6700k or Ryzen

[phillipmalecot101]

Hello, I have a craigslist opportunity to pick up a delided 6700k and an Asus Maximus VIII z170 Motherboard for 300. I already have a z170 mobo and the deal is all or nothing so I was also looking at just selling my mobo and going with ryzen. Do you guys think 300 is a good enough deal to stick with last gen mobo and cpu? I Do some heavy CAD, light video editing, and gaming on free time of course. 

 

Thanks

[suchamoneypit]

I got my used Ryzen 1700x for $180 a few months back, and a motherboard for it for $110 (both from ebay). Since then things have released, they are probably even cheaper now. Thats $290, and it would completely walk all over a 6700k in something like heavy CADD and video editing. That is not good enough a deal at $300 to go for it imo. Seems like a 6700k is scoring around 800 on cinebench. My overclocked 1700x is scoring 1689. Thats around 100% more performance which is something you will definitely notice if you doing stuff like heavy CADD and video editing. 100% more performance for probably 10-20% cheaper not including cost of RAM.

[Suika]

That's a really big "it depends on programs used" right there.

 

Without knowing what software you use, I don't know if it'll be worth sacrificing core count for frequency and single core strength, which is the reason you would choose a 6700k over Ryzen. I'm going to assume CAD programs are typically more multithreaded so maybe Ryzen?

 

If you could get that 6700k and mobo closer to $200 USD, that seems really worth it, but $300 is tough to swallow, even if that's a good motherboard.

Just now, suchamoneypit said:

and video editing.

Can't say much about CAD, but if he uses Adobe Premiere, the 6700k would destroy the 1700's rendering times. 

[phillipmalecot101]

11 hours ago, suchamoneypit said:

I got my used Ryzen 1700x for $180 a few months back, and a motherboard for it for $110 (both from ebay). Since then things have released, they are probably even cheaper now. Thats $290, and it would completely walk all over a 6700k in something like heavy CADD and video editing. That is not good enough a deal at $300 to go for it imo. Seems like a 6700k is scoring around 800 on cinebench. My overclocked 1700x is scoring 1689. Thats around 100% more performance which is something you will definitely notice if you doing stuff like heavy CADD and video editing. 100% more performance for probably 10-20% cheaper not including cost of RAM.

Perfect. That's exactly the info I was looking for.

 

CAD is solidworks by the way

[suchamoneypit]

4 minutes ago, Suika said:

That's a really big "it depends on programs used" right there.

 

Without knowing what software you use, I don't know if it'll be worth sacrificing core count for frequency and single core strength, which is the reason you would choose a 6700k over Ryzen. I'm going to assume CAD programs are typically more multithreaded so maybe Ryzen?

 

If you could get that 6700k and mobo closer to $200 USD, that seems really worth it, but $300 is tough to swallow, even if that's a good motherboard.

Can't say much about CAD, but if he uses Adobe Premiere, the 6700k would destroy the 1700's rendering times. 

CADD is very multthreaded.

 

It terms of a 6700k "destroying" an 1700's render times. I haven't used Premiere before, but looking online, I don't see how they stack up. These benchmarks show a 1700X clearly walking over a 7700k; which is a year newer than a 6700k.

 

Seems even at worse they are around the same within 10% in specific tests, but then the 1700x absolutely destroys the 6700k in something like rendering in CADD.

[Suika]

Just now, suchamoneypit said:

It terms of a 6700k "destroying" an 1700's render times. I haven't used Premiere before, but looking online, I don't see how they stack up. These benchmarks show a 1700X clearly walking over a 7700k; which is a year newer than a 6700k.

Do those results include hardware acceleration with Intel QuickSync? Judging by the lack of Coffee Lake, my guess is no.

 

Core count didn't mean everything in 2012 and still doesn't mean everything in 2018. It depends on the software and what it's capable of, too.

[suchamoneypit]

4 minutes ago, phillipmalecot101 said:

Perfect. That's exactly the info I was looking for.

Also worth noting if you cant find a 1700x for a good price, browese! more than likely there will be a good deal on a 1700,1700x, or 1800x, all of which would be pretty good. Ryzen 2 is out, but you pay for the newer stuff. Going one generation older gives you much better bang per buck.

[phillipmalecot101]

Ryzen 1700 (220) or 2600 (165)?

[TVwazhere]

2 minutes ago, suchamoneypit said:

CADD is very multthreaded.

Not all CAD software is built the same. Solidworks and Inventor for example only use a single Core (dual thread) for the actual modeling process, which depending on the work needing to be done, could be almost the entire use of the software. Only in render, analytical tests and flow simulations would multiple cores become a significant factor. 

[phillipmalecot101]

Just now, TVwazhere said:

Not all CAD software is built the same. Solidworks and Inventor for example only use a single Core (dual thread) for the actual modeling process, which depending on the work needing to be done, could be almost the entire use of the software. Only in render, analytical tests and flow simulations would multiple cores become a significant factor. 

Good to know. Thank you

[suchamoneypit]

Just now, Suika said:

Do those results include hardware acceleration with Intel QuickSync? Judging by the lack of Coffee Lake, my guess is no.

 

Core count didn't mean everything in 2012 and still doesn't mean everything in 2018. It depends on the software and what it's capable of, too.

Coffee lake is 8000 series. I don't know about QuickSync, but unless its a software implemented change then it wouldn't matter because he would be buying something 2 gens before coffee lake. And if it does, this is one very specific area. I understand certain CPUs are good at different things depending on brand, but you're focusing on one specific program and feature. That is not ideal for what is being asked. If all he is doing was rendering video, ONLY in premier, and with intel quicksync, then you might have a good point here.

[Suika]

2 minutes ago, phillipmalecot101 said:

Ryzen 1700 (220) or 2600 (165)?

