1700 or 7700K for Gaming?

[vshah]

On 6/7/2017 at 8:46 PM, nerdslayer1 said:

don't think that's what OP is aiming for, a ryzen 1600 can multitask better while keeping a solid 60 fps. unless OP wants to push 144fps, a ryzen 1600 will be cheaper, spend the extra on a gpu. 

Well, I am OP for 1, and I'm gonna have a MSI 1080 OC and a 1700. 

On 6/7/2017 at 8:26 PM, TheDankKoosh said:

I would consider the 1700 for future proofing and because it gets better minimum framerates in games.

Okay, thanks for the input!  

[NicholasNicholasNicholas]

1 minute ago, edward30 said:

Sorry, no. I opened 12 1080p youtube tabs, they're all playing right now... and I've gone from 6% consumption to 12% on my i7-7700. And who does that? You're overestimating the impact, and twisting things unfairly.

 

Youtube/web is hardly demanding enough to demand the multi-core processing power of an 8 core Ryzen over an i7-7700/k... smh

 

 

games use more than 4 cores. in ANY future game that uses more than 4 cores, ryzen will be better

[The Sloth]

Just now, vshah said:

Well, I am OP for 1, and I'm gonna have a MSI 1080 OC and a 1700. 

why do you need a 8c/ 16t cpu, they are in a different tier of performance, the 1700 will keep better minimum while multitasking, a 7700k is a pure gaming cpu. 

 

1 minute ago, edward30 said:

Sorry, no. I opened 12 1080p youtube tabs, they're all playing right now... and I've gone from 6% consumption to 12% on my i7-7700. And who does that? You're overestimating the impact, and twisting things unfairly.

 

Youtube/web is hardly demanding enough to demand the multi-core processing power of an 8 core Ryzen over an i7-7700/k... smh

 

 

open up a 4k video 

[AnonymousGuy]

7700K comfortably overclocked to 4.8 will stomp all over Ryzen for what you want to do.  The only use case for Ryzen is rendering.

 

Everyone thinking you need 8 cores for chrome are fucking morons.

[NicholasNicholasNicholas]

1 minute ago, AnonymousGuy said:

7700K comfortably overclocked to 4.8 will stomp all over Ryzen for what you want to do.  The only use case for Ryzen is rendering.

thats a flat out lie. ryzen has better minimums are there are plenty of games that use more than 4 cores

[TheDankKoosh]

1 minute ago, AnonymousGuy said:

7700K comfortably overclocked to 4.8 will stomp all over Ryzen for what you want to do.  The only use case for Ryzen is rendering.

 

Everyone thinking you need 8 cores for chrome are fucking morons.

Bit hostile there bud, and the 7700k will provide better average framerates, but what happens when minimums come into play?

[vshah]

My 6300HQ right now can barely have more than 20 tabs open and I want to have 40-50 open. I need the threads and cores for the other things than gaming. 

[The Sloth]

Just now, edward30 said:

 

Negligible performance change, 6%. With the only spike coming from the loading content, as I said. Seriously, unless he is compiling a lot of code, a i7-7700 will be just fine.

so running a 4K video won't affect gaming performance? open up pandora or sound cloud, few reddit tabs, play a game, you will notice a difference.  

[vshah]

Just now, TheDankKoosh said:

Bit hostile there bud, and the 7700k will provide better average framerates, but what happens when minimums come into play?

Especially in 3-4 years when my 1080 won't be as powerful for those games. Consistent minimums will become must 

[TheDankKoosh]

Just now, edward30 said:

Hostile, but entirely right.

A 1600 will provide the best value out of them all, with the better minimums and the cheaper cpu so he can go 1080 ti.

[NicholasNicholasNicholas]

Just now, edward30 said:

Hostile, but entirely right.

no, hes not right. 7700 has lower minimums

[TheDankKoosh]

1 minute ago, vshah said:

Especially in 3-4 years when my 1080 won't be as powerful for those games. Consistent minimums will become must 

Honestly you should go with a r5 1600 with a good cooler and OC, savings will allow for 1080 ti.

[vshah]

Just now, TheDankKoosh said:

Honestly you should go with a r5 1600 with a good cooler and OC, saving will allow for 1080 ti.

