Ryzen 7 1700 or ryzen 7 1800x

[Abhinavp]

Why the hell will someone buy an 1800x for 499 when u can buy the same thing for less than 350 bucks!!? I have watched and read many reviews of the 1800x and 1700 the 1700 can overclock up to 4 GHz with Max 1.35 volts and the 1800x overclocks to same 4ghz but with frickin 1.45 volts and the temps of the 1700 is wayyyyy better than the 1800x with an 280 aio thanks to the lower TDP of 65w so why should people buy the 1800x, please give me an ADVANTAGE of the 1800x over the 1700 when both are overclocked! The 1700 rests at 60c at full load when overclocked and the 1800x at full load when overclocked touches over 80c! And u will also get an RGB cooler with the 1700!!

[Guest Kloaked]

We. Know.

[grimreeper132]

either 1700 or 1700X and overclock, 1800X is only for people who don't want to overclock. and you should buy a bulky cooler either way if your OCing as the rated TDP goes out the window when you do

 

I assumed you were asking which to buy whoops

[Abhinavp]

So I'll definitely go with the 1700!!

[tom_w141]

Right a few things as a 1700 owner:

 

Yes all 3 chips are the same. Why is the 1700 labelled 65W? because at stock that's correct. It outputs far more heat if you clock it to 4.0Ghz. The chips are essentially the same so why would you buy an 1800X? Well some people have money to burn, some want GUARANTEED speeds (while something like 93% of 1700s can oc to 3.8GHz that is not a guarantee) and some don't want to overclock and just go right out of the box. After realising this I ofc bought the 1700 as its the sensible choice and I easily oc'd it. Yes the cooler is a very nice inclusion (finally a stock cooler that doesn't suck?!) but you can only take your chip to around 3.7GHz with it before you need to buy a 3rd party cooler, so it makes sense the others aren't sold with this stock cooler. Lastly the temps read different because of some pretty poor idea of AMD's to have a 20 deg offset on the X models so the computer thinks it hotter than it is and ramps the fans up sooner rather than later. 60 deg on a 1700 is 60 deg on the 1800x (except it will SAY 80).

[grimreeper132]

2 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

Right a few things as a 1700 owner:

 

Yes all 3 chips are the same. Why is the 1700 labelled 65W? because at stock that's correct. It outputs far more heat if you clock it to 4.0Ghz. The chips are essentially the same so why would you buy an 1800X? Well some people have money to burn, some want GUARANTEED speeds (while something like 93% of 1700s can oc to 3.8GHz that is not a guarantee) and some don't want to overclock and just go right out of the box. After realising this I ofc bought the 1700 as its the sensible choice and I easily oc'd it. Yes the cooler is a very nice inclusion (finally a stock cooler that doesn't suck?!) but you can only take your chip to around 3.7GHz with it before you need to buy a 3rd party cooler, so it makes sense the others aren't sold with this stock cooler. Lastly the temps read different because of some pretty poor idea of AMD's to have a 20 deg offset on the X models so the computer thinks it hotter than it is and ramps the fans up sooner rather than later. 60 deg on a 1700 is 60 deg on the 1800x (except it will SAY 80).

the idea is stupid to a point, as it can mean that it will try and prevent some issues with overheating, that being said they could of just set a fan curve which would mean that isn't a problem 

[Tech Wizard]

[tom_w141]

Just now, grimreeper132 said:

the idea is stupid to a point, as it can mean that it will try and prevent some issues with overheating, that being said they could of just set a fan curve which would mean that isn't a problem 

I know I was saying its a dumb idea and that i'm happier on the 1700 because I have the same performance and no fake temps

[tom_w141]

Just now, Tech Wizard said:

snip

so what I said but in a table  

[Tech Wizard]

Just now, tom_w141 said:

so what I said but in a table  

Yes, but I wanted the man to read AMD's own words, just incase.

[grimreeper132]

Just now, tom_w141 said:

I know I was saying its a dumb idea and that i'm happier on the 1700 because I have the same performance and no fake temps

oh I agree that it's stupid, I was just saying it helps in certain situations, but yea the 1700 or 1700X are better than the 1800X in terms of p to p

[Abhinavp]

4 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

Right a few things as a 1700 owner:

 

Yes all 3 chips are the same. Why is the 1700 labelled 65W? because at stock that's correct. It outputs far more heat if you clock it to 4.0Ghz. The chips are essentially the same so why would you buy an 1800X? Well some people have money to burn, some want GUARANTEED speeds (while something like 93% of 1700s can oc to 3.8GHz that is not a guarantee) and some don't want to overclock and just go right out of the box. After realising this I ofc bought the 1700 as its the sensible choice and I easily oc'd it. Yes the cooler is a very nice inclusion (finally a stock cooler that doesn't suck?!) but you can only take your chip to around 3.7GHz with it before you need to buy a 3rd party cooler, so it makes sense the others aren't sold with this stock cooler. Lastly the temps read different because of some pretty poor idea of AMD's to have a 20 deg offset on the X models so the computer thinks it hotter than it is and ramps the fans up sooner rather than later. 60 deg on a 1700 is 60 deg on the 1800x (except it will SAY 80).

