i7 8700 or Ryzen 7 1700 for gaming and streaming

[Chompy]

I wan't your opinion:.

 

I'm building a new personal rig update, i have a fx8320, i wan't a Ryzen 7 1700 or a i7 8700 (not the K), i wan't it for streaming and gaming.
Maybe just a little video editing.

Sorry for my english, it's not my first language.

 

[jtmoseley]

4 minutes ago, Chompy said:

I wan't your opinion:.

 

I'm building a new personal rig update, i have a fx8320, i wan't a Ryzen 7 1700 or a i7 8700 (not the K), i wan't it for streaming and gaming.
Maybe just a little video editing.

Sorry for my english, it's not my first language.

 

Get the 2700x, its the next gen version of the 1700. Its alot cheaper too

[whoisit1118]

Firstly, some English help  You do not need the apostrophe in want.

Secondly, the 8700 should be superior in this case. I have seen a reliable Korean site benchmark the difference between 2700x and 8700 in gaming/streaming applications, and the 8700 beat the 2700x by quite a bit. This likely means the gap between 8700 and the 1700 will be even bigger. 

[Canada EH]

36 minutes ago, whoisit1118 said:

Firstly, some English help  You do not need the apostrophe in want.

coulda been a typo, but I doubt it

 

37 minutes ago, whoisit1118 said:

8700 should be superior

yes, Intel is best

 

 

[epsilon84]

5 hours ago, jtmoseley said:

Get the 2700x, its the next gen version of the 1700. Its alot cheaper too

Uhhh, the 2700X is about $70 more than a 1700... Using Newegg prices its $260 for the 1700 vs $330 for the 2700X

https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=ryzen+1700&ignorear=0&N=-1&isNodeId=1

https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=ryzen+2700X&ignorear=0&N=-1&isNodeId=1

 

To the OP, out of these options, the 8700 would be superior for gaming whilst being about on par with the 1700 for streaming, so I would get the 8700 in this instance. If you want the best streaming experience at the expense of outright gaming performance, then go with the 2700X, which is only slightly more than a 8700.

[jtmoseley]

3 hours ago, epsilon84 said:

Uhhh, the 2700X is about $70 more than a 1700... Using Newegg prices its $260 for the 1700 vs $330 for the 2700X

https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=ryzen+1700&ignorear=0&N=-1&isNodeId=1

https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=ryzen+2700X&ignorear=0&N=-1&isNodeId=1

 

To the OP, out of these options, the 8700 would be superior for gaming whilst being about on par with the 1700 for streaming, so I would get the 8700 in this instance. If you want the best streaming experience at the expense of outright gaming performance, then go with the 2700X, which is only slightly more than a 8700.

My bad, the prices changed. There was a sale yesterday. Can you link the benchmark? All I am seeing is 2700x vs 8700k stuff

 

Anyways, I would go with the 2700x anyways because next gen intel is going to be 100% a new socket. Why not just take the more future proof option? 

 

Also why would you ever get the 8700? It seems like a stupid price point... 

[epsilon84]

7 minutes ago, jtmoseley said:

My bad, the prices changed. There was a sale yesterday. Can you link the benchmark? All I am seeing is 2700x vs 8700k stuff

 

Anyways, I would go with the 2700x anyways because next gen intel is going to be 100% a new socket. Why not just take the more future proof option? 

 

Also why would you ever get the 8700? It seems like a stupid price point... 

How is the 8700 a stupid price point, yet the more expensive 2700X isn't?

 

The benchmarks in question are at Gamers Nexus:

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews

/3076-intel-i7-8700k-review-vs-ryzen-streaming-gaming-overclocking/page-4

 

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3287-amd-r7-2700-and-2700x-review-game-streaming-cpu-benchmarks-memory/page-2

 

As I said earlier, the 8700 will give the higher framerates in game, at the expense of dropped frames when streaming if you go too high on the bit rates, when compared to a 2700X. When compared to a 1700 they are roughly comparable for streaming, but the 8700 is far superior for actual gaming.

[jtmoseley]

6 minutes ago, epsilon84 said:

How is the 8700 a stupid price point, yet the more expensive 2700X isn't?

 

The benchmarks in question are at Gamers Nexus:

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews

/3076-intel-i7-8700k-review-vs-ryzen-streaming-gaming-overclocking/page-4

 

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3287-amd-r7-2700-and-2700x-review-game-streaming-cpu-benchmarks-memory/page-2

 

As I said earlier, the 8700 will give the higher framerates in game, at the expense of dropped frames when streaming if you go too high on the bit rates, when compared to a 2700X. When compared to a 1700 they are roughly comparable for streaming, but the 8700 is far superior for actual gaming.

Dude, we are talking about the 8700 non K. You linked 8700k stuff. 

