Ryzen 7 2700x or Ryzen 5 2600x

110110

n00b
Joined
Jan 23, 2019
Messages
21
Time for an upgrade since I'm still running my AMD FX 8350 with a Geforce 970 and 8 gigs ram. I don't want to wait on ZEN3.

My concern boils down to this. Speed wise anyway. Go with the Ryzen 7 2700x while keeping existing Geforce 970 , or option 2. A Ryzen 5 2600x with a Geforce 1080 upgrade.

With the lower cost of the 2600x over the 2700x I might be able to squeeze in a Geforce 1080( or equivalent )with some extra cash if it would more than make up for what i would lose in speed by choosing the 2600x instead of the 2700x.

I thought about the Ryzen 7 1700x as well but no huge savings there.

Also would like any advice in choosing a MB for this upgrade which will be compatible with the upcoming AMD ZEN3 stuff which is coming out this summer from what i've read.

Any thoughts? I Hope this all makes sense. Just got off work and I'm half asleep. Thanks.
 

darrpara

Gawd
Joined
Apr 26, 2011
Messages
680
So, 2700x for ~$300 vs 2600x for ~$199. 8 cores vs 6 cores.

Right now I would go for the 2600x and go for the 1080 GPU upgrade for sure. I don't think the extra cores are worthwhile for most people and opting for the 2600x + new GPU is basically a new system

Do you plan on overclocking? If not a 2700 or 2600 might also be a good fit at ~$260 and ~$160 respectively.

Motherboard-wise I am partial to ASrock and the ASRock- B450 Pro4 is only ~$90 and should fit your bill. No need to worry about the compatibility. AMD has guaranteed compatibility until 2020 for the AM4. So, Ryzen 3 CPUs will work fine after a BIOS update from the MB manufacturer.
 

BoiseTech

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 15, 2018
Messages
442
Do you have a high refresh rate monitor? Do you have a need for 144+ FPS? I'd grab the best CPU now if at 60hz/1080p, until you can grab a better (more affordable) GPU later.

Also would like any advice in choosing a MB for this upgrade which will be compatible with the upcoming AMD ZEN3 stuff which is coming out this summer from what i've read.
.

Depends on what Z3 CPU you want to go to? The 570 chipset may be required for a 16/32 or 12/24 CPU. 8/16 Z3 may be locked to 470 and lower.

All a guess, but hard to assume where compatibility will lie. OR if you'll miss out on features like PB2 was present on 4XX but missing on 3XX.
 

110110

n00b
Joined
Jan 23, 2019
Messages
21
Looks like everyone is in agreement. After thinking more on it eventually if all goes well this will serve as the base system for the next gen AMD stuff coming out if I get the right MB so getting that GPU upgrade makes a lot of sense.

darrpara I do plan on OCing and I get your point and agree with your thought process. Thanks. Thanks for all the responses. It's a big help and very much appreciated.
 

MaZa

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
3,474
Most games don't use over 6 threads, so agreed.

And even if they do, 2600 has 12 threads. Now 8 real cores is always better than 6 cores and 2 split threads on top but the performace difference is pretty much nonexistent as far as gaming is concerned. 2700 is better in productivity work but 2600 is still a multithreading beast and won't run out of cores/threads for gaming anytime soon.

So yeah, go for 2600 and get a better GPU.
 

tangoseal

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 18, 2010
Messages
9,426
I run games pegged at 144hz on my 1070ti and 2600x.

I also run games I the high 190s and low 200s on my 240hz panel with my threadripper 2950x on 1080ti.

So it's the same CPU cores in the 2600x and 2950x and coupled with a good GPU delivers beautifully in games.

Thus 2600x and a good GPU will be wonderful. No need for more cores unless you need productivity. Spend the money on a better GPU.
 

MrC4

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
1,663
I think we are all in agreement that the 2600x is the way to go.
 

SimGuy

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 28, 2003
Messages
360
2600x w/ 1080.
I may be biased. :p

AM4 supposed to be Ryzen 3xxx friendly, but I'd guess that it's the quality of the VRMs that will limit CPU support for the next-gen upper tier CPU's on the X470 boards + BIOS updates from a reputable manufacturer.... but that's pure conjecture at this point.
$0.02
 

JRZoid

Weaksauce
Joined
Feb 1, 2019
Messages
91
Well I should get my New 2600x soon...a block leaked on it and even water was under the board and shit laying in it...killed the damn thing damaged it...well I have the Sycthe I can mount now..and yeahhhh I siliconed the Blocks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bink
like this

NKD

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
9,392
why not just get the regular 2600 and save some money and put it towards something else. Since they offer the same performance and same OC capability and not locked in anyway. I would rather do that then spend more on the 2600x to be honest.
 

