First Time Build Help

[LienusLateTips]

1 hour ago, MegaVoltz said:

The 1600 costs less than 1/3rd less while being ~20% less powerful in single-threaded performance than the 7700k. It would be a VERY good deal nonetheless even without the countless other advantages of a 6-core 12-thread processor.

Think about it this way. What if he isn't looking for value and instead looking for the best he can get with gaming. THINK.

[DocSwag]

1 hour ago, MegaVoltz said:

 

-AdoredTV is known to be amd biased

-even if you say that these results are correct, this just proves my point. By the time Ryzen might catch up to a 7700k, you're probably gonna be looking at an upgrade. Which means that, while you owned it, the 7700k would always have been winning.

 

Thats not to mention a 2500k has much more overclocking headroom than the 8370 so once overclocked the 2500k would win

[MegaVoltz]

41 minutes ago, DocSwag said:

-AdoredTV is known to be amd biased

-even if you say that these results are correct, this just proves my point. By the time Ryzen might catch up to a 7700k, you're probably gonna be looking at an upgrade. Which means that, while you owned it, the 7700k would always have been winning.

 

Thats not to mention a 2500k has much more overclocking headroom than the 8370 so once overclocked the 2500k would win

There is no proof whatsoever that Jim is biased.

There is also no proof your source for the other video is reliable.

I would still recommend a 1600 over a 7700k because it costs $100 less as well as having much stronger multi-threaded performance. The 1600 is faster than the 7700k in pure multi-threaded performance than the 7700k is over the 1600 in single-threaded performance.

Sure, if OP wants to buy into a dead platform and spend $100 more for it, it's his stupid decision for listening to your recommendation of a 7700k.

Basically the 1600 will have a bigger impact on performance in games that use more cores, and the 7700k will have a bigger impact in games that love single-threaded performance. IMO most of the time games are struggling on the 7700k due to something, it's normally the amount of cores. The IPC and clock speeds of the 1600 aren't that far behind the 7700K however the multi-threaded performance of the 1600 pulls FAR ahead of the 7700K due to the 2 extra cores and 4 extra threads.

 

What if OP wants to stream while gaming? The 1600 is better.

However if you try to stream in high-quality while playing modern triple-A games, the 7700k drops frames and bogs down the entire experience.

What if he wants to save money? The 1600 is better.

The 7700k costs $100 more.

What if he wants to edit videos or do 3D modeling/animation? The 1600 is better.

The 7700K falls far behind here.

What if he wants lower power consumption? The 1600 is better.

The 7700k consumes about 50% more power.

What if he wants upgradeability and future-proofing? The 1600 is better.

The 7700k is currently sitting on top of a dead platform with no CPUs releasing for it anytime in the future.

What if he wants to overclock on $80-100 motherboards without spending a fortune? The 1600 is better.
The 7700k doesn't even come with a cooler, and you need to spend upwards of $150 to get a good board to overclock on. FAR more expensive if you factor that into the cost.

What if he wants an overall cheaper platform? The 1600 is better.

Again, the 7700k costs more, the motherboards cost more, and the liquid (or high end air) coolers cost far more than the 1600 and motherboard.

7700K - $330, + good overclock-capable motherboard - $150, + noctua nh-d15 - $90 = 570

1600 - $210, + good overclock-capable motherboard - $90, + stock cooler - $0 = 300

 

Nearly double the price for 30-40% more single-threaded performance on average.

That's insanity!

IMHO OP should either buy the R5 1600 now, or wait for Coffee Lake. The 7700K is NOT worth it unless you ABSOLUTELY need the FASTEST (currently) gaming CPU on the market right now. IMO there's far too many sacrifices to be made to buy this CPU. Let me name a few.

 

-No cooler included.

-$100-120 more expensive than it should be.

-You spend way too much for an overclock-capable motherboard.

-Much less multi-threaded performance than its competition.

-Dead platform, not compatible with new CPUs.

-Stuttery mess if streaming in high-quality while gaming.

-Power consumption a bit too high for my liking.

 

However there ARE some pros.

-Beastly single-threaded performance.

-Can overclock insanely high, sometimes as far as 5 ghz on a high-end liquid cooler.

-Still not terrible at video editing and rendering.

-Thunderbolt 3 compatible.

That's about it.