 

The non overclockable i7 CPU's from intel are always not the best. If you want gaming, the 8600k is a better choice. There is no reason to get the 8700.instead of the 8600k. The clocks are too low. 

 

The 2700x can be more expensive anyways, you know why? Because it comes with a decent stock cooler, and you don't have to buy another motherboard in 2 years. So, in theory, you could knock off 130 dollars or so from the price.

[epsilon84]

8 hours ago, jtmoseley said:

Dude, we are talking about the 8700 non K. You linked 8700k stuff. 

 

The non overclockable i7 CPU's from intel are always not the best. If you want gaming, the 8600k is a better choice. There is no reason to get the 8700.instead of the 8600k. The clocks are too low. 

 

The 2700x can be more expensive anyways, you know why? Because it comes with a decent stock cooler, and you don't have to buy another motherboard in 2 years. So, in theory, you could knock off 130 dollars or so from the price.

The 8700 and 8700K have virtually the same boost clocks, the only difference is that the 8700 has a lower 'base' clock of 3.2GHz, but when set up correctly in the BIOS (65W TDP limit should be off) they will both turbo to the same speeds, which is 4.3GHz all cores. The only difference is that the max 1 core turbo is 4.6GHz on the 8700 vs 4.7GHz on the 8700K. So no, the clocks are not 'too low', in fact a stock 8700 clocks higher than a maxed out overclocked 2700X @ 4.2GHz...

 

The 8600K is not better than a 8700 non K for gaming. Even at 5.0GHz, a 8600K doesn't beat a stock 8700/8700K. It comes close, but at a similar price point I know I would rather have the 8700 any day due to the extra threads. Also, for streaming the 8600K will really struggle, you need extra threads for streaming so the 8700 or Ryzen chips will do much better in this regard.

 

I upgraded from a 6700K to a 8700K by the way, so I know what you mean about Intel's limited upgrade paths. But you know what? I was able to sell my existing 6700K and Z170 motherboard to fund the 8700K/Z370 purchase (I kept the RAM, since its so expensive to buy nowadays), and older i7s have surpisingly good resale value on the used market. Whilst in theory having a motherboard with many years upgrade path is good, you will be missing out on new industry standards and features, just look at the B350/X370 mobos for example, no XFR2 and flaky memory support for higher spec DDR4 3466 (or better) RAM compared to X470, and thats only 1 gen of chipset updates. You can be sure there will be more coming by 2020. So while plug and play upgrades has its merits, you are also losing out on the latest features compared to up to date platforms.

[jtmoseley]

2 hours ago, epsilon84 said:

The 8700 and 8700K have virtually the same boost clocks, the only difference is that the 8700 has a lower 'base' clock of 3.2GHz, but when set up correctly in the BIOS (65W TDP limit should be off) they will both turbo to the same speeds, which is 4.3GHz all cores. The only difference is that the max 1 core turbo is 4.6GHz on the 8700 vs 4.7GHz on the 8700K. So no, the clocks are not 'too low', in fact a stock 8700 clocks higher than a maxed out overclocked 2700X @ 4.2GHz...

 

The 8600K is not better than a 8700 non K for gaming. Even at 5.0GHz, a 8600K doesn't beat a stock 8700/8700K. It comes close, but at a similar price point I know I would rather have the 8700 any day due to the extra threads. Also, for streaming the 8600K will really struggle, you need extra threads for streaming so the 8700 or Ryzen chips will do much better in this regard.

 

I upgraded from a 6700K to a 8700K by the way, so I know what you mean about Intel's limited upgrade paths. But you know what? I was able to sell my existing 6700K and Z170 motherboard to fund the 8700K/Z370 purchase (I kept the RAM, since its so expensive to buy nowadays), and older i7s have surpisingly good resale value on the used market. Whilst in theory having a motherboard with many years upgrade path is good, you will be missing out on new industry standards and features, just look at the B350/X370 mobos for example, no XFR2 and flaky memory support for higher spec DDR4 3466 (or better) RAM compared to X470, and thats only 1 gen of chipset updates. You can be sure there will be more coming by 2020. So while plug and play upgrades has its merits, you are also losing out on the latest features compared to up to date platforms.

Not really... XFR2 and all the newer stuff doesn't really increase performance all that much compared to x370. You aren't really missing all that much (if any) performance by using the older boards. You are still selling your processor, so I don't see the issue. 1800x's still go for around 250-75 dollars. 

 

Case in point, the features that you are missing out on isn't worth having to sell everything, then shell out some more cash. Why not just save money?

 

Also considering intel has yet to decrease their node size... AMD is probably going to pass them up pretty soon. So I would take the processor with a more reliable upgrade path.

[Zeitec]

21 hours ago, whoisit1118 said:

Firstly, some English help  You do not need the apostrophe in want.