110110

n00b
Joined
Jan 23, 2019
Messages
21
Thanks again for all the replies and ideas.
gerardfraser thanks for the link. Good read and makes a lot of sense. I had pretty much decided to go with the x version just so I'll have the option for OC.
 

gerardfraser

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
1,295
Thanks again for all the replies and ideas.
gerardfraser thanks for the link. Good read and makes a lot of sense. I had pretty much decided to go with the x version just so I'll have the option for OC.

I also went with the X version and it works great as excepted and building a new AMD rig was a delight and something new to play with .The AMD rig is my new gaming rig ,I am happy with gaming performance.
 

oneforspeed

Weaksauce
Joined
Jan 6, 2012
Messages
122
why not just get the regular 2600 and save some money and put it towards something else. Since they offer the same performance and same OC capability and not locked in anyway. I would rather do that then spend more on the 2600x to be honest.

I might have to agree here. I built a 2700x machine with a GTX1080 gpu. I liked it so much I built a 2600 machine for my office. Hindsight I would have built a 2600 (maybe an x) for my home machine and spent the saved money on a better motherboard or gpu. The 2600 is pretty stout. Bang for buck it wins in my opinion. You can build the machine with a 2600 and upgrade to Ryzen 3 later if you feel the need. They will be out soon. I might do the same after they drop in price.
 

NKD

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
9,392
Thanks again for all the replies and ideas.
gerardfraser thanks for the link. Good read and makes a lot of sense. I had pretty much decided to go with the x version just so I'll have the option for OC.

What do you mean option for OC. 2600 can be overcooked just like the 2600x .it has unlocked multiplier just like the 2600x.
 

maxius

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 17, 2001
Messages
3,376
Time for an upgrade since I'm still running my AMD FX 8350 with a Geforce 970 and 8 gigs ram. I don't want to wait on ZEN3.

My concern boils down to this. Speed wise anyway. Go with the Ryzen 7 2700x while keeping existing Geforce 970 , or option 2. A Ryzen 5 2600x with a Geforce 1080 upgrade.

With the lower cost of the 2600x over the 2700x I might be able to squeeze in a Geforce 1080( or equivalent )with some extra cash if it would more than make up for what i would lose in speed by choosing the 2600x instead of the 2700x.

I thought about the Ryzen 7 1700x as well but no huge savings there.

Also would like any advice in choosing a MB for this upgrade which will be compatible with the upcoming AMD ZEN3 stuff which is coming out this summer from what i've read.

Any thoughts? I Hope this all makes sense. Just got off work and I'm half asleep. Thanks.
i am running something worse than you are and im doing 1400p at ultra all day long at this stage id do a gpu upgrade and wait till the x570 boards are out.

the issue im seeing you do the cpu, board and ram you are still going to hit a wall. what would aid us is your complete system specs.

the huge question is do you have a ssd?
 
Last edited:

Westwood

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
8,425
Don't want to hijack the OP's thread, but while I have you guys on the phone...

what about a lowly guy running 1080p @ 60hz? Was thinking a 2700x, but 1700x may suffice. GPU is a 1060 6GB.
 

Stoicz

n00b
Joined
Jul 24, 2018
Messages
27
Don't want to hijack the OP's thread, but while I have you guys on the phone...

what about a lowly guy running 1080p @ 60hz? Was thinking a 2700x, but 1700x may suffice. GPU is a 1060 6GB.

Getting a first gen ryzen x CPU(1700x) is sort of pointless and a bit of a waste of money. They both have the exact same boost algorithm. That is, they both downclock to their base clock speed once a load of more than 1 core is applied. Better off with a non-x first gen, as they come with decent stock coolers. I use a 1700 myself and run it 24/7 OC'd to its boost speed of 3.7 with the stock cooler.

If you're only playing games at 1080p60, then I'd say most Ryzen x600 & x700's, both first & second gen would work fine for you, just keep in mind that the first gen x-series don't have stock coolers.
 

