Read more.Quote:
Going by recent leaks, is there a particular model that's tickling your fancy?
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Going by recent leaks, is there a particular model that's tickling your fancy?
1600X - although I believe it will be a 95W $299 SKU, and what your table shows as a 1600X is in fact a 1600.
If not, then hey, $259, sweet.
Ryzen 7 1700... the 65w is my main interest, but I like to see some benchmark first.
If money was no object it would obviously be the most expensive, as it is i think the 1400X could give a good cost/performance ratio.
Ryzen 5 1400X looks nice to me.
Currently using a core i7 2600k, so it would pretty much be the same performance, which is still enough for me. And i assume i can always pick one of the top tier ones later if i should need it.
The Ryzen 5 1400X or the Ryzen 5 1600X.
1700 or above... so basically any with the 8/16 cores :)
The 1700 if it overclocks well would be the obvious one to pick because the rest of it is likely the same, especially if it can 'boost' to 3.7 from 3 versus 3.8 from 3.4 of the 1700x
Mind you I'm not really into overclocking these days so I'd likely just pick the 1800x lol, compared with the intel 8 core offerings it's still a considerable saving :)
R7 1700X sounds like a proper replacement for my good old hexacore Xeon x5675
The whole range has caught my eye. I was originally thinking of going 'all-in' and getting a 16 thread monster (1700X most likely) but I don't think I need that much power. Everything from the 1400X upwards would be a great upgrade for me.
I'll likely see how the early adopters get on with clocks before making any decision. Plus I don't want to be dealing with REV 1.0 BIOSes.
I just spent the cost of a 1700X on dental surgery. Had to be done, but all that toy money gone along with my broken tooth :(
1600X looks like the sweet spot, but knowing me I will either be building a cheap machine and go for a 1200X or splurge on an 1800X. After all, I need a motherboard and DDR4 ram so the incremental cost of a complete platform refresh isn\'t that big a percentage.
None of them. If recent cpu history has taught us anything, then you wait for the second iteration of a new arch. Sandy, Phenom II, Piledriver were all significantly better than their immediate predecessors but only marginally improved with each successive generation.
Have a 4/8 at the moment, so the 1400X would be an attractive replacement at that price. The next one I would consider in terms of my requirements would be the 1600X. Anything more would be a total overkill for my usage. Welcome back AMD. I am glad I now have a competitive alternate again.
1600X as it seems the have the best price-performance ratio, unless the 1400X proves to be the much better overclocker.
None of them yet. I want to see independant reviews before I make my mind up. All we have at the moment is rumour and speculation.
1700X, Max cores and overclockable.
I want to wait for benchmarks really, though I agree that the 1600X seems to fit a nice spot for price/performance. I\'m not sure if the 1700X is worth almost twice the price when there\'s still a fair amount of applications that don\'t make the most out of multithreading. No idea if I\'ll upgrade, things are going fine but there is a little itch I have :D