Read more.Quote:
Two blockbuster CPUs are now available for under £400. Which would you choose?
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Two blockbuster CPUs are now available for under £400. Which would you choose?
The AMD Ryzen 7 1800X wins by default. The Intel i7-8700k is out-of-stock everywhere.
I'd go with AMD just because there'd be no need to replace the motherboard in the next six months, the Z370 chipset is nothing more than a 200 series with modified power circuitry to support a Kaby-lake CPU with a few extra cores.
AMD ryzen 7 just to say FU intel for years of negligible improvements and needless forced mobo upgrades
Neither thanks. Not because the CPUs aren't good, they're both great performers, but because both platforms are utterly gimped for anyone who wants 16X for the GPU, an 4X M2 and have one or more additional cards which needs 4X or better.
1800x next year when its on 12nm, or even now, if you want to pump up the NB Core voltage, which bring AMD to life
the i7-8700k has nothing much on the ryzen in standard benchmarks
1800X clearly wins right now.
The choice is more cores or more lanes from a company that has had its offices raided countless times for breaking anti trust laws....
Would have to say the Ryzen, at least it's in stock to buy !
Ryzen, purely for the part about not requiring a new chipset / mobo every single time you want to upgrade. Intel do themselves a disservice.
Intel as I don't like 2nd Place.:)
New DADDY in town...C U LATER AMD
Intel. But very begrudgingly.
I just want a CPU that is a meaningful improvement over my 2700K on an IPC basis. I know some day I'm going to have to spend £600 (CPU/mobo/RAM), and it really pees me off. It's 6 years old as of now, and it's still nothing more than a minor improvement.
Ryzen, both for the mobo/upgrade path issues, and an FU to the general "squeeze the sheep for money" mentality Intel has.
If I was going for either, it would be Ryzen. Performance wise, there isnt much in it right now, but AM4 socket is just a better long term prospect wheras we can say with almost 100% certainty that intel will change theirs after maybe 1 gen.
if i did not already have a ryzen 5 1600, i would try for the intel i5 8400 cause of the price and core count. it would be the first time in over 15yrs that i would own a intel chip. since i already have the motherboard, my next upgrade will be a ryzen 7 1700. i will give intel a big ups for finally moving away from convincing the world that 4 cores is all you need for most of your work. im still going to remain a AMD fan.
1800X
I can replace the CPU in a few years without needing another motherboard. If Intel follows their past behavior, a new mobo will be needed in 2019.
Try early-mid 2018, they're insisting on a new platform for their mainstream hexacore CPUs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moogly
Rumor has it the x390 board launches in 2018 to support 8C/16T mainstream i7s. x370 boards just now launching will not support these CPUs <ack!>. So yeah it won't even be a full year, again, between chipset/socket changes. We already had the 200 series launch this year to support Kaby Lake which was a 100 series refresh so at least we saw 2 gens of CPUs for the socket. Now the x370 for the shiny new coffee lake 6C/12T i7s, 6C/6T i5s and 4C/4T i3s...only to be told to get a mainstream 8C/16T i7 coffee lake in 6-10 months you need yet another chipset though same socket...the x390. Intel REALLY sucks on the chipset/socket front. AMD certainly has a win in that department making the R7/5/3 series far more compelling if your a constant upgrader. If you keep a CPU for 6+ years then the argument becomes moot. Regardless I would like to see Intel stop with all the ridiculous motherboard upgrades. Two generations should be the bare minimum between switchs and even that is a bit short, ideally 3-4 gens would be better. I get AMD put the presure on Intel with Ryzen but seriously 3 motherboard chipset releases in just barely over a year's time (by the time the x390 launches) is just ludicrous.Quote:
Originally Posted by aidanjtTry early-mid 2018, they're insisting on a new platform for their mainstream hexacore CPUs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moogly
But you still get plenty of people defending this on certain forums. The current defence seems to be that because they changed some power pins for CoffeeLake they needed to break compatibility, but surely no matter how much coffee they consumed to rush this product, there is now that they didn't know this back when the 200 series Kabylake motherboards launched.Quote:
Originally Posted by atomicWAR
And then not naming the socket anything different so filtering for LGA1151 is not enough when looking for CoffeeLake boards. This will be fun (not) for the less knowledgable DIYers.
I’m thinking about upgrading from z170 / 6700k to z370 8700k, but not for a few months. Not really interested in AMD
Is it true that only gamers will buy the Core i7-8700K but for those who use their time properly making money such as video editing, programming and design will buy the R7-1800x?
amd intel still needs to be flogged a bit more ;)
Both companies offer great products, but economics wise would probably go AMD, as it is cheaper to acquire... if it all comes down to that this variant do so you can do 10 or 4 more DPS here and there and the other one has some edge and vice versa...
