Which Ryzen for a 2060

[Redrooster]

So I've been going back and forth on what gpu i should get (between the 1660 ti and the 2060). The 1660 ti might have the better price to performance ratio, but I think I'm going to pay the $60 difference and get a 2060. I also have my mind set on getting a Ryzen cpu. I'm getting a x470 mobo (so when i upgrade my cpu down the road, my mobo will still hold up). What Ryzen chip will be a great balance for the 2060? 

[Jurrunio]

dont get 1660ti, overclocking the 1660's memory makes it perform very closely to the 1660ti for a fraction of the price.

 

1 minute ago, Redrooster said:

. I'm getting a x470 mobo (so when i upgrade my cpu down the road, my mobo will still hold up)

which one?

 

1 minute ago, Redrooster said:

What Ryzen chip will be a great balance for the 2060? 

2600 or above

[Princess Luna]

With nVidia you're always jumping one GPU to make sense on the value proposition, so you either get the GTX 1660 or the RTX 2060, both the GTX 1660 Ti and RTX 2070 are bad value and kinda the reason why they came first if you put that into perspective.

[Redrooster]

4 hours ago, Jurrunio said:

dont get 1660ti, overclocking the 1660's memory makes it perform very closely to the 1660ti for a fraction of the price.

 

which one?

 

2600 or above

(Sorry for the late response @Jurrunio, I posted and then i had to get back from work)

- I have 350 usd and I want to use as much as i can on my gpu. For 350 usd, the 2060 is the best gpu you can buy (brand new) (at least where I'm at)

 

This is the x470 im looking at. vvvvv

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07CF31C1Q/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_GBeKCbEA5PFR0

 

-so is the Ryzen 5 2600x a good pair for the 2060? I want to balance my gpu and cpu.

[Redrooster]

4 hours ago, Princess Cadence said:

With nVidia you're always jumping one GPU to make sense on the value proposition, so you either get the GTX 1660 or the RTX 2060, both the GTX 1660 Ti and RTX 2070 are bad value and kinda the reason why they came first if you put that into perspective.

@Princess Cadence Yeah, I have 350 usd to spend on a gpu. What i was conflicted on was, "should I get the 1660ti for 290 usd and get that Sekiro game for 60 usd, or should I just get the 2060. I'm just gonna get the 2060 and put in the extra work to earn 60 usd for sekiro.

[Princess Luna]

1 minute ago, Redrooster said:

I'm just gonna get the 2060 and put in the extra work to earn 60 usd for sekiro.

I think this will pay off in the long run, the RTX 2060 is the most impressive turing card if I'm honest.

[Jurrunio]

12 minutes ago, Redrooster said:

This is the x470 im looking at. vvvvv

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07CF31C1Q/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_GBeKCbEA5PFR0

MSI B450 ATX boards has the same VRM for much less, go for those. Budget X470 boards arent better than good B450 ones, the one you picked is already the best among budget X470 boards.

 

12 minutes ago, Redrooster said:

 

-so is the Ryzen 5 2600x a good pair for the 2060? I want to balance my gpu and cpu.

The X here is worth at most $20 more than the non-X

[Redrooster]

6 minutes ago, Jurrunio said:

The X here is worth at most $20 more than the non-X

From what i see, they are $20 apart at the moment. So is the Ryzen 5 2600x the best to balance out the 2060? I know the word "bottleneck" is the tech equivalent to the "boogyman", but when I get the rtx 2060, is the 2600x the best cpu before a significant bottleneck appears?

[Jurrunio]

4 minutes ago, Redrooster said:

From what i see, they are $20 apart at the moment. So is the Ryzen 5 2600x the best to balance out the 2060? I know the word "bottleneck" is the tech equivalent to the "boogyman", but when I get the rtx 2060, is the 2600x the best cpu before a significant bottleneck appears?

that $20 is only for the cooler. Performance-wise the 2600X is exactly the same as the 2600 when both are overclocked. 2600X's max turbo clock is just about the average all core overclock result of a 2nd gen Ryzen CPU, so even when using PBO it doesnt get the "extra single core frequency" treatment as the 2700X does.

 

I didn't choose this CPU because it wont bottleneck the GPU (it will, depending on the game). It's just the cheapest CPU that can do well enough in most cases and in a good platform for upgrades.

[Redrooster]

14 minutes ago, Jurrunio said:

I didn't choose this CPU because it wont bottleneck the GPU (it will, depending on the game). It's just the cheapest CPU that can do well enough in most cases and in a good platform for upgrades.