Westwood

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
8,425
Getting a first gen ryzen x CPU(1700x) is sort of pointless and a bit of a waste of money. They both have the exact same boost algorithm. That is, they both downclock to their base clock speed once a load of more than 1 core is applied. Better off with a non-x first gen, as they come with decent stock coolers. I use a 1700 myself and run it 24/7 OC'd to its boost speed of 3.7 with the stock cooler.

If you're only playing games at 1080p60, then I'd say most Ryzen x600 & x700's, both first & second gen would work fine for you, just keep in mind that the first gen x-series don't have stock coolers.
mmk. I'm on a 3470 right now and have a build in the works. keep going back and forth weather to blow my wad on it, or just keep in modest.
 

dragonstongue

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Messages
3,162
Wrong thread and all not want to hijack ( I was wondering this same thing ty all for the replies of love the 2600 x and non x ,
I wanted a 2700x just to say "I have the best of a current generation" but sadly at this time my $ is not that "free" to ~$180 difference.

For me it would be an X as long as folks do not really notice with the 2xxx "stutter" or whatever when it do its boost clock/idle bit, I have not noticed such with my venerable PH II, would hate to have something supposedly much faster but feel like it having a coughing fit LOL.

That and I suppose why be burning 105+w when can burn only 65+w get still very playable performance without kicking the bank as hard.

-----------------------------------

I was wondering, maybe you folks at [H] know?

MSI B450 Pro Carbon AC is probably best overall B450 as it stands, unfortunately not every place carries it like they once did, same with RX 570 8gb OC MK2.

few that do price higher than normal ( not by much, but has been increase little amounts as it is being delisted other places? ) or have it as "product delisted"..... Anyone know anything about this?

anyways, was just curious, leaving the thread now, take care all, safe march break.
 

110110

n00b
Joined
Jan 23, 2019
Messages
21
i am running something worse than you are and im doing 1400p at ultra all day long at this stage id do a gpu upgrade and wait till the x570 boards are out.

the issue im seeing you do the cpu, board and ram you are still going to hit a wall. what would aid us is your complete system specs.

the huge question is do you have a ssd?

Yes, I do have an SSD. I'm still debating on what to do because I was thinking about the same thing. Here are my specs: AMD FX8350 Black addition, 8 gigs DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 GPU w/3gigs mem, Gigabyte 970 SLI AM3 socket, DDR3, Samsung 1 gig SSD card., Corsair CX750M Power supply.

I run ultra on the older games but on the newer games like Witcher 3, or X Foundations I have to back off to high, or even less. I want to get the best graphics again. if I can anyway.

I know I need an upgrade on RAM but I hate to spend money on any more DDR3 RAM knowing that everything is going towards DDR4 and soon 5. And if I put what money I have into a better GPU then I'm still stuck with the FX8350, and 8 gigs Ram.
Thanks for the comments.
 

maxius

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 17, 2001
Messages
3,376
Yes, I do have an SSD. I'm still debating on what to do because I was thinking about the same thing. Here are my specs: AMD FX8350 Black addition, 8 gigs DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 GPU w/3gigs mem, Gigabyte 970 SLI AM3 socket, DDR3, Samsung 1 gig SSD card., Corsair CX750M Power supply.

I run ultra on the older games but on the newer games like Witcher 3, or X Foundations I have to back off to high, or even less. I want to get the best graphics again. if I can anyway.

I know I need an upgrade on RAM but I hate to spend money on any more DDR3 RAM knowing that everything is going towards DDR4 and soon 5. And if I put what money I have into a better GPU then I'm still stuck with the FX8350, and 8 gigs Ram.
Thanks for the comments.

here my help

https://www.ebay.com/itm/PATRIOT-16...247240?hash=item1a77929e88:g:eScAAOSwqHFcfzQe

id grab a 1660ti or wait till a Vega sale ive seen the good 56 cards with 8gb hmb2 for 280ish or find someone in the forum willing to sell :D

keep a eye on slickdeals.com it will likely be there this friday or sunday the fun thing is once you have the video card sorted when you pull the trigger on your new build you dont have to do anything :)
 

110110

n00b
Joined
Jan 23, 2019
Messages
21
What do you mean option for OC. 2600 can be overcooked just like the 2600x .it has unlocked multiplier just like the 2600x.
AI'v read the article and watched a few videos which put the stock 2600x over the stock 2600 in performance.
why not just get the regular 2600 and save some money and put it towards something else. Since they offer the same performance and same OC capability and not locked in anyway. I would rather do that then spend more on the 2600x to be honest.


