Ryzen 7 2700x vs 8700k: AMD Ryzen 7 2700X vs Intel Core i7-8700K: What is the difference?

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X vs Intel Core i7-8700K: What is the difference?

50points

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

59points

Intel Core i7-8700K

vs

64 facts in comparison

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

Intel Core i7-8700K

Why is AMD Ryzen 7 2700X better than Intel Core i7-8700K?

  • 33.33% faster CPU speed?
    8 x 3.7GHzvs6 x 3.7GHz
  • 267MHz higher ram speed?
    2933MHzvs2666MHz
  • 4 more CPU threads?
    16vs12
  • 2nm smaller semiconductor size?
    12nmvs14nm
  • 2.5MB bigger L2 cache?
    4MBvs1.5MB
  • 8.32% higher PassMark result?
    17623vs16270
  • 4MB bigger L3 cache?
    16MBvs12MB
  • 384KB bigger L1 cache?
    768KBvs384KB

Why is Intel Core i7-8700K better than AMD Ryzen 7 2700X?

  • 15°C higher maximum operating temperature?
    100°Cvs85°C
  • 0. 4GHz higher turbo clock speed?
    4.7GHzvs4.3GHz
  • 10W lower TDP?
    95Wvs105W
  • Has integrated graphics?
  • 11.94% higher PassMark result (single)?
    2728vs2437

Which are the most popular comparisons?

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 5600X

Intel Core i7-8700K

vs

Intel Core i5-12400

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 3600

Intel Core i7-8700K

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 5600X

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

vs

AMD Ryzen 7 5800X

Intel Core i7-8700K

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 5500U

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 5600G

Intel Core i7-8700K

vs

Intel Core i7-9700K

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

vs

AMD Ryzen 7 5700X

Intel Core i7-8700K

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 5600G

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 3600X

Intel Core i7-8700K

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 3600

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

vs

AMD Ryzen 9 5900X

Intel Core i7-8700K

vs

Intel Core i5-9600K

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

vs

Intel Core i9-9900K

Intel Core i7-8700K

vs

AMD Ryzen 7 3700X

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 2600

Intel Core i7-8700K

vs

Apple M1 Max

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 5500U

Intel Core i7-8700K

vs

Apple M1

Price comparison

Cheap alternatives

User reviews

Overall Rating

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

2 User reviews

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

9. 0/10

2 User reviews

Intel Core i7-8700K

1 User reviews

Intel Core i7-8700K

10.0/10

1 User reviews

Features

Value for money

8.5/10

2 votes

10.0/10

1 votes

Gaming

8.0/10

2 votes

10.0/10

1 votes

Performance

8.0/10

2 votes

10.0/10

1 votes

Reliability

9.5/10

2 votes

10.0/10

1 votes

Energy efficiency

7.5/10

2 votes

10.0/10

1 votes

Performance

1.CPU speed

8 x 3.7GHz

6 x 3.7GHz

The CPU speed indicates how many processing cycles per second can be executed by a CPU, considering all of its cores (processing units). It is calculated by adding the clock rates of each core or, in the case of multi-core processors employing different microarchitectures, of each group of cores.

2.CPU threads

More threads result in faster performance and better multitasking.

3.turbo clock speed

4.3GHz

4.7GHz

When the CPU is running below its limitations, it can boost to a higher clock speed in order to give increased performance.

4.Has an unlocked multiplier

✔AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

✔Intel Core i7-8700K

Some processors come with an unlocked multiplier which makes them easy to overclock, allowing you to gain increased performance in games and other apps.

5.L2 cache

A larger L2 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.

6.L3 cache

A larger L3 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.

7.L1 cache

A larger L1 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.

8. L2 core

0.5MB/core

0.25MB/core

More data can be stored in the L2 cache for access by each core of the CPU.

9.L3 core

2MB/core

2MB/core

More data can be stored in the L3 cache for access by each core of the CPU.

Memory

1.RAM speed

2933MHz

2666MHz

It can support faster memory, which will give quicker system performance.

2.maximum memory bandwidth

43.71GB/s

42.7GB/s

This is the maximum rate that data can be read from or stored into memory.

3.DDR memory version

DDR (Double Data Rate) memory is the most common type of RAM. Newer versions of DDR memory support higher maximum speeds and are more energy-efficient.

4.memory channels

More memory channels increases the speed of data transfer between the memory and the CPU.

5. maximum memory amount

The maximum amount of memory (RAM) supported.

6.bus transfer rate

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 2700X)

The bus is responsible for transferring data between different components of a computer or device.