 

Conclusion:

While the 7700K pulls away in gaming and purely single-threaded applications, the lead simply isn't enough to justify the high price tag, dead platform, and many other compromises that come with it. The 1600 is far better value offering a solid lead in multi-threaded performance, darn well good-enough single-threaded performance, and all the other pros I mentioned earlier, at a much lower price than the competition.
1600 > 7700K

 

 

 

[DocSwag]

3 hours ago, MegaVoltz said:

There is no proof whatsoever that Jim is biased

This you say, as he has uploaded videos about some "AMD Master Plan," as well as having way more videos about AMD than about Nvidia or Intel.

3 hours ago, MegaVoltz said:

There is also no proof your source for the other video is reliable.

When it comes to sources, it's more about proving them to be unreliable, rather than to be reliable. And I've given evidence above that indicates AdoredTV is AMD biased.

3 hours ago, MegaVoltz said:

I would still recommend a 1600 over a 7700k because it costs $100 less as well as having much stronger multi-threaded performance. The 1600 is faster than the 7700k in pure multi-threaded performance than the 7700k is over the 1600 in single-threaded performance.

Completely untrue, just look at the OCed 7700k vs OCed 1600x

3 hours ago, MegaVoltz said:

Sure, if OP wants to buy into a dead platform and spend $100 more for it, it's his stupid decision for listening to your recommendation of a 7700k.

Basically the 1600 will have a bigger impact on performance in games that use more cores, and the 7700k will have a bigger impact in games that love single-threaded performance. IMO most of the time games are struggling on the 7700k due to something, it's normally the amount of cores. The IPC and clock speeds of the 1600 aren't that far behind the 7700K however the multi-threaded performance of the 1600 pulls FAR ahead of the 7700K due to the 2 extra cores and 4 extra threads.

I said that my REAL recommendation is wait a month for the 8700k, not get a 7700k...

 

You say the 1600 IPC and clock speed aren't that far behind 7700k. 7700k has an ~10% IPC advantage and when OCed a 25% clock speed advantage which gives it an approximate 37.5% single threaded performance advantage. That can't be taken lightly.

3 hours ago, MegaVoltz said:

What if OP wants to stream while gaming? The 1600 is better.

However if you try to stream in high-quality while playing modern triple-A games, the 7700k drops frames and bogs down the entire experience.

What if he wants to save money? The 1600 is better.

The 7700k costs $100 more.

And when exactly did OP say they want to stream?!? You're basically saying "the 1600 is better because for something that OP is not doing it's better." That makes no sense at all, not to mention if OP did want to stream they could always use NVENC for encoding instead, which is pretty close to h.264 when it comes to quality.

3 hours ago, MegaVoltz said:

What if he wants to edit videos or do 3D modeling/animation? The 1600 is better.

The 7700K falls far behind here.

This is very untrue. When it comes to editing videos, with something like premier, I would actually rate an OCed 7700k better. Premier has some portions that are somewhat multi threaded but other portions that are very single threaded. And considering, as I proved earlier, that the 7700k beats the 1600 in single core by more than the 1600 beats it in multi core, I think the 7700k is better.

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Premiere-Pro-CC-2017-AMD-Ryzen-7-1700X-1800X-Performance-909/

As for 3D modeling and animation, a lot of programs out there (AutoCAD, maya, etc.) are EXTREMELY single threaded.

3 hours ago, MegaVoltz said:

What if he wants lower power consumption? The 1600 is better.

The 7700k consumes about 50% more power

Source for that?

3 hours ago, MegaVoltz said:

What if he wants upgradeability and future-proofing? The 1600 is better.

The 7700k is currently sitting on top of a dead platform with no CPUs releasing for it anytime in the future.

Upgrade-ability I already addressed with the 8700k. As for future proofing... You need to give a better definition for that. Because if we're looking at who's gonna have better gaming performance for the next 3-4 years, that's the 7700k...

3 hours ago, MegaVoltz said:

What if he wants to overclock on $80-100 motherboards without spending a fortune? The 1600 is better.

You were saying?

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/WN98TW/gigabyte-ga-z270p-d3-atx-lga1151-motherboard-ga-z270p-d3

3 hours ago, MegaVoltz said:

The 7700k doesn't even come with a cooler, and you need to spend upwards of $150 to get a good board to overclock on. FAR more expensive if you factor that into the cost.

 

Doesn't come with a cooler, yeah that's a point for Ryzen. But $150 for a good board to overclock with? If you're deeming a $150 board the bare minimum for 7700k overclocking, then I think it's fair to say you need at least a $150 board to OC Ryzen. According to your logic.

3 hours ago, MegaVoltz said:

What if he wants an overall cheaper platform? The 1600 is better.

Again, the 7700k costs more, the motherboards cost more, and the liquid (or high end air) coolers cost far more than the 1600 and motherboard.

