EDT-0400

You can still mount it in the front, check the video I linked.

Yeah, you would just have to attach the two top front fans to the radiator and mount it like that.  You wouldn't need the extra long screws and you could still do push/pull if you want.
 
Here's a visual representation I did in Paint.  It's not drawn to scale so take note of that because you could still add two 120/140 mm fans in the top, and one 120 mm fan in the rear if you wanted.
 
Green are 120 mm fans, red is 240 mm radiator, purple is motherboard, and orange is power supply.
 

Yeah terrible deal.  You could build a better pc brand new like the guy above me posted.

Yeah terrible deal.  You could build a better pc brand new like the guy above me posted.

With all respect, this is probably one of the worse 1000$ build there is
 
I'm disappointed at LTT for not making this a serious ryzen 1600 based build, I mean me and every one else here on the forum are educating the newbies on daily basis to avoid the i5 since it is outdated and already bottlenecking higher end GPUs due to its very limiting 4 threads only, showing extensively how people should go for either the i7 7700 locked or ryzen 5 1600 on the same price range and then Linus himself goes and advise people further into mistake... a bit disappointing.
 
Although I'm kinda glad you guys quit telling people to overclock the i5 at least... I suppose baby steps into getting your advising better.

First of all make sure you are using the most recent BIOS version for your motherboard.
 
Secondly, did you do a clean windows install?  If not this is a must, especially if you are coming from an Intel system, since all your drivers will conflict with each other.  Once you've clean installed windows run a windows update, and that should install all necessary drivers, but if things still aren't working it might be worth trying to manually install drivers from your motherboard manufacturer's website, and AMD chipset drivers from the AMD website.
 
Third, like others have said, go into the bios and reset to defaults.  Open task manager and make sure you are seeing all 8 cores 16 threads enabled, and running at stock speeds.  
 
Other things you can do is change the power plan to High Performance, disable HPET, and make sure your temps are good under load.
 
Hope this helps.

Net neutrality isn't the problem, it sounds good on paper, but will be negative in the long run.  All the government regulations are why we are in this shitty situation with ISPs in the first place, we don't need more regulations like net neutrality.  All it does is stifle innovation, competition, and increase costs.  What the government needs to do is break up the monopolies, ie. separate the physical infrastructure owners from the isps themselves.  That way anyone could come in and lease the lines, creating more competition.  More competition means more innovation and more choice and that means lower prices.

AIDA64 has a free trial version, no need to pay for it.  Also there is other benchmarking software that some people would argue is better and also free, such as OCCT.  The absolute max temp for the 7700k is 100C.  For longevity though, I would say try to stay at 85C or below.

NVidia drives being shit and not properly utilizing Ryzen.  People have found that Ryzen utilization is much better with AMD video cards resulting in Ryzen being much closer or better than Intel CPU's if benched with an AMD card.  And also the AMD cards also perform much closer to higher end NVidia cards when pairing an AMD card with a Ryzen CPU.  Here's a long drawn out video, but if you make it through the whole thing you will have a better understanding.
 
 

Ashes was built on a new engine with minimum requirements of Sandy Bridge. If the engine itself was not designed to be dealing with C2Q's idiosyncrasies (legacy code does take forever to take out, just see Unreal 4), then no, it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest. And AOTS is not a paragon of optimization. Until I see an AVX instruction in the disassembly (hint, just look for "ymm"), then there's a near 2x speedup for the CPU-side code available.
 
Or what it also means is they got the cache friendliness done well enough that Ryzen's double-sized L2 made up for its overall lower IPC just as it did for Cinebench. And before you challenge me on the definition of IPC, throughput, and performance, http://www.agner.org/optimize/instruction_tables.pdf
 
The results for Ryzen haven't been written up in the PDF, as Agner's been busy, but go ahead and run his test scripts here: http://www.agner.org/optimize/#testp
 
Several people have already found Ryzen has roughly Ivy Bridge IPC; but it's the 2x sized L2 lowering the # of 42-cycle cache miss penalties --thus keeping the pipeline better fed-- which make up for it and sometimes can even beat Kaby Lake.