Go with what is the cheapest option of the two is my opinion and what I would do today.
The 1800X isn't a great value option, I wouldn't recommend buying it. I do recommend buying the 1700 or maybe the 1700X for slightly better odds in the silicon lottery both of which are cheaper than an 8700K and can be overclocked on a board much cheaper. Plus, as they weren't rushed out to release, they're actually available.
AM4 being a supported platform for a number of years is also a bonus. Should be able to get a good upgrade at a later date if needed without swapping motherboards.
Since I am a FO4 player,the Core i7 8700k,even though I think the Ryzen 7 1800x and it's platform is better overall.
Thank you Bethesda! :(
Tired of getting over priced Intel and having to change boards all the time. I already have the 1700 and glad I bought it. The 1800x would be a great buy if it was the same price as the 1700x on sale.
For me, its 1700X. However i dont need any upgrade yet, so its just a pure vote.
I must say i am amazed that people are upgrading 2 gen old intels to another intels, mine 3770k is still doing the job nicely.
Anyway, since the core count moved, we can expect that more application will support paralellism better, and therefore AMD is just a better buy.
I\'d be more tempted to get a 8700k for consistently high performance as a gamer.
Still selling for ~£150 used aswellQuote:
Originally Posted by DevDrake
I will probably look at upgrading my i5-2500k to the i7-8700k at some point soon. I'm not really concerned about Intel changing the socket requirements as my current CPU/motherboard is nearly six years old, even if the cost is a little higher over similar time frames it'll not be noticed.
You wont notice if you are running 110 or 100 FPS average in X game on ultra settings... not that am a fanboy but if it means can save alot of credits on CPU/Mobo then would defineately throw the extra money towards a more kickass GFX card instead or m2 SSD or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by FRISH
So it's nealry 1AM and I'm about to go away on holiday so this seems like the perfect time to try and troll.
I agree with everyone who has said that the AMD platform will have better longevity, BUT I have to ask a question. How many people can afford to / need to upgrade the CPU so frequently that the mobo upgrade (and maybe even the RAM, I'm still on DDR3) isn't a requirement anyway? Yes there will be the odd person who uses CPU bound processes but most stuff can be done exponentially faster with GPGPU these days and so the CPU is becoming less and less relevant. Indeed for gaming the improvement you get from an i7 over an i5 is only signfiicant if you're playing at stupidly low resolutions in which case you're an idiot who should have spent more on your GPU / monitor. I personally find benchmarks which turn down the graphics settings to expose GPU bottlenecks in games totally useless as no one runs Doom 3 at 640x480 at the lowest settings. Run it at normal settings against the competition and see if you get any odd lag that shouldn't be there.
I think there's an excellent marketing strategy out there from Intel which makes their products seem more "solid". This may be a hangover from the old days when a cheap AMD CPU + cheap RAM made for an unstable system due to my cheapskate ways but that's the "feeling" I get when I see an Intel processor. It's interesting, totally unfounded (unless you count the recent RAM compatiblity fiasco) and something I'm acutely aware of to disregard in favour of objective criteria.
Personally, I think you just need to examine your needs, existing hardware and the capabilities of each CPU carefully. If one excels at benchmarks on a program you use then you should buy that if you have the cash. If you're a gamer, you should probably consider if you really need this kind of CPU horsepower and whether spending your money on a better GPU would be better. If you have the money to spend on a high end CPU and GPU, I would suggest strongly dropping the CPU spec down to a mid range i5 and giving me the surplus cash. Or maybe buying the missus something nice. Like a porno.
EDITED because my brain works faster than my alcohol addled fingers.
I'll take the R5-1600 or R7-1700, much better bang for the buck and already include HSF.
Either wait for 12nm ryzen or 8c/16t i7 on z390 for me. My I7 4790k is still more than enough performance in my games.
AMD wins, Intel's cpu's were sold out on the first day where I live,No ETA on next lot.
They only had a handful sent to stores, May as well have been a paper launch.
That's why Z390 will be well worth waiting for, it addresses both those issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agrippa
It's a fair point but back in the days of 939 and AM2/AM3 I changed CPUs quite a few times while retaining the same boards.Quote:
Originally Posted by philehidiot
But yeah now I tend to only change when i need a full overhaul, probably next year for me.
