Is the Ryzen 5 1600 the best way to go for my gaming PC build?

[Abe_R]

I've got all my parts ready more or less (already have the SSDs as they were free) to buy but the one aspect that keeps bugging me is my Ryzen 5 1600 and how it compares to Intel and other Ryzen CPUs for gaming. To get the most out of both my CPU and GPU while also having the CPU being future proof, allowing me to upgrade my graphics card in the future, is the 1600 the best way to go or shall I pay the ~£40 more for a 1600X or even more for a 1700.

 

I'm not too keen on Intel as I can see a quad-core processor quickly becoming obsolete with Ryzen doing well early on and I don't want to waste my money only to have to upgrade again shortly after.

 

Here is the parts list for my build

https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/bRRTf8

[MrJarhead]

either get a 1600 or a 1700, the x is pointless.

[Zando_]

1600 is the best bang for the buck, the 1600X is a pre-overclocked 1600 with no cooler, and the 1700 is pure awesomeness. 

[MrJarhead]

just to note quad cores are not going to be obsolete anytime soon, intel make the best cpus for gaming period, and nobody can deny that.

[NoxiousOdor]

4 minutes ago, MrJarhead said:

just to note quad cores are not going to be obsolete anytime soon, intel make the best cpus for gaming period, and nobody can deny that.

Until you factor in price to performance. I am an intel fan and I am comfortable admitting that 

[MrJarhead]

2 minutes ago, WhisperingKnickers said:

Until you factor in price to performance. I am an intel fan and I am comfortable admitting that 

i dont disagree, intel prices are just shocking, and this is why i wont be getting an intel cpu when i upgrade next.

 

i paid £250 for my 4790k last year, i didnt get a 6700k because it would have meant having to buy a new mobo and ram, when i already had a z97 and 16gb of ddr3.

[Abe_R]

1 minute ago, MrJarhead said:

i dont disagree, intel prices are just shocking, and this is why i wont be getting an intel cpu when i upgrade next.

Yes sorry, I agree with you that intel is better but what I meant by obsolete is that if AMD continues to push and increase their market share then hopefully Intel will have to respond and the core count may change or at least become a bigger issue for them. I just don't see Intel's current strategy being sustainable.  

[MrJarhead]

1 minute ago, Abe_R said:

Yes sorry, I agree with you that intel is better but what I meant by obsolete is that if AMD continues to push and increase their market share then hopefully Intel will have to respond and the core count may change or at least become a bigger issue for them. I just don't see Intel's current strategy being sustainable.  

intel are better for gaming as we both agree.

 

in terms of rendering and that type of stuff, amd wins until you get to the 6900x, but theyre way too pricey.

[STRMfrmXMN]

18 minutes ago, Abe_R said:

I've got all my parts ready more or less (already have the SSDs as they were free) to buy but the one aspect that keeps bugging me is my Ryzen 5 1600 and how it compares to Intel and other Ryzen CPUs for gaming. To get the most out of both my CPU and GPU while also having the CPU being future proof, allowing me to upgrade my graphics card in the future, is the 1600 the best way to go or shall I pay the ~£40 more for a 1600X or even more for a 1700.

 

I'm not too keen on Intel as I can see a quad-core processor quickly becoming obsolete with Ryzen doing well early on and I don't want to waste my money only to have to upgrade again shortly after.

 

Here is the parts list for my build

https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/bRRTf8

An i5 4670K like the one I had already struggles at 144Hz in Overwatch, a CPU-intensive game, so your worries about quad-cores becoming obsolete are not unwarranted. That said, for most people an i5 7600K would be fine. My 4770S plays 144Hz Overwatch without a problem. So a 1600 over a 1500X would be a good idea. 

 

If you want the best chip for gaming right now then it would be a 7700K but a 1600 is a good chip for the money and I'd recommend it over the i7 for most people.

[Abe_R]

25 minutes ago, STRMfrmXMN said:

An i5 4670K like the one I had already struggles at 144Hz in Overwatch, a CPU-intensive game, so your worries about quad-cores becoming obsolete are not unwarranted. That said, for most people an i5 7600K would be fine. My 4770S plays 144Hz Overwatch without a problem. So a 1600 over a 1500X would be a good idea. 

 

If you want the best chip for gaming right now then it would be a 7700K but a 1600 is a good chip for the money and I'd recommend it over the i7 for most people.

 

28 minutes ago, MrJarhead said:

intel are better for gaming as we both agree.

 

in terms of rendering and that type of stuff, amd wins until you get to the 6900x, but theyre way too pricey.

 

36 minutes ago, WhisperingKnickers said:

Until you factor in price to performance. I am an intel fan and I am comfortable admitting that 

Lol thanks for the help guys, I panicked for a sec thinking everything I've researched was a lie and tried to create a similar but better gaming PC for the same price as mine from Intel and I couldn't do it so I think you're all right in saying price to performance wise I'm better off with Ryzen.