Ok here's one reason.
why not just get the regular 2600 and save some money and put it towards something else. Since they offer the same performance and same OC capability and not locked in anyway. I would rather do that then spend more on the 2600x to be honest.

Thanks for your thoughts. I was wanting the 2700x but decided to step down for practical reasons to the 2600x. I did look at the non X version and the differences and this is what I saw.

Here's one reason as posted above by gerardfraser - https://hardforum.com/threads/amd-precision-boost-2-and-wraith-prism-deep-dive-h.1959636/

Also, I've seen some videos comparing the two at stock and the non x version seems to always come in behind the x version in many different tests. I don't know how much stock to put into a youtube video but they all seem to say about the same thing. That's it. I'm certainly no expert on the subject. All I have to go on is what I can read and other peoples opinions, or advise.
 

NKD

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
9,392
AI'v read the article and watched a few videos which put the stock 2600x over the stock 2600 in performance.



Ok here's one reason.


Thanks for your thoughts. I was wanting the 2700x but decided to step down for practical reasons to the 2600x. I did look at the non X version and the differences and this is what I saw.

Here's one reason as posted above by gerardfraser - https://hardforum.com/threads/amd-precision-boost-2-and-wraith-prism-deep-dive-h.1959636/

Also, I've seen some videos comparing the two at stock and the non x version seems to always come in behind the x version in many different tests. I don't know how much stock to put into a youtube video but they all seem to say about the same thing. That's it. I'm certainly no expert on the subject. All I have to go on is what I can read and other peoples opinions, or advise.

I was just referring to unlock portion. You an OC both. Depends on the price you paid for it. Last week I saw 100 dollar difference between the x and the non x version. I honestly wouldn't pay that much for it.
 

ReaperX22

Gawd
Joined
Oct 29, 2013
Messages
720
AI'v read the article and watched a few videos which put the stock 2600x over the stock 2600 in performance.



Ok here's one reason.


Thanks for your thoughts. I was wanting the 2700x but decided to step down for practical reasons to the 2600x. I did look at the non X version and the differences and this is what I saw.

Here's one reason as posted above by gerardfraser - https://hardforum.com/threads/amd-precision-boost-2-and-wraith-prism-deep-dive-h.1959636/

Also, I've seen some videos comparing the two at stock and the non x version seems to always come in behind the x version in many different tests. I don't know how much stock to put into a youtube video but they all seem to say about the same thing. That's it. I'm certainly no expert on the subject. All I have to go on is what I can read and other peoples opinions, or advise.

Of course it's faster. It's clocked faster. And boosts higher. In the same generation even looking at the specs you could determine that.

What everyone is saying is that if you're happy to overclock, you can get essentially the same performance from a 2600 that you can get from a 2600x, for less money.
 

dragonstongue

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Messages
3,162
I always looked at simple "graphs" from userbench site, I look at rouch percentage perfrmance site to site and compare the + or - % per core, per thread, per dollar etc.

I know for a while the 1600 was "the" just before 2xxx launched, then it became 1700 (though it has been such more or less since day it launched depending on price)

2600 and 2600x to me seems a simple math % ( in my mind) if the % gain is within a certain small range, then x is worth it, above that range non x .. course I do not mind OC if need be or whatever.

^.^
 

Nobu

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
8,846
Of course it's faster. It's clocked faster. And boosts higher. In the same generation even looking at the specs you could determine that.

What everyone is saying is that if you're happy to overclock, you can get essentially the same performance from a 2600 that you can get from a 2600x, for less money.
That's not true in every case, though. A 2600x can boost higher than an all core OC on a 2600 (confirmed by [H] and a few other sites, iirc) given enough cooling, and in some situations that is preferable to an all core OC.
 

tangoseal

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 18, 2010
Messages
9,426
I have a 2950x and 2600x. Both feel fast af in everything. Just sayin'

2700x is only gonna be 2 cores faster than 2600x for more money. So weigh your needs appropriately. Any video rendering etc... go with 8 core. If your just handbraking then 6 is fine. If your staxrippin go with 8.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nobu
like this

ReaperX22

Gawd
Joined
Oct 29, 2013
Messages
720
That's not true in every case, though. A 2600x can boost higher than an all core OC on a 2600 (confirmed by [H] and a few other sites, iirc) given enough cooling, and in some situations that is preferable to an all core OC.

