QOTW: AMD Ryzen 5 1600 or Intel Core i5-7600?

[Eric F]

Would appreciate some views and comments on pre-built, customizeable systems available - which companies would people recommend? Interested in a R5 1600, SSD + 1or 2 gb HD, 1080p gaming rig. Hopefully in the £1k region. Should I maybe wait until Vega and see if that pushes down costs on 570s or 1060s??

[Spreadie]

Ryzen seems like an easy and obvious answer.

Where it gets interesting is when you're not building a gaming PC. The Ryzen line aren't APUs, whereas all the Intel ones are up to the HPET chips. I was looking at a Ryzen 5 1400 for a low-end rig for somebody who doesn't game, and the Intel offering is actually cheaper because of this. I was quite surprised.

Yeah, but the question was about R5 1600 vs i5 7600.

I understand your point but the APUs are coming later, and will likely be priced just as aggressively.

[alchemist83]

Ryzen 5 1600 and that is from a FO4 player where the Core i5 7600K has the edge. The fact of the matter is when I am helping someone with a build many people I know would want a £200 CPU to last a few years,and as time progresses the Core i5 7600K will be more of a limiting factor. It also does not help it cost more as a CPU,it lacks a cooler,the Z series motherboards cost more than the B series ones and to get the best overclocks you need to delid destroying the warranty.

I helped someone with a build a while back,and by the time I had added the cost of even a £25 to £30 cooler,the added cost of the Core i5 7600K and the slightly more expensive motherboard,it was not worth it as the money saved went towards an SSD in the build. Plus in the games like Overwatch there is no difference between the chips too,and for their work related stuff it looked superior.

Also if the rumoured sub £130 price for the 4C/4T Ryzen CPUs is true then pay nearly double for a Core i5 7600K over a Ryzen 3 1100 seems a tad pointless for me.

Maybe the 1600 is good value (personally I like the 1600X) however I have to point out you mistakes in this comment and the others. People yapping without knowledge, just angers me. You try compare a 7600k when we are talking non-k. A B Series MB is comparable to an Intel MB that IS NOT a Z. Only a X AMD MB compares to a Z INTEL. The cooler is crap. And a 7600 BEATS a 1600 in single core speed, making it making for gaming. The 1600 is better in multi tasking due to more cores. It is not more powerful. You lot lack experience. Bigging up you know nothing about. Noobs of tech shud STFU. 7600K vs 1600X = 1600X wins in terms of value and performance. 7600 vs 1600 = 7600 for gaming, 1600 for general. All jumping on the AMD train. Facts are such, dont go round making up BS to suit what you say.

[Tabbykatze]

Maybe the 1600 is good value (personally I like the 1600X) however I have to point out you mistakes in this comment and the others. People yapping without knowledge, just angers me. You try compare a 7600k when we are talking non-k. A B Series MB is comparable to an Intel MB that IS NOT a Z. Only a X AMD MB compares to a Z INTEL. The cooler is crap. And a 7600 BEATS a 1600 in single core speed, making it making for gaming. The 1600 is better in multi tasking due to more cores. It is not more powerful. You lot lack experience. Bigging up you know nothing about. Noobs of tech shud STFU. 7600K vs 1600X = 1600X wins in terms of value and performance. 7600 vs 1600 = 7600 for gaming, 1600 for general. All jumping on the AMD train. Facts are such, dont go round making up BS to suit what you say.

Wow, that was a roller coaster of "Lulz".

I think you're being a bit obtuse with how close the two processors are to each other, this is the difference of two very large quantities. Sure you lose a few FPS with AMD but that doesn't make "STFU YO, Intel am bestest and all youse can shaddup".

But the funny thing is, you've pretty much agreed with everyone here is that the AMD side using the 1600(X) would be the better choice, but sadly you are so wrong in A) your world view that everyone else is stupid and you're the God and B) making big swathing judgments in a less than 10% scenario.

I think you should work for Intel Marketing

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Maybe the 1600 is good value (personally I like the 1600X) however I have to point out you mistakes in this comment and the others. People yapping without knowledge, just angers me. You try compare a 7600k when we are talking non-k. A B Series MB is comparable to an Intel MB that IS NOT a Z. Only a X AMD MB compares to a Z INTEL. The cooler is crap. And a 7600 BEATS a 1600 in single core speed, making it making for gaming. The 1600 is better in multi tasking due to more cores. It is not more powerful. You lot lack experience. Bigging up you know nothing about. Noobs of tech shud STFU. 7600K vs 1600X = 1600X wins in terms of value and performance. 7600 vs 1600 = 7600 for gaming, 1600 for general. All jumping on the AMD train. Facts are such, dont go round making up BS to suit what you say.

Some of use have been around for building PCs for over a decade and have seen how things have changed. You know before Sandy Bridge you could actually overclock ALL Intel CPUs even on a £60 motherboard??

You don't even seem to get that, if you want to overclock an Intel CPU YOU NEED AN Z270 motherboard. Intel has on purpose made sure the H and B series motherboards are locked out.

With an AMD CPU you don't need the Z270 equivalent which is the X370 - there are even £65 motherboards with 9 phase VRMs.

What you don't seem to get is that the K series CPUs lack a cooler,so are ignoring the fact the Core i5 7600K still NEEDS a cooler to overclock even 100mhz or run at stock clockspeeds.

