[Poll] i5 13600K vs Ryzen 5 7600X

[handymanshandle]

So thought I’d see what y’all like better. I remember the enthusiasm for Ryzen back in the day as if 2016-2019 was so long ago but in the tech world I guess it sort of is and LTTf changed a looot since I stopped using the site in 2021ish.

[DarkSwordsman]

I can't speak on behalf of Zen 3 or Zen 4 users, especially since they fixed the CCX issue by moving it to 8-core CCXs with shared cache. But based on my experience building PCs for others and for myself, namely with my experience with the 3950X in the past 3 years (and 1700X before that), I would go for the 13600K, especially if you're running Windows 11.

 

I simply can't trust AMD to have good thread scheduling or stable frame pacing. The cross CCX and CCD latency makes this chip absolutely garbage for video games. I'm over here getting a stuttery experience in games, even with a CCD disabled on a fresh windows install (and trying everything I could BIOS-wise), while people with otherwise identical setups besides a 9th or 10th gen Intel getting 10-40% more FPS and a much more smooth frame-pacing at that.

 

Every system I have built with an Intel processor was plug and play with no extra tweaking or mods needed. Every Ryzen chip I have seen has some sort of deficiency where you need to tune it to be better or completely disable half the chip. Heck, I'd even suggest getting a used 10th or 11th gen chip over Ryzen, personally. I still love the 3950X especially when I need it to compile shaders or do video encoding. But it is a workstation chip, really. Can't do games as well as the competition.

If you are trying to save cash, I think AMD will still be a great option especially with Zen 3 and Zen 4 chips. However, if you have the money, I'd go Intel simply for reliability and likely better performance and experience.

[CommanderAlex]

13600K for more cores and better "workstation" application performance. 

[handymanshandle]

25 minutes ago, DarkSwordsman said:

I can't speak on behalf of Zen 3 or Zen 4 users, especially since they fixed the CCX issue by moving it to 8-core CCXs with shared cache. But based on my experience building PCs for others and for myself, namely with my experience with the 3950X in the past 3 years (and 1700X before that), I would go for the 13600K, especially if you're running Windows 11.

 

I simply can't trust AMD to have good thread scheduling or stable frame pacing. The cross CCX and CCD latency makes this chip absolutely garbage for video games. I'm over here getting a stuttery experience in games, even with a CCD disabled on a fresh windows install (and trying everything I could BIOS-wise), while people with otherwise identical setups besides a 9th or 10th gen Intel getting 10-40% more FPS and a much more smooth frame-pacing at that.

 

Every system I have built with an Intel processor was plug and play with no extra tweaking or mods needed. Every Ryzen chip I have seen has some sort of deficiency where you need to tune it to be better or completely disable half the chip. Heck, I'd even suggest getting a used 10th or 11th gen chip over Ryzen, personally. I still love the 3950X especially when I need it to compile shaders or do video encoding. But it is a workstation chip, really. Can't do games as well as the competition.

If you are trying to save cash, I think AMD will still be a great option especially with Zen 3 and Zen 4 chips. However, if you have the money, I'd go Intel simply for reliability and likely better performance and experience.

Interesting comment. From what I’ve seen, it’s hard to go wrong with either lol. 

 

I personally am getting a Ryzen 5 7600X, and Arc A750. I want a weird set up lol.

 

though I could see a few situations pushing me to LGA1700 lol

[CyberneticTitan]

The 13600K is a great chip, but on Newegg right now, the 7600X is $250 and the 13600K is $320. According to HardwareUnboxed they are pretty much neck and neck in gaming performance at 1080p. Now you might want to bring in the multithreaded performance into the equation to justify the $70 premium, but to that I would introduce the Ryzen 7700 which gives you 8 Zen 4 cores, also at $320 USD on Newegg. Let's not even mention the base 7600 which can be had for $230 and is very slightly slower than the 7600X.

 

LGA1700 is a dead socket. You will need to dump your motherboard if you wanted to upgrade to a new generation.

[Dedayog]

10 hours ago, handymanshandle said:

So thought I’d see what y’all like better. I remember the enthusiasm for Ryzen back in the day as if 2016-2019 was so long ago but in the tech world I guess it sort of is and LTTf changed a looot since I stopped using the site in 2021ish.

I definitely like the 7600x better.

 

Why?  No idea.  I also like green better than blue.  

 

 

[DarkSwordsman]

22 hours ago, CyberneticTitan said:

LGA1700 is a dead socket. You will need to dump your motherboard if you wanted to upgrade to a new generation.

I think most people trying to save money aren't even going to upgrade soon enough for the chip compatibility to matter. To me, basing a build on upgradability in the future is just another way to "future proof" a system. It's really not useful to consider that metric.

[YoungBlade]

1 hour ago, DarkSwordsman said:

I think most people trying to save money aren't even going to upgrade soon enough for the chip compatibility to matter. To me, basing a build on upgradability in the future is just another way to "future proof" a system. It's really not useful to consider that metric.

The ability for people who invested in a Ryzen 7 1700 and X370 motherboard to upgrade to a Ryzen 7 5800X3D for just $340 a few years later was pretty insane. That's like an 80% boost in multicore performance and a 120% boost in gaming performance. And not only does it cost about the same as an entry level motherboard+CPU combo, it only requires removing the cooler and slotting in the new CPU, rather than upgrading the whole platform.

 

Anyone who sold AM4 in 2017 based on upgradability was definitely on to something. I'm not sure that AMD will allow that to happen again, but I think they should, because if AM5 is as good as AM4, I think a lot of people will flock to AM6 when it comes around.

[handymanshandle]

1 hour ago, DarkSwordsman said:

I think most people trying to save money aren't even going to upgrade soon enough for the chip compatibility to matter. To me, basing a build on upgradability in the future is just another way to "future proof" a system. It's really not useful to consider that metric.

AM4 was sort of AMD trying to entice people to come over with the promise of long term support. However no such promise exists for AM5. That being said, I hope we see 2 more Gens on AM5.

it doesn’t really wouldn’t concern me if LGA1700 is a dead end… AM5 could see one more gen, it could see 2 hell it could see 3-4 gens in total. 
 

the only thing that in my own opinion that directs my interest in AM5 is just how the 7000 series CPUs feels like the same kind of situation but different for Intels 11th gen stuff.