Could be they can't afford to drop the lump sum on a dream PC at once, so they're working up to it - eg put together the base of the system now, and upgrade to higher up the product stack once the next paycheck comes in. You could also upgrade a year or two after the part you're upgrading to has been released - so the 3 year old system you've been using can get a 1 year old CPU with more cores dropped in once whichever ryzen you're gone for starts showing it's ageQuote:
Originally Posted by philehidiot
1) You've got to wait a year till it's releasedQuote:
Originally Posted by ETR316
2) The roadmap show it for sale in parallel to the Z370 - so it's bound to cost more than Z370, which is already pricey. I bet it'll cost the same as low end X299 or TR systems, which both provide good IPC, good clockspeeds, and lots of IO
There's only £90 difference between the cheapest Z370 board and the cheapest X299 board, and the 7800x is £10 cheaper than the 8700k (and in stock). That means you're only paying £80 more for a system with the same core count, that should OC to the same speed (+/- a couple hundred MHz, 4.8GHz vs 5GHz), and a lot more IO. TR is substantially more pricey, but it's bound to come down in price over the next year (and starts at 8 cores)
Holding on for next year's 12nm Ryzen. Still using a 3770k.
Still no point to upgrade my i7 3770K. If i need more speed i can just adjust it to 5Ghz (5120 is the end of for my cpu, running under water)
I think i will upgrade when my mobo will die.
My mobo is dying, so I'm buying i7-8700K the moment it becomes available. I would gladly wait for Ryzen+, but I have no time, and I need the single-thread performance, so current Ryzen is out of question :(.
It seems Intel\'s 8700K had a "paper launch", as it\'s out-of-stock everywhere.
Does the performance increase REALLY warrant shelling out $600? I would say not.Quote:
Originally Posted by spye435
Honestly I\'m surprised anyone likes FO4 enough to base their CPU choice on it. Was the lack of dialogue, creation club etc. not a put off for you?Quote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
Its the fact I am at my mod limit and have built massive settlements,some upto 23 stories high with dozens of NPCs. My current modded playthrough is really very different from the normal game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozaron
With a Xeon E3 1230 V2 and a GTX1080,at qHD I can hit sub 30FPS in settlements,and the game is unplayable without an SSD.
This is what I have done as I tend to buy secondhand CPUs,but a major problem is since Intel changes sockets so much is if you are stuck with a decent CPU but when your motherboard goes you find getting a replacement harder. AMD tends to have made their motherboards much better with regards to compatibility. Someone with a Phenom II X6 for example,can even buy a replacement motherboard today if it still does the job.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xlucine
AMD is old now....Just wait for the 8700k chips to come back into stock....get your other parts lined up 1st...by then the chips will be back and ready to go.
The i7-8700k is $379 the 1800x $294 and the benchmarks don't show the i7-8700k worth the extra $100 plus the hole upgrade path of the AMD alone makes the 1800x a clear winner in my eyes .for rite now my i7-7700 will hold me over for a bit :)
AMD, but not the 1800x. I'd go for the R7-1700 and just clock it to 4Ghz. Plus you are gonna be keeping your motherboard for a while yet.
(P.S: I might be biased because iv'e already got a R7-1700 with 32GB RAM @2800MHz) System is very solid.
I have, and love, AMD's 1800x. Disappointing overclocks, but I knew that going in.
I'm on the fence about buying an i7 8700k, which is fine since 10/5 saw just an Intel paper launch. Maybe in a few months for my second rig that currently uses an i7 6700k with 5.1 OCs.
That's a lot of money to spend on what would basically be just adding 2 cores.Quote:
Originally Posted by rpjkw11
Its a tough call at the moment and based on the past, I wouldn't be 100% sure that an AMD mobo would still be good for future upgrades....they have messed that up in the past, could easily do it again. Forward compatibility isn't guaranteed.
Neither platform is really giving me the "buy me now" vibe. The intel launch seems half-baked and the AMD launch seems a bit beta-ish.
I noticed today that Overclockers UK are offering "pre-binned" 8700K for exuberant prices.
They have slapped a £800 price tag on 5.2 capable chips. I hope other sellers don't also start to do this sort of thing.
I would also choose Ryzen 1700, b350 and roughly 3000mhz RAM (maybe 3200).
This is almost my setup now and I'm very happy.
It's cheaper, but if you really want 144hz 1080p intel is an option if you can afford and cool it.
I wonder what they do with the rejects? IIRC my last intel CPU had tamper evident intel branded tape, and I'd be annoyed if someone had got into my brand new CPU before me - so selling them normally is probably out the windowQuote:
Originally Posted by Biscuit
Well, if someone wants to pay £800 for a CPU that will go 200MHz higher than "average", let them. It's their money they're pissing up the wall.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biscuit
They do them for 5.0, 5.1 and 5.2, from what I can see. So it's unlikely there will be any rejects.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xlucine
Are they delidding them or just checking all their stock for 5ghz+ capable ones?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonigan
Taken directly from the OCUK page:Quote:
Originally Posted by outwar6010
Quote:
Features:
- De-lidded by 8 Pack for upto 26c cooling running temperatures under load
- Guaranteed minimum overclock of 5.2Ghz with an AIO 240mm cooler with 1.35-1.425v
- Comes with 1yr guarantee, so should if fail you are completely covered by OcUK 12 month warranty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonigan
Its not so much about the money they're charging (although I do find it objectionable still), its about the principle of them doing it. Looking at the OCUK forums it looks like they have been doing this for a while with older generation chips as well.
