Ryzen5 1600 vs i7 3770(non K) For Games

[DeadlyTitan]

I originally wanted to buy an i7 8700(non K), but the non availability of cheaper non overclocking motherboards drove me towards Ryzen5

My current choices are i7 3770, or go Ryzen 5 or Wait for Non overclocking motherboards to appear for i7 8700

So, between R5 1600 and i7 3770 which one of them is better for gaming?

Money is not an issue, i just wanted to know that am not necessarily degrading if i choose R5 1600 over i7 3770 in games, i asked cause some of my friends said that Ryzen is not really good for gaming, and its targeted towards workstations and am better off with an i7 3770. Also i do play a lot of CPU intensive simulation/war multiplayer games like Total War, City Skylines, Civilization, Planet side 2, Script Heavy Skyrim, PCSX2 (PS2 Emulator) and some older games that relay on strong single core performance.

I currently have an i3 2120 and was thinking about dropping an i7 3770 but i would like to know how Ryzen 5 1600 will perform in games compared to i7 3770.

my current system specs

• 1060 6GB
• i3 2120
• 512 GB SSD
• 500W Seasonic PSU
• 16 GB DDR4 Ram

 

[IRobot23]

- i7 8700 might be TDP limited on some motherboards, so it won't clock as well as it could (Some will disagree it, but i7 8700 is not 65W TDP at 4,3GHz)

- As for i7 3770, depends on games you play. If you can get i7 3770 cheap then go with it and you can simply upgrade later if you needed.

- R5 1600 is solid choice, but you won't reach high frequencies. I have seen city skyline running pretty much insanely good with Ryzen. Anyway you might get higher clock with pinnacle or even waiting for 7nm which "should be made" for 5GHz.

If I were you I would try to get i7 3770 as cheap as possible.

 

[DeadlyTitan]

how long do u think i can hold on to that i7 3770?

 

[IRobot23]

for old games?

 

[epsilon84]

The 3770 would be a huge upgrade over your i3, its not much slower than a stock R5 1600 for gaming so its the most cost effective upgrade option for you since its a drop in upgrade.

The 8700 would be a step above both the 3770 and 1600, but to be honest you wont see much difference on a GTX 1060. You will need a faster GPU to see the performance gain from a 8700.

If I were you, I would just drop in the 3770 for now, and reasses your options when cheaper Intel mobos come out, which should be around the time of the updated Ryzen chips as well. The 3770 will hold its own in games for the meantime.

 

[DeadlyTitan]

for old games?

For in general, Old single threaded CPU heavy games. and also for MP games although the only MP game i play regularly play is planetside2 and maybe warframe.

 

[mikeymikec]

I'd triple check that you can use a 3770 in your Sandy Bridge board. My wife's SB board officially lists Ivy support yet doesn't work with one.

 

[DeadlyTitan]

I'd triple check that you can use a 3770 in your Sandy Bridge board. My wife's SB board officially lists Ivy support yet doesn't work with one.

Might need a Bios update,

 

[mikeymikec]

Might need a Bios update,

Or even a double BIOS update, and still not make any difference. I'd rely on someone saying "I have that CPU and mobo and with such-and-such BIOS update, it worked".

 

[DeadlyTitan]

Or even a double BIOS update, and still not make any difference. I'd rely on someone saying "I have that CPU and mobo and with such-and-such BIOS update, it worked".

Well, to be fair, am not really sure, it does says it supports Ivy Bridge.

 

[mikeymikec]

Well, to be fair, am not really sure, it does says it supports Ivy Bridge.

Ditto, and at least for me at the time it wasn't quite so irritating because the i3-3225 I had intended for her machine ended up going into a new build for a customer, but I imagine for you if the 3770 doesn't work in your board then it'll be an expensive paperweight. If you're lucky then someone here will have tried the same combination of board and CPU, but if if not I assume the board manufacturer will have their own forums and maybe you'll get a result there.

 

[el etro]

Games today don' scales well with over than 4 cores. Grab a used 3770non-K and your build is ready to play for two more years to come.

