Ryzen 5 1600x vs 2600

[xFluing]

Right now both the 1600x and 2600 are on sale, with the 1600x being about $40 cheaper (accounting for the sale), with the 1600x having a wraith max thrown in as a bonus.

 

Now, I would like to get one of these but can't really make up my mind. The 1600x in this situation would be the best bang for the buck, but at the same time I feel like the 2600 would be better because of the improved IMC and lower temps.

 

I don't plan on using Store MI and I don't really want to wait for Zen 2 because it's pretty far off and I kinda NEED an upgrade seeing as one of the RAM dimms got shot and I'm stuck both in single channel, and the 860k is starting to show its limits.

[DailyProcrastinator]

If it was me I'd get the 1600x since it's on cheaper and comes with the wraith cooler. You can OC it as well.

[xFluing]

Just now, JM21 said:

You can OC it as well.

All ryzen CPUs are unlocked, but yeah I get what you're saying.

[DailyProcrastinator]

Just now, xFluing said:

All ryzen CPUs are unlocked, but yeah I get what you're saying.

I know, but once OC'd your not far off the 2600 anyways is my point. I'd have to watch some videos but the 1600x OC'd might even be better. It already turbos to 4.0GHz, the 2600 only hits 3.9GHz.

[Bravo1cc]

i have the 1600x and it overclock to 4ghz very easy and i am running this now with no issues at all, if you just using your pc for gaming the 1600x is plenty as the load will be on your GPU for the most part so i don't believe the 2600 is needed

[xFluing]

Just now, Bravo1cc said:

i have the 1600x and it overclock to 4ghz very easy and i am running this now with no issues at all, if you just using your pc for gaming the 1600x is plenty as the load will be on your GPU for the most part so i don't believe the 2600 is needed

What about recording / streaming? I know the 2600 has no issues whatsoever.

[lmeneses]

The 2600 performs better than the 1600x, even tho the 1600x has higher base and boost clock, but the performance difference is not that great. Honestly, for $40 less, the 1600x seems like a good option

[Quadriplegic]

2600 will likely be a better overclocker from what I have seen, as 1600x may struggle going above 4 GHz.

But unless you are extreme overclocker, I suggest to go with cheaper option

[xFluing]

Just now, Quadriplegic said:

2600 will likely be a better overclocker from what I have seen, as 1600x may struggle going above 4 GHz.

But unless you are extreme overclocker, I suggest to go with cheaper option

I'm not an extreme overclocker, any performance will be a vast improvement over this 860k.

[Bravo1cc]

21 minutes ago, xFluing said:

What about recording / streaming? I know the 2600 has no issues whatsoever.

As another user had said the 1600x and the 2600 are the same CPU with different clocks and the better thermals and better frequency stabilisation i dont imagine it will have any issues with this as a 4ghz overclock is very nice and the fact that almost all games only use a core or two means that the 4 other cores are free to take up tasks like this. I highly doubt you would see any real difference honestly, the only consideration is that the 1600x will have more issues with very high frequency on memory as mine will only support 2800mhz on a 2400 set of 2x8gb ram sticks. Saying that its not that bad and if you rely want a more multitask friendly CPU i would opt for a 1800x over a 2600. It is very subjective as most people wouldn't build a system like mine but it suites me extremely well for what i use it for.