Ryzen 5 or Ryzen 7

[AdvancedG]

So i have a 1500$ budget for pc that i use for gaming,video recording.video editing.I decided to go with amd's new ryzen cpu.The reason why i going to use this cpu its because its multi core performance and the core per core performance is not to bad for a multitasking.The game that i will record is minecraft and gta v.these is my complete spec that i will use

 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD - Ryzen 7 1700 3.0GHz 8-Core Processor  ($289.99 @ SuperBiiz) 
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master - Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler  ($24.89 @ OutletPC) 
Thermal Compound: Thermaltake - CL-O004-GROSGM-A 4g Thermal Paste  ($7.99 @ Amazon) 
Motherboard: MSI - B350 TOMAHAWK ATX AM4 Motherboard  ($70.98 @ Newegg) 
Memory: Corsair - Vengeance LPX 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-3200 Memory  ($162.99 @ Best Buy) 
Storage: Samsung - 850 EVO-Series 250GB 2.5" Solid State Drive  ($89.99 @ B&H) 
Storage: Western Digital - Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive  ($45.87 @ OutletPC) 
Video Card: Asus - GeForce GTX 1070 8GB Video Card  ($494.88 @ OutletPC) 
Case: NZXT - S340 (White) ATX Mid Tower Case  ($64.99 @ SuperBiiz) 
Power Supply: EVGA - SuperNOVA G2 650W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply  ($79.99 @ NCIX US) 
Keyboard: Razer - DeathStalker Essential Wired Gaming Keyboard  ($39.50 @ Amazon) 
Mouse: Redragon - Centrophorus M601 Wired Optical Mouse  ($13.99 @ Amazon) 
Total: $1386.05
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-09-14 07:05 EDT-0400

 

But i saw the performance of ryzen 5 1600 and gtx 1060 6gb is more better than ryzen 7 1700 compare with gtx 1070

 

So which one is i would pick the parts before i lost money for low performance

[You_are_a_cunt]

I think the 1700 will be somewhat better than an 1600 since you're looking for video editing

Everything looks alright to me, though I would get an AIO instead of an air cooler. And I wouldn't be caught dead buying thermal compound for $2/gram

[3rrant]

8 minutes ago, AdvancedG said:

cut

 

1 minute ago, revsilverspine said:

I think the 1700 will be somewhat better than an 1600 since you're looking for video editing

Everything looks alright to me, though I would get an AIO instead of an air cooler. And I wouldn't be caught dead buying thermal compound for $2/gram

1600 will be better in games if you overclock it, by a very small margin, unless it's 4K.

1700 will give you a slight boost in video editing/recording/streaming, but it isn't huge.

 

If you have the budget, go for the 1700 and overclock it at 3,8+ if you prefear to reallocate some budget, go with the 1600 because you won't really miss anything is a day to day scenario.

[AdvancedG]

Okay but does the r7 1700 and gtx 1070 is going to be bottlenecking since the the r7 1700 is slow at 3.0 ghz-3.8ghz

 

For Overclocking i wont do much higher speed nya under 4.1ghz is my limit because i wont risk since its 1500$ pc 

[Syfes]

7 minutes ago, AdvancedG said:

Okay but does the r7 1700 and gtx 1070 is going to be bottlenecking since the the r7 1700 is slow at 3.0 ghz-3.8ghz

 

For Overclocking i wont do much higher speed nya under 4.1ghz is my limit because i wont risk since its 1500$ pc 

Bottlenecking is a difficult subject, because it heavily depends on the tasks you're performing. I would say that in most cases, it will not be an issue. Definitely when you're recording gameplay, because in those situations you generally won't be aiming for extreme FPS anyways, but rather a solid 60fps, which it should manage just fine.

 

Additionally I would add that these days there is little risk in overclocking. The worst that could happen is your system gets unstable, and in the worst case crashes and forces a reboot. And when that happens, you just back off the clock and your system will be just fine. So overclock this thing to your heart's content! 

[AdvancedG]

On 9/14/2017 at 6:27 PM, Syfes said:

ottlenecking is a difficult subject, because it heavily depends on the tasks you're performing. I would say that in most cases, it will not be an issue. Definitely when you're recording gameplay, because in those situations you generally won't be aiming for extreme FPS anyways, but rather a solid 60fps, which it should manage just fine

im aiming my fps at solid 60 fps gsync, vsync or what ever it is

For the task is im just only rendering intro editing video record a video posible i will play minecraft or gta v while rendering intro

[AdvancedG]

 

This is the one with ryzen 7 1700 and gtx 1070

 

 

but does it do better at multitasking than its big brother 1700x?