Ok, so lets say i have another $50 to spend on a cpu. Is the Ryzen 7 2700 a better option for the 2060? And does the X variant warrant an additional $30-$40? (Sorry if I'm asking too many questions, this is going to be my first official build. I bought a used workstation back in 2014 and i put a rx 460 4gb in with a 500w psu and 16gb ddr3 ram. This is the first PC build where i have to assemble it all)

[Jurrunio]

6 hours ago, Redrooster said:

Ok, so lets say i have another $50 to spend on a cpu. Is the Ryzen 7 2700 a better option for the 2060? And does the X variant warrant an additional $30-$40? (Sorry if I'm asking too many questions, this is going to be my first official build. I bought a used workstation back in 2014 and i put a rx 460 4gb in with a 500w psu and 16gb ddr3 ram. This is the first PC build where i have to assemble it all)

As a workstation then sure, get Ryzen 7 if you can afford it. In games though the bottleneck is actually Ryzen's internal latency (due to its architecture), not core count

[Redrooster]

6 hours ago, Jurrunio said:

As a workstation then sure, get Ryzen 7 if you can afford it. In games though the bottleneck is actually Ryzen's internal latency (due to its architecture), not core count

Well, it's really for gaming. I bought a used workstation in '14 because it was cheap and it had a i5 3550 in it which was actually really good for budget gaming, but now I'm moving to the middle range, but you are saying the r5 2600 (or X variant if its cheap enough) should be enough for the 2060?

[Jurrunio]

3 hours ago, Redrooster said:

Well, it's really for gaming. I bought a used workstation in '14 because it was cheap and it had a i5 3550 in it which was actually really good for budget gaming, but now I'm moving to the middle range, but you are saying the r5 2600 (or X variant if its cheap enough) should be enough for the 2060?

yes

[Redrooster]

3 hours ago, Jurrunio said:

yes

Okay, thanks for the support. I'm still learning.

[sauronofmordor]

@Redrooster

 

TL;DR |---| If dead-set on Ryzen go with the 2600 ($164.99), and get an aftermarket cooler and overclock (makes sense if you stream or do workstation tasks in addition to gaming), if not go with the i5 9400f ($169.99) in order to get better gaming performance at a lower price (other components are cheaper, makes back the $5 and then some), and with less hassle (makes sense if you want best gaming performance, mediocre at best for streaming/workstation).

 

If Ryzen-bound I would go with the 2600 non-x, and then get a cooler like https://pcpartpicker.com/product/hJFPxr/deepcool-cpu-cooler-gammaxx400 (or anything else hyper 212 and up: https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/891730-cpu-cooler-performance-tier-list/, once you overclock it (which you can do even on B450/350 motherboards) it will be functionally identical to the 2600x, the main thing you're paying for between the 2600 and 2600x is just the cooler (Wraith Spire vs. Stealth) and it tends to be a slightly higher rated chip for overclocking, but unless you're going extreme and unlocking settings and trying to reach the limit of what is possible on the chip it won't matter. 2700 has nearly identical performance in the vast majority of games, the only reason you'd really buy it over the 2600 is for those extra cores, and the better stock cooler, as shown in the image below. Left is 2600, right is 2700, and as you can see in both single and quad core scores the 2600 and 2700 are functionally identical, but in tests where it can take advantage of all the cores at once (like workstation task or streaming) it pulls wayyyyy ahead. In fact it gained an extra +33% more cores (6 to 8 ) and then gained an extra +33% on it's multi-core score. It's the same cores, there are just more on the 2700. Some games can take advantage of the extra core power, but most can't, which is why it's better to just use an aftermarket cooler and get those individual core speeds up.

 

However there is an even better option, the i5-9400f ($169.99) doesn't need to be overclocked (in fact it can't be overclocked), but has even better gaming performance than even a max overclocked 2600 ($164.99). On top of this the i5-9400f is brand new, it was literally released like a month ago. (see image, bottom rows are overclocked, and it still is ahead, even more ahead in base forms, and again Multi-core doesn't really matter for most games) (The "f" in 9400f just means that you HAVE to have discrete graphics in order for it to work, but seeing as you are pairing it with a GPU it should be no problem) (BTW if you're going to overclock your CPU I'd highly suggest this as your PSU, it'll last a lifetime: https://www.amazon.com/BitFenix-Formula-Standard-BF-550G-BP-FM550ULAG-7R/dp/B0776YX8F1?ref_=bl_dp_s_web_9026970011)

 

On top of that you get all the advantages of overclocking such as:

1. Cheaper Mobo (as long as VRAMs aren't at risk of exploding from normal usage, you're good)

2. Cheaper RAM (You'll still want 2+ sticks for multi-Channel, it provides a significant performance boost for AMD and Intel, but you can have it at nearly any Mhz with a minimal penalty for slow speeds)

3. You Can Use The Stock Fan (because it will stay at 65 TDP, which even Intel stock fans can handle, overclocking increases TDP)

4. If you do use an aftermarket fan, it'll be much quieter

5. Cheaper PSU (I'd highly suggest looking at the list I'll link at the bottom, but that A-tier PSU I linked aboive wouldn't be required, and honestly as long as it's 80+ bronze from a reputable company with 3+ star reviews on that specific PSU you'll be good when you don't overclock)

https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/986897-psu-tier-list-21-legacy/

 

My builds (ignore non-core components):

2600: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/7wrQHh

9400f: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/qBxKtg

 

 

[sauronofmordor]