Well then, with what TVwazhere said, it's easier to suggest the R5 2600 and some overclocking knowledge, or an X470 board and 2600X if you don't want to overclock. Better single threaded performance and still a lot of threads.

[suchamoneypit]

7 minutes ago, TVwazhere said:

Not all CAD software is built the same. Solidworks and Inventor for example only use a single Core (dual thread) for the actual modeling process, which depending on the work needing to be done, could be almost the entire use of the software. Only in render, analytical tests and flow simulations would multiple cores become a significant factor. 

Good point. A 1700x scores 159 around in cinebench for single-core, and a 6700k scores around 200. That is around 20% more performance, but when modeling (when you say you are using a single core), thats not super intensive, and in my opinion something a 1700x or similar would still easily handle, but while still excelling when it came to multi threaded. For reference, when modeling, I notice zero difference whether using my 1700x, 5820k, or my laptops 7200u when doing basic parts. When it comes to intensive modeling though, my 1700x dominates because of its threads. Drawing lines doesn't require much performance, thats not where the performance bottleneck is.

8 minutes ago, phillipmalecot101 said:

Ryzen 1700 (220) or 2600 (165)?

Depends on you preference. Ryzen 1600/2600 are still great, but they are Ryzen 5s and you go from 8 cores to 6 cores, which makes a decent difference in multithreaded workloads.

[TVwazhere]

3 minutes ago, phillipmalecot101 said:

Good to know. Thank you

Is CAD the #1 concern? (Assuming this will be primarily a "workstation oriented" system?) If so,  I'd actually consider the 6700K for it's very high single thread performance as long as you're not doing renders, flow simulations or any sort of analytical work. However if you do a lot of renders I'd probably go with more cores since that helps a LOT. 

 

AS an example, I went with the 7700K because I dont do any flow simulation, and I rarely do renders. I focus primarily on modeling and drawing.

[Suika]

6 minutes ago, suchamoneypit said:

I don't know about QuickSync, but unless its a software implemented change then it wouldn't matter because he would be buying something 2 gens before coffee lake.

QuickSync has existed since Sandy Bridge and Adobe added it as hardware acceleration in Premiere for better render times. As an example, i5-8600k is now one of, if not the best performing processors for Adobe Premiere in both timeline performance and render times. Technically an i9-7980XE will get slightly better render times, but at 9x the cost, you don't even get 1.5x the performance.

[suchamoneypit]

Its worth noting im not trying to go hardcore AMD fanboy here or trying to argue with the guys pushing for intel options. I do get their points, and if you do specifically what they say intel is better for (not rendering or doing heavily multi-threaded tasks), then I certainly agree. However in my personal opinion, I would always take maybe 20% less performance in a few areas that im not even likely to notice, in order to have WAY more threads which would help significantly in a lot more area.

 

Its like having a 1000hp drag-racing only car versus a highly modified 700hp street car. Obviously that drag car is going to be stupid fast in a straight line, and if all you're doing with the car is drag racing, its gonna be fantastic. But the street car can drive you to work, go on a track, and go drag racing while still having amazing performance. Just not as much as that drag car. When choosing parts its all about these comparisons and what you personally value.

[TVwazhere]

7 minutes ago, suchamoneypit said:

Obviously that drag car is going to be stupid fast in a straight line, and if all you're doing with the car is drag racing, its gonna be fantastic. But the street car can drive you to work, go on a track, and go drag racing while still having amazing performance.

That depends on how much drag racing you want to do, and that in the end should be the deciding factor. 

 

My recommendation is based on "Heavy CADD" (drag), "light video editing" (track) and "light gaming) (street). If both CAD and Video editing were of equal needs, or at least very similar, AMD definitely has the better value in that case.  

[phillipmalecot101]

After looking somewhat extensively. I found a 1800x for 215 but it won't work as well with my 2400 mhz ram and new ram these days is expensive. I got the guy to come down to 280 so I think I'm going to go 6700k for now. Still have to sell my motherboard regardless. Sigh.

 

Thanks for the help

[JoostinOnline]

$300 is a bad deal. If you want a 6700k then you can get one cheaper on eBay.

[phillipmalecot101]

1 minute ago, JoostinOnline said:

$300 is a bad deal. If you want a 6700k then you can get one cheaper on eBay.

It's 280 for a 2 year old delided 6700k that he told me he hit 4.9 and it includes the mobo which is Asus Maximus VIII z170. So I would be able to sell my motherboard and have a system for cheaper than ryzen, but the 1800x is a good deal and I'm conflicted..

[JoostinOnline]

2 minutes ago, phillipmalecot101 said:

It's 280 for a 2 year old delided 6700k that he told me he hit 4.9 and it includes the mobo which is Asus Maximus VIII z170. So I would be able to sell my motherboard and have a system for cheaper than ryzen, but the 1800x is a good deal and I'm conflicted..

I'm guessing it doesn't come with the cooler that let him hit 4.9GHz though, right?

 

Keep in mind that while Skylake is still relevant, it's not just a single generation old. We're getting 9th generation soon.

[phillipmalecot101]

1 minute ago, JoostinOnline said:

I'm guessing it doesn't come with the cooler that let him hit 4.9GHz though, right?

Well here's the sellers description for the "new" 1800x I am looking at. Is new really worth it?

"No box, Never installed, just been sitting for 2 months. Company CPU from our work computers and had a couple extra"

[JoostinOnline]

1 minute ago, phillipmalecot101 said:

Well here's the sellers description for the "new" 1800x I am looking at. Is new really worth it?

"No box, Never installed, just been sitting for 2 months. Company CPU from our work computers and had a couple extra"

What country?

[phillipmalecot101]

Just now, JoostinOnline said:

What country?

US. I think you've convinced me against the used 6700k