Intel 8350k or RYZEN 1500x

[IRobot23]

It's not a matter of believing you or not. I already know BF1 likes cores/threads. I upgraded from a 2500K to a 2600K and got much improved performance.

You say you have tested it on your own, what exactly have you tested? Have you run your 1600 next to a 8400 test bench to come to your conclusions? If not, then your claims about Ryzen IPC parity with CFL is just hot air, and quite frankly laughable as numerous reviews will point out that clearly isn't the case.

Just to be clear, I'm not disputing that the 1600 with its thread advantage will beat a 8400 in heavily threaded software. Not every application can take full advantage of 12 threads though, just keep that in mind.

About IPC like i said ryzen 1C/2T = 1C/2T kaby/coffee/skylake
https://cdn.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/cinebench-r15-740x371.png

I am not lying.

You are right, that it doesn't matter if we talk about which one is best for OP. Just don't go with i3 8100, Z370 and 16Gb of DDR4.

 

[tamz_msc]

Is 16Gb of ddr4 really good deal with i3 8100?
I mean you can get 8GB + R5 1600/i5 8400 for less money.

i3 8100 + Z370? Are you kidding me? You are huge intel fanboy.

For development work it's better to have more RAM, whether or not it's going to be paired with a quad core or hexa core. The price difference between the 1600 and the 1500X in India isn't that great, and the i5 8400 slots between the two. So the choice is really between the i5 8400 and the Ryzen 5 1600, however both of those choices would result in going over budget, assuming that the OP means 1050Ti level of performance when he's saying light gaming.

For development work it makes more sense to go with the Intel route even if it means getting the i3 8100 and a Z370 board, unless the OP is willing to wait till January for cheaper Intel boards, in which case he ought to choose the i5 8400 instead.

 

[IRobot23]

For development work it's better to have more RAM, whether or not it's going to be paired with a quad core or hexa core. The price difference between the 1600 and the 1500X in India isn't that great, and the i5 8400 slots between the two. So the choice is really between the i5 8400 and the Ryzen 5 1600, however both of those choices would result in going over budget, assuming that the OP means 1050Ti level of performance when he's saying light gaming.

For development work it makes more sense to go with the Intel route even if it means getting the i3 8100 and a Z370 board, unless the OP is willing to wait till January for cheaper Intel boards, in which case he ought to choose the i5 8400 instead.

i3 8100 and Z370 is just stupid. No offence.

 

[tamz_msc]

i3 8100 and Z370 is just stupid. No offence.

It isn't, because the alternative(1600 + A320 motherboard) costs the same. I've already made it clear why getting the Intel platform is preferable in this scenario.

 

[IRobot23]

It isn't, because the alternative(1600 + A320 motherboard) costs the same. I've already made it clear why getting the Intel platform is preferable in this scenario.

are you serious?

 

[tamz_msc]

are you serious?

Why do you think I'm not being serious?

 

[frozentundra123456]

This thread is getting a bit off topic in the context of the OPs original question. Debating over frametimes between an i5 8400 and Ryzen 1600, really?! The OP doesn't even have the budget for a mid range GPU so whatever differences there are between these CPUs in a gaming context will be purely academic.

@frozentundra WRT to BF1 MP the only site that I know to have tested this is computerbase: https://www.computerbase.de/2017-10/intel-coffee-lake-8700k-8400-8350k-8100-test/5/

No, Ryzen doesn't equal CFL clock for clock in BF1 MP as iRobot would like people to believe. Again though, I stress that this has absolutely no bearing on the OPs situation, he/she hasn't even replied to explain what 'moderate gaming' means, honestly if it's just for CS:GO or Overwatch etc then you could just about get away with the IGP on the CFL chips.

Irregardless, I dont like to see unsubstantiated claims presented as proven fact.

 

[Glo.]

All in all, OP has few choices:

Ryzen 5 1400, A320 MoBo, GTX 1050 Ti - around 350$ equivalent.
Ryzen 5 1400, A320, GTX 1050 - around 300-310$ Equivalent.
Ryzen 5 1600, A320, no GPU - around 230-250$ Equivalent.
i3 8350K, Z370 - 310$ Equivalent.
i3 8100, Z370 - 260$ Equivalent.

If you consider Value, and what you get for your money, one of first two picks will be always the best.

 

[Shmee]

Cool it guys. If you cannot stay civil then you should stay out of this thread, and stop derailing it. Enough with the back and forth bickering. Remember, member callouts are not allowed.

 

[bullzz]

I would add this to Glos choices.
Intel 8400 + GTX 1050Ti - around $330.
You should have enough to build you rest of the config under 50K
This has more value than Glos 2 choices IMHO. 2 more cores and better turbo clocks.

 

[slashy16]

I am confused on buying CPU 8350k or ryzen 1500x.

My work will be moderate gaming and lots of coding with Visual studio and android development. And little bit of photoshop and illustrator.

currently i dont own a graphics card.. My budget is around 50,000(INR)

Thanks in advance.

If you are overclocking the 8350k it will be significantly faster in Photoshop, Illustrator and Gaming. I agree with most people in this thread who say get the 8400 even if you need to wait another month.