Example comparison video, he's using a 2080 as his GPU, but this is just to remove any potential GPU bottleneck, and it just highlights each CPU's max potential (the 2600 is running at a 3.9 Ghz overclock compared to the base 3.4 Ghz, a respectable delta of .5Ghz, which is maybe obtainable with the aftermarket cooler I suggested. The 9400F is also at a 3.9 Ghz turbo tho (1Ghz delta), which means you would also need an aftermarket cooler to get up to that speed as well, but would work pretty fine at the base, same for both processors actually. The reason I assumed that the 9400F would remain at it's base is that it retains 96% of it's Single Core (SC) at base, while the 2600 only maintains 92.5% at it's base, but that being said the architecture of both could disproportionately affect the fps at the higher overclocks, especially considering that the 9400F's Turbo Delta is double the Delta of Ryzens, and it's an even bigger percent increase from it's base value (2600: 114% |---| 9400f: 134%), so take this benchmark and value proposition with a big ol' grain of salt, because if both systems are being compared at overclocking then it really depends on what exact components you go with but it's a toss up as to which would be cheaper, you could make it go either way, but while the bang per buck value for gaming on the 9400f may go down, it would still be better for the 9400f because now instead of being cheaper with better performance, it'd be nearly the same price with the 9400f having better performance. and in fact when you look back at the single core performance of the best overclocked 2600 it's nearly identical to the score of the base 9400f (OC 2600: 120pts |---| Base 9400f: 121pts)

 

[Redrooster]

38 minutes ago, sauronofmordor said:

@RedroosterHowever there is an even better option, the i5-9400f 

 

@sauronofmordor what about the upgradability of the 9400f mobo? I want a mobo i can use for 7 years (with cpu upgrades.)

[sauronofmordor]

@Redrooster it uses the LGA 1151 socket, So probably a while, I believe their next generation is going to use it, and if not you can slowly upgrade to the i9 - 9900k as it becomes older and cheaper, and the i9- 9900k will likely still be useable in 7 years (for reference that'd be like using the i7-3770k, which was the top processor 7 years ago, but there will be better processors for LGA 1151 than the i9-9900k, so you're pretty good, and both AM4 and LGA1151 will need to be tossed out once DDR5 for RAM comes out (DDR4 is the reason for the AM3 to AM4 upgrade), and DDR5 isn't far in the future, so future proofing for both looks very similar.

[Redrooster]

13 minutes ago, sauronofmordor said:

@Redrooster and both AM4 and LGA1151 will need to be tossed out once DDR5 for RAM comes out 

I doubt that ddr5 will produce any meaningful yeilds for a while (at least for gaming) and yeah, the lga 1151 is an option i haven't thought about, it is the most upgradable mobo on the market (for gaming rigs around $1000)

[sauronofmordor]

You're right DDR5 probably won't produce meaningful game yields, but that's not the point I was trying to make, I was trying to say that since the chances that DDR5 will be compatible with LGA1151 and AM4 are very low, the new motherboards that use DDR5 won't have AM4 or LGA1151 sockets, and in order for their processors to work with the newest and best motherboards AMD and Intel won't develop new CPUs for those sockets, thus making your rig un-upgradeable without a new motherboard.

[Redrooster]

5 hours ago, sauronofmordor said:

in order for their processors to work with the newest and best motherboards AMD and Intel won't develop new CPUs for those sockets, thus making your rig un-upgradeable without a new motherboard.

Yeah i agree with you, but with the current list of processors that fit on the LGA 1151 sockets, if i get a decent mobo (like a z370) I could work my way up to a i9-9900k (which will be plenty of cpu power for me for at least 6+ years)

[sauronofmordor]

Yep, you're right you can still upgrade to the 9900k, and I realize now that I left some ambiguity in what I meant when I said upgrade, and that's my bad. by "future" upgrades I meant like 10th, 11th, 12th, ... generation processors, you can still upgrade all the way to the 9900k I just meant that in even as little as 2 years Intel's newest processors probably won't run on that motherboard, and so you'd be stuck in 9th generation, but with the slowing of Moore's Law you're right you can upgrade to the 9900k and it'll likely still be relevant in 7 years (if a little security prone) 

[Redrooster]

12 hours ago, sauronofmordor said:

Yep, you're right you can still upgrade to the 9900k, and I realize now that I left some ambiguity in what I meant when I said upgrade, and that's my bad. by "future" upgrades I meant like 10th, 11th, 12th, ... generation processors, you can still upgrade all the way to the 9900k I just meant that in even as little as 2 years Intel's newest processors probably won't run on that motherboard, and so you'd be stuck in 9th generation, but with the slowing of Moore's Law you're right you can upgrade to the 9900k and it'll likely still be relevant in 7 years (if a little security prone) 

Im not getting a cpu upgrade until August, so I'll see what the new Ryzen chips look like in june/july. Im getting a 2060 at the end of the first week of April, so that means my i5 3550 3.3Ghz will be holding back that rtx card for at least 4 months but i will see some real gains bumping up from a rx 460, even with the bottleneck