 

[NTMBK]

You don't have DDR4, you have DDR3- you would have to buy all new memory to move to Ryzen, on top of the motherboard and CPU. Not worth it! Just drop in a 3770.

 

[frozentundra123456]

If money is not a major issue, why wait. How much can you save by waiting, maybe a hundred dollars? A z board will allow you to use faster ram as well. If you wait for cheaper motherboards, you could also consider the i5 8400, which turbos to 3.8 on all cores and is under 200.00.

I consider a 3770k overclocked to above 4ghz to still be a solid gaming cpu, but would be less confident of the non-k versions. It will be the cheapest option by far, obviously, if it will work in your motherboard. You could try it, and if not satisfied, resell it.

 

[frozentundra123456]

- i7 8700 might be TDP limited on some motherboards, so it won't clock as well as it could (Some will disagree it, but i7 8700 is not 65W TDP at 4,3GHz)

- As for i7 3770, depends on games you play. If you can get i7 3770 cheap then go with it and you can simply upgrade later if you needed.

- R5 1600 is solid choice, but you won't reach high frequencies. I have seen city skyline running pretty much insanely good with Ryzen. Anyway you might get higher clock with pinnacle or even waiting for 7nm which "should be made" for 5GHz.

If I were you I would try to get i7 3770 as cheap as possible.

Any documentation from a reliable source that an 8700 won't run at all core turbo under gaming workloads?

 

[SPBHM]

DDR4 is too expensive, if you have 16GB of DDR3 and a 1155 MB it makes perfect sense to buy the i7 and save some money overall.
the performance is going to be close enough in most games.

 

[DeadlyTitan]

When i said money is not an issue, i mean i have enough to upgrade to ryzen platform (new build), no i do not have DDR4. I currently have an Asus H61M-CS Board that also supports Intel Ivy bridge CPU's, or so it says.

Am not an overclocker, am just happy with a non k CPU, knowing that it is working at its 100% potential than buying a K chip and worrying if i am not pushing it enough to utilize its 100% potential. Its just a piece of mind thing, helps with my OCD, which is also the same reason why i do not like buying Z370, cause it bothers me a lot if i buy something and never use it to full potential.

However its an entirely different story if you consider Ryzen cause you are not essentially paying for an unlocked chip.

 

[el etro]

If you are power conscious, then sell your kit and then get a B350 mobo, Ryzen 7 1700 or Ryzen 5 1600(if you're even more power conscious) and 2x4 GB of DDR4 with 1.2v operating voltage.

 

[frozentundra123456]

If you are power conscious, then sell your kit and then get a B350 mobo, Ryzen 7 1700 or Ryzen 5 1600(if you're even more power conscious) and 2x4 GB of DDR4 with 1.2v operating voltage.

How much difference is there in power consumption between a Ryzen 1600/1700 and a Coffee Lake 8400/8700 non-k? Pretty much negligible in my opinion. People keep trying to paint Ryzen as some miracle of efficiency while Intel is a power hog. Not true at all except for highly overclocked chips. And for that supposed efficiency of Ryzen, especially the 1700, one sacrifices single thread performance.

 

[Topweasel]

How much difference is there in power consumption between a Ryzen 1600/1700 and a Coffee Lake 8400/8700 non-k? Pretty much negligible in my opinion. People keep trying to paint Ryzen as some miracle of efficiency while Intel is a power hog. Not true at all except for highly overclocked chips. And for that supposed efficiency of Ryzen, especially the 1700, one sacrifices single thread performance.

The increase is the mixture of clock speeds, core count, and power usage. The 1700 is an 8 core CPU at 3.3GHz that only uses 60w. Yes Ryzen sacrifices some IPC (though who is to say that they did that to get power usage down) and max clocks (this contributes to the power usage though).

You only need to look at the numbers for Raven ridge to see the efficiency. A 4 core CPU with a large IGP running at Ultrabook/Tablet power usage. Or a 32 core running mid 2GHz CPU on Epyc.