7700K - $330, + good overclock-capable motherboard - $150, + noctua nh-d15 - $90 = 570

1600 - $210, + good overclock-capable motherboard - $90, + stock cooler - $0 = 300

First off, you're price comparison is heavily weighted in your favor. You chose a pretty good z270 board compared to a mediocre b350 board. If we even that comparison out we end up with a $100-$110 motherboard. As well, you DON'T need a friggin D15 for the cpu cooler!!! Something like a Cryorig H7, which is $35, would do. Factor in those and the price comes down to around $475 ish, a far cry from your outrageous $570 number.

3 hours ago, MegaVoltz said:

Nearly double the price for 30-40% more single-threaded performance on average.

That's insanity!

IMHO OP should either buy the R5 1600 now, or wait for Coffee Lake. The 7700K is NOT worth it unless you ABSOLUTELY need the FASTEST (currently) gaming CPU on the market right now. IMO there's far too many sacrifices to be made to buy this CPU. Let me name a few.

And that's why I said, my REAL recommendation is WAIT for the 8700k!

3 hours ago, MegaVoltz said:

Conclusion:

While the 7700K pulls away in gaming and purely single-threaded applications, the lead simply isn't enough to justify the high price tag, dead platform, and many other compromises that come with it. The 1600 is far better value offering a solid lead in multi-threaded performance, darn well good-enough single-threaded performance, and all the other pros I mentioned earlier, at a much lower price than the competition.
1600 > 7700K

Here let me adjust that for you:

           The Ryzen 5 1600 is a CPU that offers excellent performance/$ and gives you outstanding gaming performance for the money, while also being capable of streaming and potentially being used for prosumer tasks. However, if you want the best possible gaming performance while ignoring everything else and have the money for it, the 7700k is the best gaming cpu money can buy today, so if you want a beastly gaming pc the 7700k is a good option (though it's worth noting that unless you have zero patience, you should wait one month for the 8700k).

 

Much better.

[SupamanLawson]

Come on now. I didn't mean to start a war. 

 

I appreciate everyone and their opinion. 

 

I ended up going with the Ryzen R5 1600. Purely off price to performance. Many of you recommended it. And of course I have nothing against Intel. I would have loved to get one but saving that extra cash to go towards a gpu was a financially better decision. I would have been different if someone said absolutely not for Ryzen. But luckily it has something to offer that everyone can agree on. 

 

My only stall is my non existent knowledge of power supplies. lol ANY rec would help out alot. 

 

Im positive this CPU can last 3-4 years maybe more for me. 

 

I want to thank everyone for taking the time to write your suggestions. 

[LienusLateTips]

1 minute ago, SupamanLawson said:

I ended up going with the Ryzen R5 1600. Purely off price to performance. Many of you recommended it. And of course I have nothing against Intel. I would have loved to get one but saving that extra cash to go towards a gpu was a financially better decision. I would have been different if someone said absolutely not for Ryzen. But luckily it has something to offer that everyone can agree on. 

I would also recommend Ryzen.

didn't list above

 

1 minute ago, SupamanLawson said:

My only stall is my non existent knowledge of power supplies. lol ANY rec would help out alot. 

I'm your guy, along with @STRMfrmXMN.

[SupamanLawson]

And on the topic of Ram. will any ram work for the Asus B350 Strix f gaming. I read the qvl but none of the Ram i was looking at is on that list. 

[LienusLateTips]

Just now, SupamanLawson said:

And on the topic of Ram. will any ram work for the Asus B350 Strix f gaming. I read the qvl but none of the Ram i was looking at is on that list. 

ya it will

[SupamanLawson]

Just now, JDE said:

ya it will

So what Power supply would you recommend?

 

Im a noob to this whole process and what a good quality supply thats a decent price. 

[LienusLateTips]

Just now, SupamanLawson said:

So what Power supply would you recommend?

 

Im a noob to this whole process and what a good quality supply thats a decent price. 

Looking at power supplies there's a good deal for the Rosewill Capstone (not G) for $40.

 

and there's the TX750M for $90

and the G2 650 for $80

[SupamanLawson]

1 minute ago, JDE said:

Looking at power supplies there's a good deal for the Rosewill Capstone (not G) for $40.

 

and there's the TX750M for $90

and the G2 650 for $80

is a fully modular psu better than a semi-modular?