 

[IRobot23]

If you are overclocking the 8350k it will be significantly faster in Photoshop, Illustrator and Gaming. I agree with most people in this thread who say get the 8400 even if you need to wait another month.

These are pretty old benchmark. I just don't know why would anyone buy i3 unless ST is all that you need. Otherwise you have i5 8400 if you must go with Intel. Even games doesn't run very well on 4 threads.

ryzen 5 6C and i5 8400 are to good to miss.

 

[slashy16]

These are pretty old benchmark. I just don't know why would anyone buy i3 unless ST is all that you need. Otherwise you have i5 8400 if you must go with Intel. Even games doesn't run very well on 4 threads.

ryzen 5 6C and i5 8400 are to good to miss.

Actually, it will run circles around Ryzen ST and anything using 4 cores or less. Depending on how high you clock it 4.8-5ghz I'm betting it will win its share of highly threaded benches. The benchmarks I linked are not old at all. Adobe is all about single thread performance. You need to remember that most applications generally take advantage of two cores with some using four. The sweet spot is still 4C/T for the majority of applications and will remain this way for a long time.

 

[IRobot23]

You probably never used photoshop. Okey, I am done.

No, 4C/4T is not sweetspot, not by a long shot.

 

[Glo.]

All in all, OP has few choices:

Ryzen 5 1400, A320 MoBo, GTX 1050 Ti - around 350$ equivalent.
Ryzen 5 1400, A320, GTX 1050 - around 300-310$ Equivalent.
Ryzen 5 1600, A320, no GPU - around 230-250$ Equivalent.
i3 8350K, Z370 - 310$ Equivalent.
i3 8100, Z370 - 260$ Equivalent.

If you consider Value, and what you get for your money, one of first two picks will be always the best.

I would add this to Glos choices.
Intel 8400 + GTX 1050Ti - around $330.
You should have enough to build you rest of the config under 50K
This has more value than Glos 2 choices IMHO. 2 more cores and better turbo clocks.

If the OPs budget is a bit higher, best Value proposition can be: Ryzen 5 1600, A320 MoBo, and GTX 1050 Ti.

 

[epsilon84]

You probably never used photoshop. Okey, I am done.

No, 4C/4T is not sweetspot, not by a long shot.

No, he is right about Photoshop, it's not very heavily threaded. If you compare the 7700K to the 8350K, HT at most adds about 5% to performance, so in Photoshop at least, 4C/4T is indeed the 'sweet spot'.

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/a...ormance-Core-i7-8700K-i5-8600K-i3-8350K-1057/

 

[Indus]

When I first read your post, I was like holy cow, a cpu costs 50000 INR in India? Then I went and looked at the conversion rate. So basically you're talking about 10000+ for CPU and a budget of 50000.

With that said.. for content creation instead of 4 cores, I'd go 6 and get the Ryzen 5 1600 for 12000 INR. Those 6 cores will help a lot with work.

Now about gaming.. before you just listen to anyone.. consider this.. what refresh rate does your monitor have? 60 hz or 144 hz or 240 hz? If you have a 60 hz monitor that means more than 60 frames per second is useless since the monitor cannot display them.

If that's the case, the Ryzen 5 1600 is KING for steady 60 fps.

So basically I'd do this for yourself.

Ryzen 5 1600
Asrock B350 motherboard
16 GB DDR4 memory
RX 580 video card
and whatever you have left spare, you can spend on a Solid State Drive.

 

[tamz_msc]

When I first read your post, I was like holy cow, a cpu costs 50000 INR in India? Then I went and looked at the conversion rate. So basically you're talking about 10000+ for CPU and a budget of 50000.

With that said.. for content creation instead of 4 cores, I'd go 6 and get the Ryzen 5 1600 for 12000 INR. Those 6 cores will help a lot with work.

Now about gaming.. before you just listen to anyone.. consider this.. what refresh rate does your monitor have? 60 hz or 144 hz or 240 hz? If you have a 60 hz monitor that means more than 60 frames per second is useless since the monitor cannot display them.

If that's the case, the Ryzen 5 1600 is KING for steady 60 fps.

So basically I'd do this for yourself.

Ryzen 5 1600
Asrock B350 motherboard
16 GB DDR4 memory
RX 580 video card
and whatever you have left spare, you can spend on a Solid State Drive.

The RX 580 alone will cost 25K, The 1600 and B350 board will be another 20K, so he's left with only 5K for the rest of the components.

We don't know if the 50K he's allocated is only for the CPU and GPU or the whole system. If it's the latter then putting together a PC with that amount of money limits options significantly. The i3 8100 is a more attractive choice in that case.

Plus you're forgetting his main use-case, which is Visual Studio and Android development. Personally I wouldn't want to deal with a faulty Ryzen CPU if software development is my main objective.

 

[Indus]

The RX 580 alone will cost 25K, The 1600 and B350 board will be another 20K, so he's left with only 5K for the rest of the components.