Secondly, the 8700 should be superior in this case. I have seen a reliable Korean site benchmark the difference between 2700x and 8700 in gaming/streaming applications, and the 8700 beat the 2700x by quite a bit. This likely means the gap between 8700 and the 1700 will be even bigger. 

The 2700x gives 95% of the gaming performance of the 8700 while smashing it for streaming according to Gamers Nexus who is one of the most reliable review sites. The 8700 also costs the same, while losing the ability to overclock, while needing a 3rd party cooler (trust me, I tried the stock one). The 2700x is definitely the better option. 

 

Disclaimer: I am biased... towards the 8700. I have one and love it, but I also don't stream so gaming performance is my only factor and I bought it before Ryzen 2 came out. 

[epsilon84]

6 hours ago, Zeitec said:

The 2700x gives 95% of the gaming performance of the 8700 while smashing it for streaming according to Gamers Nexus who is one of the most reliable review sites. The 8700 also costs the same, while losing the ability to overclock, while needing a 3rd party cooler (trust me, I tried the stock one). The 2700x is definitely the better option. 

 

Disclaimer: I am biased... towards the 8700. I have one and love it, but I also don't stream so gaming performance is my only factor and I bought it before Ryzen 2 came out. 

I thought there was something odd with your numbers so I actually went to the GN review again (I saw it on launch day and don't recall the 2700X being within 5% of the 8700K for gaming (which = 8700 performance ofc)

 

They only tested 3 games, which is rather disappointing to be honest for a channel called 'Gamers Nexus' when you see channels like Hardware Unboxed churn through 10 games.

 

Anyhow, the stock results at 1080P are (avg/1% low/0.1% low)

AC:O

8700K: 119.8 / 90.5 / 80.3

2700X: 107.3 / 82.5 / 71.3

 

So a 10 - 12% difference for AC:O

 

Watch Dogs 2:

8700K: 132.5 / 105.0 / 80.3

2700X: 118.8 / 86.0 / 70.3

 

11 - 20% difference in WD2

 

Project Cars 2:

8700K: 135.8 / 108.3 / 102.3

2700X: 111.0 / 88.0 / 86.0

 

19 - 23% difference in PC2

 

Thats not exactly '95% the gaming performance' as you claim, but I guess you were just estimating and assumed the 2700X was closer than it actually was. 

 

Agreed that with high bit rate streaming, the 2700X pulls well ahead. No questions about that. The 8700K still holds its own at 10Mb/s though, so it's not like its useless for streaming. You just need to avoid 12Mb/s so you don't drop frames, and to be honest 12Mb/s is quite a high bit rate to stream at. It's impressive that the 2700X can pull that off without dropping many frames.

 

As I said earlier in this thread, the OP has to weigh up whether outright gaming performance is the priority, or streaming performance.

 

[michaelbelgium]

The 8700 is worse than u think for streaming

Im not sure about the 1700, but the 2700 will have the best viewing experience for the stream in stead of a 8700. 

 

In your case i would choose ryzen, especially for the video editing also

[i_build_nanosuits]

i7-8700 is better.

[DarkSmith2]

Dont compare apples with pears.

Compare 2700x @max or avg overclock against 8700k @max or avg overclock.

 

Nobody should be interessted in compairing products of a different performance and price tier.

Also nobody should run any Intel K CPU at stock clocks nor compare that to Ryzen stock clocks, even if Ryzen might be valid to be compared at stock through minimal, nonexistent or not worthy performance/watt increases.

 

So if the question is 8700 vs 2700x and your are playing on higher than 1080p then get the 2700x easy choice, its theoretically a higher tier CPU.

If the question is 8700k vs 2700x it depends on the priorities of the OP.

 

If you do gaming + streaming all the time and make your money with it the stream gets more important than the personal gaming experience, but if this is the case you should already know that you need a dedicated streaming rig if you are aiming for the best results.

 

If you do it just for shit and giggles without any real plan to make it your profession anyway than the 8700 is sufficient enough, well even streaming via NVENC is sufficient enough and no matter how you turn it, none of those CPUs will dramatically increase or decrease your viewers watching experience, while the 8700 will give you a better gaming experience overall. 

 

If you really aim to get a single rig setup to stream in the highest quality possible while playing on the same machine a 10c/20t with moderate overclock is currently the bare minimum.

 

Have a nice day.

[Zeitec]

10 hours ago, epsilon84 said:

 

Your numbers came to the 2700x giving about 90% of the performance of the 8700k. Keep in mind this is while NOT streaming. While streaming those numbers will close a bit (not enough to equalize, but maybe 95% would be accurate at that point) and the 2700x would drop far fewer frames as shown by the GamersNexus review. Also the 2700x is cheaper and comes with a cooler, so there's that too.