Most review sites have tested the AMD coolers,and the Wraith Spire is actually close to £20 to £25 coolers like the 212 Evo,which is quite decent for a stock cooler.

You have no clue about stock coolers too - the old Intel ones all had copper cores and large heatsink mass,which meant they were far better than the tiny ones we have today.

I also have loads of mates who are enthusiasts,and know people with both Ryzen and modern Intel builds,and I have made some direct criticisms of areas where it was lacking. There are also quite a few here who actually have Ryzen rigs and newish Intel rigs too,and the same goes over on OcUK.

People like Saracen,who agreed with me, have worked in the tech industry actually reviewing hardware,and a number have been enthusiasts even longer than me,and I am sure if that is not enough for you,you might want to talk to some of the people with orange,red and blue sigs!

[3dcandy]

To be honest I'm encouraged this kind of debate is happening again...

[Biscuit]

Maybe the 1600 is good value (personally I like the 1600X) however I have to point out you mistakes in this comment and the others. People yapping without knowledge, just angers me.

A B Series MB is comparable to an Intel MB that IS NOT a Z. Only a X AMD MB compares to a Z INTEL.

The cooler is crap.

You lot lack experience. Bigging up you know nothing about.

Noobs of tech shud STFU.

All jumping on the AMD train. Facts are such, dont go round making up BS to suit what you say.

The contradiction and irony is just too much.

[peterb]

Some of use have been around for building PCs for over a decade and have seen how things have changed. You know before Sandy Bridge you could actually overclock ALL Intel CPUs even on a £60 motherboard??

You don't even seem to get that, if you want to overclock an Intel CPU YOU NEED AN Z270 motherboard. Intel has on purpose made sure the H and B series motherboards are locked out.

With an AMD CPU you don't need the Z270 equivalent which is the X370 - there are even £65 motherboards with 9 phase VRMs.

What you don't seem to get is that the K series CPUs lack a cooler,so are ignoring the fact the Core i5 7600K still NEEDS a cooler to overclock even 100mhz or run at stock clockspeeds.

Most review sites have tested the AMD coolers,and the Wraith Spire is actually close to £20 to £25 coolers like the 212 Evo,which is quite decent for a stock cooler.

You have no clue about stock coolers too - the old Intel ones all had copper cores and large heatsink mass,which meant they were far better than the tiny ones we have today.

I also have loads of mates who are enthusiasts,and know people with both Ryzen and modern Intel builds,and I have made some direct criticisms of areas where it was lacking. There are also quite a few here who actually have Ryzen rigs and newish Intel rigs too,and the same goes over on OcUK.

People like Saracen,who agreed with me, have worked in the tech industry actually reviewing hardware,and a number have been enthusiasts even longer than me,and I am sure if that is not enough for you,you might want to talk to some of the people with orange,red and blue sigs!

The contradiction and irony is just too much.

I suspect the poster hasn't quite got the hang of the way we discuss things round here...

yet.

[Biscuit]

I suspect the poster hasn't quite got the hang of the way we discuss things round here...

yet.

Im sure a swift swing of Peters hammer should rectify any confusion

[Ozaron]

Would appreciate some views and comments on pre-built, customizeable systems available - which companies would people recommend? Interested in a R5 1600, SSD + 1or 2 gb HD, 1080p gaming rig. Hopefully in the £1k region. Should I maybe wait until Vega and see if that pushes down costs on 570s or 1060s??

Suggest you post this in one of the dedicated forums for such things rather than comments here. Lots of people will have lots of opinions. Personally I have nothing but positive things to say about OCUK, and other people like PCSpecialist a lot. As to GPUs, right now the entire mid-high end stack is low on stock for both AMD and NVidia AFAIK. Prices likely to be a little higher than value. I don't know if Vega will make that any better though.

[Spreadie]

Maybe the 1600 is good value (personally I like the 1600X) however I have to point out you mistakes in this comment and the others. People yapping without knowledge, just angers me. You try compare a 7600k when we are talking non-k. A B Series MB is comparable to an Intel MB that IS NOT a Z. Only a X AMD MB compares to a Z INTEL. The cooler is crap. And a 7600 BEATS a 1600 in single core speed, making it making for gaming. The 1600 is better in multi tasking due to more cores. It is not more powerful. You lot lack experience. Bigging up you know nothing about. Noobs of tech shud STFU. 7600K vs 1600X = 1600X wins in terms of value and performance. 7600 vs 1600 = 7600 for gaming, 1600 for general. All jumping on the AMD train. Facts are such, dont go round making up BS to suit what you say.

That's an impressive quantity of ignorance and arrogance in one paragraph.

Having owned and 6700K with a z series board (two actually) and a Ryzen 5 1600, I can confidently state you don't have a clue. The cooler is crap? Seriously? Have you tried overclocking with an intel stock cooler?

Corresponding intel CPUs do have an advantage in single core performance, something which is becoming less and less important - why else are Intel running scared? If you care to look at a bunch of gaming benchmarks, you'll see how wrong you are.

This whole intel for gaming amd for general crap is laughable - most people want the best single all round PC the can afford - right now, that means Ryzen.

[tomthum]

Ryzen 5 1600 - 6 cores and 12 threads is more future proof than 4 cores with 4 threads

[elites2012]

has anyone downclocked the i5 7600 down to the ryzen 5 160 clock speed in ANY REVIEW?? intel is going back to clock speed does matter and not work per clock.