We don't know if the 50K he's allocated is only for the CPU and GPU or the whole system. If it's the latter then putting together a PC with that amount of money limits options significantly. The i3 8100 is a more attractive choice in that case.

Plus you're forgetting his main use-case, which is Visual Studio and Android development. Personally I wouldn't want to deal with a faulty Ryzen CPU if software development is my main objective.

No problems here with my ryzen in 6 months with software creation.

I've yet to come across a faulty CPU yet in 20 years +. Faulty motherboards yes. Faulty ram yes. Faulty gpu yes. But a CPU never!

 

[tamz_msc]

No problems here with my ryzen in 6 months with software creation.

I've yet to come across a faulty CPU yet in 20 years +. Faulty motherboards yes. Faulty ram yes. Faulty gpu yes. But a CPU never!

It seems like you're unaware of the issues Ryzen has with heavy compilation workloads.

 

[UsandThem]

It seems like you're unaware of the issues Ryzen has with heavy compilation workloads.

That issue has already been identified and corrected this past summer, with AMD replacing any CPU that is affected. AMD is not the only CPU manufacturer to have computation issues like this, BTW.

If you want to debate the performance, or the pros and cons between Intel and AMD processors and builds, fine. However, at this point segfault is a non-issue for people buying AMD CPUs, and what you are doing is getting close to spreading FUD.

 

[tamz_msc]

That issue has already been identified and corrected this past summer, with AMD replacing any CPU that is affected. AMD is not the only CPU manufacturer to have computation issues like this, BTW.

If you want to debate the performance, or the pros and cons between Intel and AMD processors and builds, fine. However, at this point segfault is a non-issue for people buying AMD CPUs, and what you are doing is getting close to spreading FUD.

AMD may have corrected the problem on their part but there is no way for the customer to ensure that he'll get a non-defective CPU. AMD only recognizes that a batch of CPUs from before a certain manufacturing date are problematic and provided that you've received such a CPU and show them that it's faulty, they'll replace it once you've put in an RMA request. This process can take anywhere from a couple of weeks to over a month, going by different posters on the AMD subreddit.

The thing is the OP has to decide if the trouble is worth it, if indeed it is found that the RYzen CPU he buys reports this issue. If he thinks it's worth the risk, then that's fine. I'm only saying that if it was my decision to make being in his position, then personally I would not have gone the AMD route.

 

[IRobot23]

No, he is right about Photoshop, it's not very heavily threaded. If you compare the 7700K to the 8350K, HT at most adds about 5% to performance, so in Photoshop at least, 4C/4T is indeed the 'sweet spot'.

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/a...ormance-Core-i7-8700K-i5-8600K-i3-8350K-1057/

Like I said first time.

Anyway then go with i3 8100 and Z370.
I just don't know why, but pentium g4560 and H or B board still sound way better.

 

[VirtualLarry]

It may be adding some fuel to the flames, but my (early-purchased) R5 1600 CPU, is spontaneously rebooted, when under a heavy CPU+GPU load, running WCG on 10 threads on the CPU, and F@H on the RX 580 (NOT overclocked, in fact, I have a WattMan -20% power limit set - it still hits 89C). It was previously overclocked, but has continued to re-boot, even after setting back to stock clocks. I also updated to the newest UEFI on my AB350M Pro4 board, UEFI 4.10. I have a similar rig, with an older RX 470 card, and it does NOT exhibit the reboots. The CPU was purchased, perhaps a month or two later than the first.

Does this sound like I have one of the buggy CPUs?

Oh yeah, PSU on the rebooting rig, is an Antec Neo Eco 620C, which I believe is made by SeaSonic, and the other rig, has a Rosewill 80Plus Gold 600W (maybe a "Valens"?).

Edit: The rebooting CPU is on water-cooling, a 120mm MasterLiquid Lite 120 model. Generally, temps are OK, they can hit high 70sC under heavy load, even with water.

Edit: I've installed the newest 17.12.4 (or is that .1) "Adrenaline" drivers, and set Power Limit -30%, and upped fan speed to 3000, and now the card is hovering around 74-77C.

So far, for one day, it's good. Maybe newer drivers fixed it?

 

[IRobot23]

It may be adding some fuel to the flames, but my (early-purchased) R5 1600 CPU, is spontaneously rebooted, when under a heavy CPU+GPU load, running WCG on 10 threads on the CPU, and F@H on the RX 580 (NOT overclocked, in fact, I have a WattMan -20% power limit set - it still hits 89C). It was previously overclocked, but has continued to re-boot, even after setting back to stock clocks. I also updated to the newest UEFI on my AB350M Pro4 board, UEFI 4.10. I have a similar rig, with an older RX 470 card, and it does NOT exhibit the reboots. The CPU was purchased, perhaps a month or two later than the first.

Does this sound like I have one of the buggy CPUs?

Oh yeah, PSU on the rebooting rig, is an Antec Neo Eco 620C, which I believe is made by SeaSonic, and the other rig, has a Rosewill 80Plus Gold 600W (maybe a "Valens"?).

89C? Thats your problem. When my GPU hits 95C PC reboots.

I have problems when 1 fan on GPU suddenly stops and need to start it manually.