I'll take that into account

[The Sloth]

Just now, edward30 said:

No I won't. The CPU is rarely the limiting factor in rendering video games. The GPU will bottleneck long before an i7-7700/k . This is silly.

don't know what to say, sounds BS. yes playing a 4k video and having 52 tabs open while gaming will effect gaming performance, a 7700k also has lower minimums. 

[NicholasNicholasNicholas]

3 minutes ago, edward30 said:

No I won't. The CPU is rarely the limiting factor in rendering video games. The GPU will bottleneck long before an i7-7700/k . This is silly.

ever played gta v or like any ea game released in the past 2 and a half years? maybe civ 6?

[NicholasNicholasNicholas]

Just now, edward30 said:

Negligible difference. My CPU usage went from 5 to 6% with a 4k video, and those other 51 tabs will happily sit in the background idle. 8 cores for web browsing and gaming is not a thing. It just isn't. You could come up with some totally out of the norm scenario where someone is playing a whole raft of 4k videos at once, but that would just prove how silly you're being.

 

I'm not arguing that the 7700, K or no, is a better buy than the 1700 for any particular buyer. Just that the 7700 might make more sense than the 7700k if the OP here doesn't want to overclock.

youve completely ignored our arguments claiming the 7700 has lower mins

[The Sloth]

Just now, edward30 said:

I'm not arguing that the 7700, K or no, is a better buy than the 1700 for any particular buyer. Just that the 7700 might make more sense than the 7700k if the OP here doesn't want to overclock.

ryzen 1600 would make more sense, it has better minimums and cheaper. 

[NicholasNicholasNicholas]

On 6/7/2017 at 9:08 PM, edward30 said:

So those games continually consume 100% of a i7-7700?

 

Video games are not compute intensive applications.

you dont have to consume 100% of a 7700 to get a studder, you have to consume 50%. once the game starts to use more than 1 thread per core performance drops off a cliff

On 6/7/2017 at 9:09 PM, edward30 said:

Guys. I regret, to some extent, buying the i7 over the R7-1700. I'm not arguing that point.

then why are you recommending the 7700?

[NicholasNicholasNicholas]

Just now, edward30 said:

That doesn't make sense. The game can consume whatever it pleases (and hopefully the threading is done properly), because chrome is going to be negligible.

no what im saying is regardless of chrome, games are using more than 4 cores. and since the 7700k only has 4 cores, performance will be worse when it needs to simulate cores.

 

1 minute ago, edward30 said:

Only over the 7700K

so 7700<7700k>1700?

[vshah]

1 minute ago, edward30 said:

Unless he wants to overclock, yep. A K processor does't make sense unless you want to overclock.

I'm gonna overclock. It's either the 1600, 1700, or 7700K for me. Right, based on all your guys' arguments, the 1700 is best for me because I can get it for only 90 bucks more than the 1600 and it has two more cores. The 1700 has better minimums that the 7700K and it will be better for the future. 

[NicholasNicholasNicholas]

Just now, vshah said:

I'm gonna overclock. It's either the 1600, 1700, or 7700K for me. Right, based on all your guys' arguments, the 1700 is best for me because I can get it for only 90 bucks more than the 1600 and it has two more cores. The 1700 has better minimums that the 7700K and it will be better for the future. 

not to mention upgrade path. am4 will be supported until 2020, and that will include zen 2 and 3, which are both 7nm chips

[vshah]

Just now, Nickathom said:

not to mention upgrade path. am4 will be supported until 2020, and that will include zen 2 and 3, which are both 7nm chips

Did AMD confirm that?

[NicholasNicholasNicholas]

Just now, vshah said:

Did AMD confirm that?

yup, on their timeline

[vshah]

Just now, Nickathom said:

yup, on their timeline

Damn, yeah then why would I get a 7700K? I would need to upgrade my motherboard if I get a 7700K and want to upgrade in the future. And the Zen 2's and 3's will probably be better than their Intel counterparts or have similar performance to them. Yeah there's little reason for me to get the 7700K. The 1700 is a WAY better CPU all around and the minimums are better. Thanks for the thread guys  

[NicholasNicholasNicholas]

Just now, vshah said:

Damn, yeah then why would I get a 7700K? I would need to upgrade my motherboard if I get a 7700K and want to upgrade in the future. And the Zen 2's and 3's will probably be better than their Intel counterparts or have similar performance to them. Yeah there's little reason for me to get the 7700K. The 1700 is a WAY better CPU all around and the minimums are better. Thanks for the thread guys  

not all around, but yes, youre making the right choice