The 8400 us barely clocked over the 1600/1800, both of which have more cache. The 1600 has SMT on for its cores. The 1700 has 2 more cores and SMT. Even the 8700 only looks as good as it does against the 1600/1600x/1700 if maintains it's turbo long term on all boards. Even then a 1600x is pretty close at nearly $100 less.

So there is efficiency there to be had. I think the major point is that Intel offers Halo chips in the -k chips that bring their CPU's well out of the range of any competitors offerings. To do that and honestly all of Skylake and Kabylake (and by definition Coffee Lake) has been taking the ultra conservative broadwell efficiency and tweaking it for outright clock speeds. This allows for really high turbos and really well clocked Halo's. But it wouldn't take a lot to tweaking it back to being more efficient. I think it's why Intel seems even more driven to segment their offering in terms of platforms. They can start being a little more mobile focused on some variations and more performance driven with others while not changing up too much.

 

[kawi6rr]

Get the Ryzen it'll last you many years to come and will perform very well.

 

[epsilon84]

If you are power conscious, then sell your kit and then get a B350 mobo, Ryzen 7 1700 or Ryzen 5 1600(if you're even more power conscious) and 2x4 GB of DDR4 with 1.2v operating voltage.

I don't understand this logic at all. You're suggesting the OP spend hundreds of dollars on a platform upgrade for a negligible performance gain compared to a drop in upgrade of a 3770, PLUS you're suggesting a downgrade from 16GB of RAM (which the OP already has) to 8GB of DDR4? All to save a few watts? Is a 1600 even that much more efficient than a 3770, both at stock speeds and volts? I'm not convinced it is. FWIW the 3770 has a TDP of 77W compared to 65W on the 1600. That's hardly a big enough difference to warrant spending hundreds of dollars on.

I seriously wonder if all the votes and posts recommending Ryzen are even taking into account the OPs current situation and platform? You are advocating spending $400 for a new platform instead of a $100 drop in upgrade, for pretty much the same gaming performance.

 

[coercitiv]

Normally the best choice would be the 3770, however it all depends on the shape your motherboard is in. If your motherboard is in good condition then the 3770 will be enough for the next 1-2 years, giving you the opportunity to buy into a new system when DDR4 prices go back down and the AMD platform has matured. (no matter if you choose Intel or AMD at that time, your options will be better, the RAM price drop alone will likely compensate for the 3770). However, if your motherboard decides to shorten it's presence on earth during the upgrade operation or shortly after (old hardware can do that), then you might end up in a bit of a pickle.

Personally I would attempt the 3770 upgrade (low risk, high reward, especially if the MB looks in good condition during a visual inspection and the system has been rock stable until now). However if things go south and hardware starts to fail or refuses to work with the 3770, I would not attempt to further patch the system, cut my losses short and go for a new build.

Considering your current GPU class and the choice to not overclock, for a new system I would recommend the i5 8400 or the R5 1600X. When you do the math you'll see they end up close in pricing (CPU + MB). The 1600X has a 400Mhz-500Mhz advantage over the 1600 and is well worth the money for people who want maximized stock performance out of the Ryzen platform.

Performance between 8400 and 1600X will be a wash considering your GPU, with some potential for the 1600X to age better in terms of MT gaming performance. The 8400 will likely offer more consistent performance in old and current titles. The Z motherboard will likely be better quality and more feature packed than the AMD motherboard you will choose to offset the price difference, but this only matters in the context of your form factor and feature preference.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

The increase is the mixture of clock speeds, core count, and power usage. The 1700 is an 8 core CPU at 3.2GHz that only uses ~70w. Yes Ryzen sacrifices some IPC (though who is to say that they did that to get power usage down) and max clocks (this contributes to the power usage though).

FTFY. Stock frequency is only 3GHz, the 3.2GHz is sustained all core turbo. Max turbo with XFR is 3.75GHz. Or so my 1700 claims...

 

[Topweasel]

FTFY. Stock frequency is only 3GHz, the 3.2GHz is sustained all core turbo. Max turbo with XFR is 3.75GHz. Or so my 1700 claims...

Sorry thought it was 3.3GHz. But it's still 65w.