Gamersnexus's review goes a little into temperatures.  Using an x62 Kraken at full fan speed and pump speed and maxing out the CPU the Ryzen 1700 hit a max temp of around 46C, and the 1800x hit a max temp of 75C.  But now we know the 1700x and 1800x have a 20C offset, which wasn't known when he did his reviews, so that puts the 1800x at 55C under full load.  So temperature wise, these CPU's are quite chilly.

The WD Black is faster.

I think the 1800x is a terrible price/performance comparison at $500 and no cooler.  The 1700 comes with it a cooler, only costs $330 and will overclock to nearly the same speed as the 1800x, sometimes 3.9 Ghz on the stock cooler.  Now that is an amazing value, and I wish reviewers and the like would use the 1700's price/performance ratio when comparing against Intel.  I think it's unfortunate because a lot of reviewers used the 1800x for comparison between AMD and Intel, and I think it's a bad comparison, when you have the 1700 which blows it away in price/performance.

The iGPU has nothing to do with it.  It's the CPU usage. Chrome or Firefox can hit around 50% cpu before buffering a youtube video, and stabilize around 25-30% after buffering has finished.  With that much CPU usage dedicated to the browser it isn't difficult to max out a core or two, causing a dip in FPS.

I think the 1800x is a terrible price/performance comparison at $500 and no cooler.  The 1700 comes with it a cooler, only costs $330 and will overclock to nearly the same speed as the 1800x, sometimes 3.9 Ghz on the stock cooler.  Now that is an amazing value, and I wish reviewers and the like would use the 1700's price/performance ratio when comparing against Intel.  I think it's unfortunate because a lot of reviewers used the 1800x for comparison between AMD and Intel, and I think it's a bad comparison, when you have the 1700 which blows it away in price/performance.

Basically AMD confirmed that the Windows Scheduler was not a problem, and that optimizations for Ryzen needed to be made by the game developers.  Besides that though, the major problem is that AMD uses two 4 core/8 thread CCXs, but many games see it as a single 8 core/16 thread CPU, and some see it as a 16 core CPU, causing lower performance, because if the game is using some cores on one CCX and some on the other, then there is an added latency penalty, causing lower framerate.
 
If the games are programmed and optimized to know that Ryzen uses 2 CCXs and try to reduce cross-talk between the two CCXs then there will be a lot better performance overall.  And in some games that only utilize 4 cores, you can even use a program called Process Lasso to make sure that the game is only using the 4 cores from the same CCX, eliminating the latency problems altogether.  It's not ideal, but it works. 
 
Hopefully game developers work with AMD and optimize their games properly for Ryzen, but we shall see.  Even still though, the difference really isn't as big as some people are making it out to be.

I want to see some Ryzen 8-core multi-tasking benchmarks.  That's the real reason you buy an 8-core cpu.  The game only benchmarks mean little to me.  I wanna see how well it performs when playing a game, watching a youtube video, and streaming to twitch all simultaneously.  And see a comparison between the Ryzen chips overclocked and non-overclocked, and compare those results to the 6700k, 6800k, and 6900k overclocked and non-overclocked.  I think it would be interesting.  I also think multithreading/hyperthreading should be disabled on all chips to level the playing field, since I know there seems to be some issue with windows not utilizing Ryzen's multithreading correctly.  Hopefully that should be fixed in the next windows update, who knows.
 
Or has someone already done a multi-tasking benchmark?  If so let me know, thanks.

Someone went out and tested Ryzen on Windows 7, and performance with SMT on was better than windows 10 with SMT off.  So there is an issue with windows 10 not correctly using the multithreading, as well as some additional windows 10 overhead it seems.
 
https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/page-8#post-38775732
 
reddit thread:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/5xkghp/confirmed_windows_10_scheduler_is_gimping_ryzen/

At that price you would get better performance from a Ryzen 8-core.  You'll save money on the motherboard as well.

At that price you would get better performance from a Ryzen 8-core.  You'll save money on the motherboard as well.

Someone went out and tested Ryzen on Windows 7, and performance with SMT on was better than windows 10 with SMT off.  So there is an issue with windows 10 not correctly using the multithreading, as well as some additional windows 10 overhead it seems.
 
https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/page-8#post-38775732
 
reddit thread:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/5xkghp/confirmed_windows_10_scheduler_is_gimping_ryzen/