elKz

I've been experiencing some issues with my PC lately that go from boot issues, all the way to extremely long load times in games to even my read/write speeds being slow when moving files. I ran a benchmark on UserBenchmarks.com and it reported that my RAM was running at 44%, along with my drives also reporting some very slow read/write speeds (both HDD and SSD). I'm wondering what might be the best route to finding out what the issue is, is there a more trustworthy benchmark tool?

please do not SPAM our forums with same subject threads.. all threads have been merged to this one.

I'm looking for a second monitor for my setup. It doesn't have to be anything fancy as in G-Sync, 144Hz but I'm looking to use it for console gaming & as a secondary PC monitor. I don't need anything fancy but I would like It to be 4K & have a VESA mount. Can anyone recommend one or advise me here? I'm looking to pair it with a ASUS PG278Q so It has to be 27" or 28".
 
Thanks in advanced.

I was considering going for the 8600K but jumping from a 4770K to a 8700K seems the logical choice for me, seeing as the gains per generation are quite small I may as well make the biggest jump I can right now, ignoring the $500+ processors. 

If I still drank, I'd literally take your advice and get the Noctuas lol. But I've just watched them drop 10c off of a H110i from stock fans so I'm hoping I get the same result!

I looked at the 1600 route yesterday but wasn't to happy with what I found, decided to go with this and the Thermaltake V21 which puts me ever so slightly over budget but that's acceptable when you're gaining an extra 3000 in Passmark score alone.

I did just mention that the price difference doesn't bother me, I just want what's best for what I'm doing.

Same features, cooler RGB on the K5 (IMO obviously) similar quality and 60 bucks cheaper.  Also comes with a steam voucher

I'd agree, good value for money.

I'm probably just going to RMA it straight away, If I open it up and replace it that will void the warranty. I'd rather just get it sorted and risk voiding it.

I'm probably just going to RMA it straight away, If I open it up and replace it that will void the warranty. I'd rather just get it sorted and risk voiding it.

They do overcharge a little but I think for the quality they provide, they're worth it. I'm going to shop around before anything else anyway, I've just got the quote through from them at £1,347 which is a little more than i wanted to spend anyway. That would be a good idea but then I live in an area miles from anything so that isn't an option unfortunately.

Never buy the X models, if you want 8 cores: 1700, 6 cores: 1600. The only exception is the 1500X because of the 1400 only having half the L3 cache and a smaller cooler
 
This ^

You've literally just made my mind up 100% for me right there then. Ryzen 1700 It is. 

the 1700 won't hinder you much at that res, probably 5fps max. Because it doesn't bottleneck the 1080 really. So I would suggest it and overclocking it. The 1700 with it's extra cores is brilliant at streaming so it won't be anywhere near as sluggish, as a 7700K which doesn't and when using the fancy thing that the 7700K can do with it's igpu with streaming it's not as good quality, so I suggest the 1700 as it will be better in this case.

The 1700x generally has lower FPS in games, but it also has twice the core and thread count of the i7. In terms of streaming and video editing, the Ryzen CPU should be way ahead of the i7. I would also think the Ryzen CPU is more "Future Proof" than the i7, since it seems that games will start taking advantage of higher core and thread counts. 

The i7 7700K is essentially the best "gaming" CPU that the current market has to offer. Where the R7 1700/X falls behind in gaming performance (and honestly speaking, it's still a decent gaming chip), it makes it up in heavily threaded tasks.
 
Since you're not only gaming, but also streaming and rendering, I'd recommend getting the R7 1700 and overclocking it.

the FPS count isn't too much lower so that doesn't matter, as the difference between 150fps and 145fps isn't noticeable especially if you only have a 60/120hz monitor  you'd need a 144hz monitor, and even then there wouldn't be any noticeable difference in most games
 
I would say overclock a 1700, as it will give a better quality stream and is much better at rendering due to the extra cores. It also as pelark touched on will get better at gaming in the future, due to patches to optimise games for AMD CPUs (very little games are at the moment as everyone normally had bought intel) so this will change in the future, probably, and games will optimise for AMDs extra cores and threads. This will go for both games and other applications btw, so expect some improvements with most newer applications

the OP might want/need the extra two cores and four threads of the 1700, so that might not be a good idea

@elKz
 
First off 1700, never buy the X models as all Ryzens are unlocked. The frame difference factor only plays a part at high refresh rates @ 1080p, you have a <100Hz monitor or play at 1440p or 4k then you won't see a gain with the 7700k. Going with the 1700 you are on a new platform guaranteed for 4 years vs the aging/soon for retirement LGA1151. Also regarding games in the near future scaling with cores should now become more common now that the option for a good 8 core is $280 instead of the criminal $1000+. Next when you consider you are doing anything aside from gaming the 1700 becomes the clear winner here, it'll crush the 7700k in multi-threaded applications.
 
In summary:
1700 should age better due to future support for multi cores in games.
AM4 is a newer platform
Cheaper
Better productivity performance