I will overclock the 1700 with the kraken x62 on Asus crosshair 6 so am expecting to OC it to 4ghz at reasonable temps for long-term usage! 

[Princess Luna]

1800x has the purest silicon, works pretty much on 4ghz without stressing the CPU like the 1700 gets stressed, it really is all about how much you want to spend, if you want to make a top of the line workstation and have the money for it going with the 1800x does make its sense... but if you're looking where to save some cash than go with the 1700 simple....

 

The way I see it this is more about how much you can spend than how much you win in a way...

[tom_w141]

Just now, Abhinavp said:

I will overclock the 1700 with the kraken x62 on Asus crosshair 6 so am expecting to OC it to 4ghz at reasonable temps for long-term usage! 

Be aware 70% of 1700's can achieve 4Ghz, mine can  but you could be in the unlucky 30%

[grimreeper132]

Just now, Abhinavp said:

I will overclock the 1700 with the kraken x62 on Asus crosshair 6 so am expecting to OC it to 4ghz at reasonable temps for long-term usage! 

I'm still waiting till the summer time till I get my R7 chip as most the problems will be gone then, and so I might be able to get a better OC, cause fuck yea, also Polaris, if it comes out on time, cause I wouldn't mind an all red system, if the red's GPU was any good, (like 1080/1080ti good) and priced accordingly

[tom_w141]

Just now, Princess Cadence said:

1800x has the purest silicon, works pretty much on 4ghz without stressing the CPU like the 1700 gets stressed, it really is all about how much you want to spend, if you want to make a top of the line workstation and have the money for it going with the 1800x does make its sense... but if you're looking where to save some cash than go with the 1700 simple....

 

The way I see it this is more about how much you can spend than how much you win in a way...

Actually no they are all produced in the same way and binned. the best performers that can achieve the higher clocks become the 1800Xs. as long as voltage is the same a 1700 and 1800X @ 4Ghz are the same chip and neither is being "silicon stressed" more than the other.

[tom_w141]

Just now, grimreeper132 said:

I'm still waiting till the summer time till I get my R7 chip as most the problems will be gone then, and so I might be able to get a better OC, cause fuck yea, also Polaris, if it comes out on time, cause I wouldn't mind an all red system, if the red's GPU was any good, (like 1080/1080ti good) and priced accordingly

Polaris is out, you mean Vega right? Yes I also hope vega is decent because competition is good for consumers

[Princess Luna]

1 minute ago, tom_w141 said:

Actually no they are all produced in the same way and binned. the best performers that can achieve the higher clocks become the 1800Xs. as long as voltage is the same a 1700 and 1800X @ 4Ghz are the same chip and neither is being "silicon stressed" more than the other.

You clearly didn't watch Linus recent video;

 

[tom_w141]

5 minutes ago, Princess Cadence said:

You clearly didn't watch Linus recent video;

 

Actually I did. I eagerly awaited this video then was thoroughly disappointed at how irrelevant and out of date this video was (even at the exact minute of upload it was obsolete due to 3 bios updates since he recorded it) If I recall correctly he is using a 1700X? His Ram is slower than mine and his cpu is clocked the same as mine, so unfortunately due to this old video (look at the date in bios) all I learned was my system is faster than his :D. link me the exact time period where he explains your point  Also linus isn't gospel try independent research. Voltage is what causes degradation so if voltage is the same then those chips are the same thing different labels  welcome to capitalism.#

 

EDIT: my comments on page 1 of the forum thread for this video explain the issues with the video in more detail

[DocSwag]

18 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

Actually no they are all produced in the same way and binned. the best performers that can achieve the higher clocks become the 1800Xs. as long as voltage is the same a 1700 and 1800X @ 4Ghz are the same chip and neither is being "silicon stressed" more than the other.

You literally contradicted yourself there. You said "the best performers than can achieve higher clocks become the 1800xs." Then you said "as long as the voltage is the same a 1700 and 1800x @4ghz are the same chip and neither is being 'silicon stressed' more than the other."