Can't imagine they welcome debate about it on the forum all that much.
If I got a box with a broken seal, and it hadn't been advertised as "open box" with a reasonable discount, I would be demanding they sent a courier to collect it and replace it.
If I buy a K cpu, I expect to play the silicone lottery the same as everyone else.
Edit - So a little bit more reading:
Suppose that's fair enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibbo - OCUK Staff
That sounds reasonable. A delidded&prebinned i9 with a warranty would definitely be worth the extra, if you wanted the fastest thing possible, and a couple hundred pound premium on something that costs over a grand is definitely worth it for the warranty if you were planning on delidding anyway
And to save having the hassle and risks of doing it yourself, quite.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xlucine
Its because there are idiots jumping on the Ryzen is "slow" and hence "dead" for gaming bandwagon so retailers then will find ways of pushing the price of the limited supply of Core i7 chips too since its the ultimate E-PEEN chip. Its not the first or last time when hardware enthusiasts on forums overhype a CPU or GPU and the retailers laugh,plonk the price up and they still pay the stupid price for the honour of their E-PEEN,since they have considered anything else as rubbish so have to "live by the sword".Quote:
Originally Posted by Biscuit
Don't blame the retailers - blame the people who pay the prices when retailers start jacking them up at launch.
Launch quantities of the Core i7 8700K also look very low and also the number of orders too!!
So OcUK only sold 90 on launch day and 120 on the first two days - they had to scour the UK to get more stock to fill pre-orders.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibbo
Low supply = Poor yields?Quote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
You wouldn't think so given its the same tech as the 2 previous generations.
It seems it was probably meant to be released in early 2018 which makes sense if you look at the B360,etc being launched during that time too,and that the Z390 is also being released next year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biscuit
So Intel brought forward the launch,and this is probably why only the Z370 is available as many of the motherboards seemed to slightly rejigged Z270 ones.
Basically Intel is trying to put people off buying the higher end Ryzen CPUs though by dangling the Core i7 8700K in front of people,and it shows you how worried they must have been,to essentially crater sales of the Core i7 7700k an Z270 which are under a year old.
Edit!!
It also does make me wonder though - Zen+ is meant to be probably first quarter 2018,so by the time Intel actually gets the other chipsets launched and the Core i7 8700k out in decent quantity it might be not that long until Zen+ launches,unless AMD/GF screw that up!! ;)
https://www.techpowerup.com/237371/a...-february-2018
Hmm.
I think it's a terrible misstep. They launch these CPU's, get the review sites to proclaim the 6 core chips as "the best gaming CPU's ever", and then don't provide any stock - so consumers get told by intel that a 6 core chip is needed for gaming, and the only 6-core chip available is from AMD. The 7th gen intel is still available, of course, but who'd want to buy that when the latest gen stuff is the first to meaningfully improve upon the 2500k?Quote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
The response to the launch from the red team has been illuminating too. While many ryzen chips got cheaper before the launch, the 1600X has gone back up in price so that now a 1600X system exactly matches the cost of a 8400 system - dunno if this is AMD or the e-tailers setting the price (and I only looked at scan), but it's an interesting coincidence.
I'd say the low supply is more to do with the bringing forward of what they had planned, Ryzen probably prompted them to bring a launch they had planned for next year forward by a few quarters, hence the low supply as they've not had time to build up stock, it's also why IMO they modified what is in essence a 2 series chipset, rumors suggest the Z370 is a stopgap measure and they plan to release a Z390 in the second half of 2018, they probably planned to release CL then also.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biscuit
+1 for AM4 given promises to maintain platform until 2020+ whereas I think there is already noise that z370 might not support next gen. also there is dedicated x4 pcie nvme to cpu with AMD. Intel still seem to lump too much into the DMI link (although do offer more pcie lanes through this bottleneck)
ha ha not for 1440p gaming and especially modern DX12 games that are properly core optimised. Intel if you plan to play old games mainlyQuote:
Originally Posted by Troopa
only at 1080p gaming and DX11 (so old games). New games, DX12 and at 1440p the two are about the same so go AM4 so you know next gen supported and it's cheaper plus you get a cool free rgb fan if you're going for a build with looks and don't want to pay hundreds extra for a few effective more fps (as it becomes GPU limited at this res/api)Quote:
Originally Posted by FRISH
Given the option, I would go with the 8700k due to my usage. My most played game, World of Warcraft is heavily single-threaded. And thus favouring Intel.