Ryzen Over CFL?

[ABehery]

I was deciding for a couple months on which cpu to get and I was about to buy R7 1700, then here comes coffee lake making me as confused as a potato.

Im mostly working with adobe products (Photoshop, illustrator, premiere, after effects) and some gaming, priority to my work though.

Question is, should I get the R7 1700 or wait, spend more and get an i7 8700k?

 

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/3BFgvV

[Nocte]

If you are giving priority to your work, I would get the Ryzen 7.

 

The difference between the two CPUs is not enormous, and given the price difference of CPU + motherboard, Ryzen pulls ahead imo. 

[ImNotThere]

what do you want to do, they trade blows in productivity and gaming, imo its personal preference, as said above, a good x370 board will cost less than a good z370 board 

[ColdCrystal]

It looks like even the cheap, lower-end Coffee Lakes perform better than the previously best-buy Ryzens..

The 8700k results are borderline workstation-grade, while offering the best gaming performance.

[Guest]

I would recommend the R7 1700, the extra cores/threads will benefit in these different applications. The 8700k takes the crown when it comes to gaming performance, but since the R7 1700 in the mainstream has more cores/thread and is more expensive, your workloads are better optimised in terms of multicore/multithreaded performance.

[Guest]

Also, given the huge expenses with the coffelake upgrade, including the costs of the motherboard and CPU on the AM4 platform will be cheaper than the coffelake combined with a Z370 motherboard.

[ColdCrystal]

9 minutes ago, TheBeastPC said:

I would recommend the R7 1700, the extra cores/threads will benefit in these different applications. The 8700k takes the crown when it comes to gaming performance, but since the R7 1700 in the mainstream has more cores/thread and is more expensive, your workloads are better optimised in terms of multicore/multithreaded performance.

8700k performs better than R7 1700 and even R1800X in almost every workstation, multicore scenario.

[HKZeroFive]

Get the i7-8700K. Those applications (Photoshop, After Effects etc.) tend to favour the i7-8700K's stronger single threaded performance more.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, ColdCrystal said:

8700k performs better than R7 1700 and even R1800X in almost every workstation, multicore scenario.

If you look at the cinabench scores compared between the R7 1700 and i7-8700k, they both perform the same in the multithread test, however, the R7 1800X beats the 8700k in the multithreaded test. Look at the Excel tests, the 1800X beats the 8700k. The benchmarks conducted in this video are very interesting, like the decrompression work, SMT has the advantage of the decompression. When it comes to these benchmarks, results vary between the 8700k and R7 1700/1800X, sometimes it gets beaten by the 8700k or vice versa.

[Guest]

I fully understand that the 8700k has stronger singlethreaded performance, and in some benchmarks they tend to beat each other.

[Simon771]

Not even sure what should recommend now.

Ryzen does have same multithreaded performance, but cost 100€ less than i7 8700k ( at least in EU you can get R7 1700 for 290€, while i7 8700k is at 399€).

But that's just cinebench score. For some reason i7 8700k will do rendering faster, because some programs just prefer high clock speed. Linus explained that in 8700k review on youtube video.

 

But are you willing to pay 100€ more for CPU, and again something more for motherboard, to get that better performance?

 

For Hyper-V and VMware Ryzen is perfect because of more cores. For gaming Intel 8700k is better.

For rendering etc. .... no idea anymore  

[ABehery]

The choice is really hard now, you guys made me even more confused. Guess the comaptible proof is another thing to take into consideration.

[MyName13]

i7 8700k performs like r7 1800x even though it has 2 cores less, with an overclock it would destroy it.

[TahoeDust]

The Adobe products you are using love strong core with high frequency.  Go with the 8700k 100%.  It will be better in gaming also.

[VagabondWraith]

8700K for Adobe and games. Put a noice OC on that K and watch ‘er fly. Ryzen has no chance.

[riz06]

I personally need more cores because of the kind of virtual machines and middlewares I run in my setups. Previously, 6th & 7th gen Intel i7 have been quite frustrating for work usages. 

 

So, my next desktop is going to be a Ryzen build most likely. Another reason is that AM4 socket is going to support at least one more generation upgrade. I personally hate having to sell-off or leave out the whole mobo+cpu+coolers(probably)+ram(probably) for an upgrade.

[Jon Jon]

Keep in mind that in order to get that performance out of the 8700K, that allows it to beat the Ryzen 7 lineup in most benchmarks, requires more than adequate cooling.

 

Honestly, I wouldn't pair an 8700K with anything lower than a very high end air cooler, or a 240MM AIO, especially at 5ghz.

 

Even then, 8700K temperatures are extremely high (we are talking 80C-90C, which I would consider to be too hot).

 

For rendering workloads, where you will be hammering the CPU really hard for hours at a time at 100%, you really need to keep this in mind, as the quality of the motherboard will be important as well.

 

Meanwhile, you can get a Ryzen 7 1700 and get away with using the Wraith Spire for a 3.8-3.9ghz overclock, albiet with noise concerns and similar temperature readings.

 

It's interesting to see Intel to be the hotter than hot CPU for a change.