I agree, though we're talking generally within a margin of 100-150mhz max, so depending on the price gap may or may not be worth it. For me, 2600 cost me 210? (AUD), 2600X was like 329+ at the time. Depends I guess!
 
Joined
Dec 18, 2016
Messages
2
So, 2700x for ~$300 vs 2600x for ~$199. 8 cores vs 6 cores.

Right now I would go for the 2600x and go for the 1080 GPU upgrade for sure. I don't think the extra cores are worthwhile for most people and opting for the 2600x + new GPU is basically a new system

Do you plan on overclocking? If not a 2700 or 2600 might also be a good fit at ~$260 and ~$160 respectively.

Motherboard-wise I am partial to ASrock and the ASRock- B450 Pro4 is only ~$90 and should fit your bill. No need to worry about the compatibility. AMD has guaranteed compatibility until 2020 for the AM4. So, Ryzen 3 CPUs will work fine after a BIOS update from the MB manufacturer.

I just did a build with the 2700 and ASRock B450 Pro4. I have had 0 issues. Lots of fan headers and its fan profiles are keeping the system pretty cool. I went with the 2700 over the 2600 because I was doing a project for school that was thread heavy and thought "why not?". But everyone's use case is different.
 

CAD4466HK

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
1,612
Curious why you make that distinction there?

Using the x264 encoder in Handbrake with more than 6 threads, leads to diminishing returns, unless you run 2 instances. The x265 encoder is capable of using more threads, but doesn't scale as well as the first 6 threads. Apparently StaxRip can utilize more cores/threads.
 

tangoseal

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 18, 2010
Messages
9,426
If only AMD would get AVX512 extensions on the Threadripper/Ryzen 3rd Gen that would be awesome...

15% increase over regular AVX/AVX 2 is quite substantial.

Anyways like I said earlier, just weigh your core needs before getting huge eyes for power. I can't tell the difference in gaming at all, literally, between my 2600x and my 2950x. Those are two SUBSTANTIAL differente product segments and target markets too. Ryzen cores are all the same, TR has more, 2600x has less, 2700x has 2 more, but performance wise you'll only see it scale in appropriate workloads.

Honestly given the sale prices right now for the 2700x I would rather just get the 8 core slab over the 6 core hunk. Just gives you more future in your chip. Keep in mind the thermal and power needs are a little bit more on the 8 core so plan your board and cooler accordingly. Around $40 per core more for the 2700x vs the 2600x.

upload_2019-3-10_23-53-2.png
 

Algrim

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 1, 2016
Messages
1,786
Using the x264 encoder in Handbrake with more than 6 threads, leads to diminishing returns, unless you run 2 instances. The x265 encoder is capable of using more threads, but doesn't scale as well as the first 6 threads. Apparently StaxRip can utilize more cores/threads.

That must be a Windows thing. My x264 12c encodes are far faster (not exactly linear but close enough to matter) than 6c. If you're a hobbyist I guess it really doesn't matter but when you have a couple hundred thousand dollars on the line to deliver on time I let it rip with all 12c/24t.
 

tangoseal

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 18, 2010
Messages
9,426
That must be a Windows thing. My x264 12c encodes are far faster (not exactly linear but close enough to matter) than 6c. If you're a hobbyist I guess it really doesn't matter but when you have a couple hundred thousand dollars on the line to deliver on time I let it rip with all 12c/24t.

Hundreds of thousands? For what?
 

CAD4466HK

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
1,612
That must be a Windows thing. My x264 12c encodes are far faster (not exactly linear but close enough to matter) than 6c. If you're a hobbyist I guess it really doesn't matter but when you have a couple hundred thousand dollars on the line to deliver on time I let it rip with all 12c/24t.

Not saying more cores won't finish your project quicker.
As an example, I have a client that has a wildlife video centric Youtube channel, that recently upgraded from a i7 9700K to a i9 9900K. According to his tests using HEVC, his gains were around 20% in Handbrake, coming from 8c/8t to 8c/16t . In my eyes those are diminishing returns for the money he spent. Granted that is on W10 and the extra grunt was the result of HT. But he is ok with that.

But as you said, if your on a deadline and doing this as a source of income, more is always better when this is your bread and butter and money is on the line.
 
Top