 

In one sentence you say the 1800x is binned, which means it should be able to reach higher clocks and can reach the same clocks as the 1700 at lower voltages.

 

In the other you say they can both reach 4 ghz at the same voltage. WTF?

 

You do know that binned CPUs generally have better quality silicon, leading to them being able to achieve higher clock speeds AND get lower clock speeds working at lower voltages, right?

 

Not all 1700s can reach 4ghz. Most can, but some only get to 3.9. All 1800xs can reach 4 ghz on all cores, and some can get 4.1.

 

While I don't think the difference is worth the extra $170, there is a small difference, and you can't deny it.

[tom_w141]

1 minute ago, DocSwag said:

You literally contradicted yourself there. You said "the best performers than can achieve higher clocks become the 1800xs." Then you said "as long as the voltage is the same a 1700 and 1800x @4ghz are the same chip and neither is being 'silicon stressed' more than the other."

 

In one sentence you say the 1800x is binned, which means it should be able to reach higher clocks and can reach the same clocks as the 1700 at lower voltages.

 

In the other you say they can both reach 4 ghz at the same voltage. WTF?

 

You do know tha binned CPUs generally have better quality silicon, leading to them being able to achieve higher clock speeds AND get lower clock speeds working at lower voltages, right?

 

Not all 1700s can reach 4ghz. Most can, but some only get to 3.9. All 1800xs can reach 4 ghz on all cores, and some can get 4.1.

 

While I don't think the difference is worth the extra $170, there is a small difference, and you can't deny it.

My 1st and 2nd posts explain the bottom half of what you said already see above.

 

I'll explain as I didn't mean to sound like I was contradicting myself.

 

The chips are produced. They need a certain amount of 1800Xs per batch so they test them and select them and the same process for 1700X. Now what is left becomes the 1700 (as long as no bad cores) this is why some (a high % luckily) of 1700s can clock to 4GHz at comparable voltages to the X models. Now because of the binning you are very unlikely to get your 1700 to 4.1 or above but only 20% of 1800Xs can do this anyway. Which is evidence that for the majority of chips there is a hard voltage wall at 4GHz regardless of the model name. Intel chips would behave in the same way if they were all multiplier unlocked. That is how intel prevent you from doing the same thing to your lesser i7 to ensure the 7700k still has value.

 

What I was saying about stress and degradation of the cpus life was that 1700 1800 or whatever it says on the front are for all intents and purposes the exact same chip if they are clocked at the same frequency and voltage. The 1800X won't last longer because it has different writing on the front.

[SCHISCHKA]

59 minutes ago, Abhinavp said:

Why the hell will someone buy an 1800x for 499 when u can buy the same thing for less than 350 bucks!!? I have watched and read many reviews of the 1800x and 1700 the 1700 can overclock up to 4 GHz with Max 1.35 volts and the 1800x overclocks to same 4ghz but with frickin 1.45 volts and the temps of the 1700 is wayyyyy better than the 1800x with an 280 aio thanks to the lower TDP of 65w so why should people buy the 1800x, please give me an ADVANTAGE of the 1800x over the 1700 when both are overclocked! The 1700 rests at 60c at full load when overclocked and the 1800x at full load when overclocked touches over 80c! And u will also get an RGB cooler with the 1700!!

shit you got some responses quick to this.

Disclaimer: Im a memer of AA: AMD Anonymous: a support group for people addicted to more cores.

you're right the 1700 is the buy right now. Every other CPU sucks dirty anus in comparison. Your OP is begging for someone to give an advantage for the 1800X; good luck with that quest; I hope you come out of it without an Intel fanboi tattoo burnt on your arse and I really do hope you look back on the world with hope and prosperity. peace AA brothers

[DocSwag]

16 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

 

 

What I was saying about stress and degradation of the cpus life was that 1700 1800 or whatever it says on the front are for all intents and purposes the exact same chip if they are clocked at the same frequency and voltage. The 1800X won't last longer because it has different writing on the front.

But while that might be true, the 1800x, on average, can reach the same frequency at lower voltages.

[tom_w141]

1 minute ago, DocSwag said:

But while that might be true, the 1800x, on average, can reach the same frequency at lower voltages.

Yes that is correct

[SCHISCHKA]

23 minutes ago, tom_w141 said:

What I was saying about stress and degradation of the cpus life was that 1700 1800 or whatever it says on the front are for all intents and purposes the exact same chip if they are clocked at the same frequency and voltage. The 1800X won't last longer because it has different writing on the front.

youre saying binning which i think is in the area of the OP's topic of complaint. You want an 8-core chip in 2017 get a 1700; anything else is the silicone lottery