[Jurrunio]

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/WsF9gL

$1417

 

Changed RAM to a slightly cheaper one that is 3000MHz but has while LEDs and $10 cheaper

Changed Asus Strix GTX 1070 to EVGA GTX 1080 FTW DT (not the cheapest 1080, but it is closer to white than the cheaper Gigabyte G1 card)

Add another $20 and you can get a 2TB HDD, another $20 will get a 3TB one.

[just_dave]

Dont get tomahawk - check my guide

[seon123]

Please don't tell me you're getting a $1500 just to play Minecraft... Even with SEUS, it's not that demanding

[Sanctorum]

3 hours ago, AdvancedG said:

But i saw the performance of ryzen 5 1600 and gtx 1060 6gb is more better than ryzen 7 1700 compare with gtx 1070

Uh, what? Seriously, what is this even supposed to say?

3 hours ago, ErrantNyles said:

1600 will be better in games if you overclock it, by a very small margin, unless it's 4K.

Um, no. That's not even remotely true.

3 hours ago, AdvancedG said:

Okay but does the r7 1700 and gtx 1070 is going to be bottlenecking since the the r7 1700 is slow at 3.0 ghz-3.8ghz

Is what going to bottleneck in what situation? You're always going to have a bottleneck in your system. Sometimes it's CPU, sometimes it's GPU, or RAM, or storage. It depends on what you're doing with the system.

2 hours ago, AdvancedG said:

For the task is im just only rendering intro editing video record a video posible i will play minecraft or gta v while rendering intro

English please?

2 hours ago, AdvancedG said:

but does it do better at multitasking than its big brother 1700x?

No. Why would a slower, cheaper CPU be better than "its big brother"? An R7 1700 overclocked to 3.8GHz is essentially a 1700x.

 

Now on to the parts list. Do NOT buy a 212 EVO. Not only is anything less than a decent $30+ cooler pointless with Ryzen, but the 212 EVO is just a shit choice of cooler anyway. No need to buy thermal compound, stock cooler comes with pre-applied paste, and aftermarket coolers will either come with pre-applied paste or a tube of thermal compound. Do NOT pay $500 for a GTX 1070, that's GTX 1080 territory. No need to pay so much for RAM. Lastly, that keyboard is overpriced trash. 

 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD - Ryzen 5 1600 3.2GHz 6-Core Processor  ($196.88 @ OutletPC) 
Motherboard: Asus - STRIX B350-F GAMING ATX AM4 Motherboard  ($106.98 @ Newegg) 
Memory: Corsair - Vengeance LPX 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-3000 Memory  ($151.99 @ Best Buy) 
Storage: Samsung - 850 EVO-Series 500GB 2.5" Solid State Drive  ($139.99 @ Newegg) 
Storage: Western Digital - Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive  ($45.87 @ OutletPC) 
Video Card: EVGA - GeForce GTX 1070 8GB SC GAMING ACX 3.0 Black Edition Video Card  ($449.99 @ Amazon) 
Case: Phanteks - ECLIPSE P400S TEMPERED GLASS ATX Mid Tower Case  ($89.99 @ Newegg) 
Power Supply: BitFenix - Whisper M 450W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply  ($66.99 @ SuperBiiz) 
Keyboard: Corsair - K70 LUX Wired Gaming Keyboard  ($99.99 @ Corsair) 
Mouse: Redragon - Centrophorus M601 Wired Optical Mouse  ($13.99 @ Amazon) 
Total: $1362.66

 

If you're just doing small video edits, an R5 1600 is more than enough. If you're playing AAA titles at 1080p144Hz or are using a 1440p high refresh monitor, go for a GTX 1080. Or if you're only using a 60Hz 1080p panel, a 6GB 1060 is more than adequate.

[3rrant]

42 minutes ago, Sanctorum said:

cut

Stop giving away bad suggestions and misinformation. It has been proved not by one but MANY reviews already, expecially Tom's Hardware, that R5 is better at single thread performance than R7 in many games. 1700 in particular quite suffers from SC performance compared to the better binned R7s.

[Sanctorum]

7 minutes ago, ErrantNyles said:

Stop giving away bad suggestions and misinformation. It has been proved not by one but MANY reviews already, expecially Tom's Hardware, that R5 is better at single thread performance than R7 in many games. 1700 in particular quite suffers from SC performance compared to the better binned R7s.

From someone who doesn't understand how CPU microarchitectures work. Ryzen 5 is literally a Ryzen 7 with 2 cores disabled. Ryzen 7 IS better binned Ryzen 5, whether it's a 1700 or 1800x. IPC is exactly the same on R5 and R7, so clock speed ALONE determines single core performance between Ryzen chips.

[minervx]

At a >$1000 range you may as well go for the Ryzen 7.