[LienusLateTips]

Just now, SupamanLawson said:

is a fully modular psu better than a semi-modular?

non modular PSUs are PSUs that have all the cables it can handle permenantly attached

semi modular is where the cables you NEED for sure (CPU, motherboard power and sometimes GPU) and permenantly attached and the others are detachable

full modular is where every single cable is detachable

[SupamanLawson]

So I'm going to guess fully/semi is better for cable management ?

[LienusLateTips]

Just now, SupamanLawson said:

So I'm going to guess fully/semi is better for cable management ?

a lot better

[SupamanLawson]

They are all standard size right? 

 

I purchased the NZXT S340 (non elite)

[SupamanLawson]

5 minutes ago, JDE said:

a lot better

Ram question?. Should I get 3200mhz or lower? Not to sure the performance side of those numbers. 

[LienusLateTips]

10 minutes ago, SupamanLawson said:

They are all standard size right? 

 

I purchased the NZXT S340 (non elite)

yeah

 

5 minutes ago, SupamanLawson said:

Ram question?. Should I get 3200mhz or lower? Not to sure the performance side of those numbers. 

3000 will do, if you don't have the budget go 2800

 

[SupamanLawson]

1 minute ago, JDE said:

yeah

 

3000 will do, if you don't have the budget go 2800

 

Any ram recommended? I was expecting to pay between $120-$175 as far as budget. 

[LienusLateTips]

Just now, SupamanLawson said:

Any ram recommended? I was expecting to pay between $120-$175 as far as budget. 

For that price, you can get good and cheap non-RGB DDR4 3000 16GB kits, or if you want there are RGB ones.

[SupamanLawson]

1 minute ago, JDE said:

For that price, you can get good and cheap non-RGB DDR4 3000 16GB kits, or if you want there are RGB ones.

Any brand to choose from or stay away from? I definitely quality parts for my first build

[LienusLateTips]

Just now, SupamanLawson said:

Any brand to choose from or stay away from? I definitely quality parts for my first build

Not really. But there are brands to look out for, in a good way (like better quality than others):

G Skill, Team and Corsair.

[SupamanLawson]

3 minutes ago, JDE said:

Not really. But there are brands to look out for, in a good way (like better quality than others):

G Skill, Team and Corsair.

That’s perfect. At least now I know what to look for. 

 

Should i I go with 4 sticks of 4GB or 2 8GB sticks? Is 1 better than the other? 

[LienusLateTips]

5 minutes ago, SupamanLawson said:

That’s perfect. At least now I know what to look for. 

 

Should i I go with 4 sticks of 4GB or 2 8GB sticks? Is 1 better than the other? 

2 8GB sticks for future expansion.

[SupamanLawson]

9 minutes ago, JDE said:

Not really. But there are brands to look out for, in a good way (like better quality than others):

G Skill, Team and Corsair.

PCPartPicker part list:

 

CPU: AMD - Ryzen 5 1600 3.2GHz 6-Core Processor  ($197.08 @ OutletPC) 

 

Motherboard: Asus - STRIX B350-F GAMING ATX AM4 Motherboard  ($102.98 @ Newegg) 

 

Memory: Team - Vulcan 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-3000 Memory  ($134.99 @ Newegg) 

 

Storage: Samsung - 850 EVO-Series 250GB 2.5" Solid State Drive  ($89.99 @ B&H) 

 

Case: NZXT - S340 (White) ATX Mid Tower Case  ($64.99 @ SuperBiiz) 

 

Power Supply: Corsair - CSM 550W 80+ Gold Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply  ($39.99 @ Newegg) 

 

Total: $630.02
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-09-10 02:52 EDT-0400

 

Does this look like a good build? 

[LienusLateTips]

1 minute ago, SupamanLawson said:

PCPartPicker part list:

 

CPU: AMD - Ryzen 5 1600 3.2GHz 6-Core Processor  ($197.08 @ OutletPC) 

 

Motherboard: Asus - STRIX B350-F GAMING ATX AM4 Motherboard  ($102.98 @ Newegg) 

 

Memory: Team - Vulcan 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-3000 Memory  ($134.99 @ Newegg) 

 

Storage: Samsung - 850 EVO-Series 250GB 2.5" Solid State Drive  ($89.99 @ B&H) 

 

Case: NZXT - S340 (White) ATX Mid Tower Case  ($64.99 @ SuperBiiz) 

 

Power Supply: Corsair - CSM 550W 80+ Gold Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply  ($39.99 @ Newegg) 

 

Total: $630.02
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-09-10 02:52 EDT-0400

 

Does this look like a good build? 

For the same price as the PSU you listed you can get a Rosewill Capstone M which is a better unit.