7.Supports ECC memory

✔AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

✖Intel Core i7-8700K

Error-correcting code memory can detect and correct data corruption. It is used when is it essential to avoid corruption, such as scientific computing or when running a server.

8.eMMC version

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 2700X)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

A higher version of eMMC allows faster memory interfaces, having a positive effect on the performance of a device. For example, when transferring files from your computer to the internal storage over USB.

9. bus speed

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 2700X)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

The bus is responsible for transferring data between different components of a computer or device.

Benchmarks

1.PassMark result

This benchmark measures the performance of the CPU using multiple threads.

2.PassMark result (single)

This benchmark measures the performance of the CPU using a single thread.

3.Geekbench 5 result (multi)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 2700X)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures a processor’s multi-core performance. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)

4.Cinebench R20 (multi) result

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

Cinebench R20 is a benchmark tool that measures a CPU’s multi-core performance by rendering a 3D scene.

5.Cinebench R20 (single) result

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

Cinebench R20 is a benchmark tool that measures a CPU’s single-core performance by rendering a 3D scene.

6.Geekbench 5 result (single)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 2700X)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures a processor’s single-core performance. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)

7.Blender (bmw27) result

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 2700X)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

The Blender (bmw27) benchmark measures the performance of a processor by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render the scene in less time.

8.Blender (classroom) result

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 2700X)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

The Blender (classroom) benchmark measures the performance of a processor by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render the scene in less time.

9.performance per watt

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 2700X)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

This means the CPU is more efficient, giving a greater amount of performance for each watt of power used.

Features

1.uses multithreading

✔AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

✔Intel Core i7-8700K

Multithreading technology (such as Intel’s Hyperthreading or AMD’s Simultaneous Multithreading) provides increased performance by splitting each of the processor’s physical cores into virtual cores, also known as threads. This way, each core can run two instruction streams at once.

2.Has AES

✔AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

✔Intel Core i7-8700K

AES is used to speed up encryption and decryption.

3.Has AVX

✔AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

✔Intel Core i7-8700K

AVX is used to help speed up calculations in multimedia, scientific and financial apps, as well as improving Linux RAID software performance.

4.SSE version

SSE is used to speed up multimedia tasks such as editing an image or adjusting audio volume. Each new version contains new instructions and improvements.

5.Has F16C

✔AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

✔Intel Core i7-8700K

F16C is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting the contrast of an image or adjusting volume.

6.bits executed at a time

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 2700X)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

NEON provides acceleration for media processing, such as listening to MP3s.

7.Has MMX

✔AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

✔Intel Core i7-8700K

MMX is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting the contrast of an image or adjusting volume.

8.Has TrustZone

✖AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

✖Intel Core i7-8700K

A technology integrated into the processor to secure the device for use with features such as mobile payments and streaming video using digital rights management (DRM).

9.front-end width

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 2700X)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

The CPU can decode more instructions per clock (IPC), meaning that the CPU performs better

Price comparison

Cancel

Which are the best CPUs?

Ryzen 7 vs. Core i7: Revisiting the 2700X vs. 8700K

To revisit the battle between the Core i7-8700K and Ryzen 7 2700X, we’ll be comparing today’s data with what we found back in 2018 to see if either CPU has aged better. In addition, we’ll benchmark alongside the new Core i7-11700K and Ryzen 7 5800X, so owners of the older Core i7 and Ryzen 7 CPUs can see if the upgrade is worth it.

It’s a straightforward set up, so let’s quickly go over the system specs and jump into the results. All CPUs were configured with 32GB of DDR4-3200 CL14 dual-rank, dual-channel memory. For the AM4 platform we used the MSI X570 Unify motherboard, while Intel’s LGA1200 platform used the Gigabyte Z590 Aorus Master and the Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra for LGA1151. All boards were running the latest BIOS revision available.

For the graphics card we’re using a Radeon RX 6900 XT with all CPUs cooled using the Corsair iCUE h250i Elite Capellix liquid cooler. We’ve tested 30 games at 1080p, 1440p and 4K, and we’ll look at the data for about a dozen titles before checking out our usual data breakdown.

Benchmarks

We feel like a good place to get us started is Battlefield V since the franchise has often been used for comparing the performance of these very CPUs. I recall testing the 8700K with the GTX 1080 Ti and pushing up near 170 fps and that was pretty amazing at the time.

That was about the limit of these parts, in today’s retest we’re still limited to 167 fps on average, whereas the newer 11700K and 5800X pushed up over 200 fps.

The 8700K has remained 17% faster at 1080p, though this time the margin is kept at 1440p, while before it closed up almost entirely with the GTX 1080 Ti. It’s not until we reach 4K that the margins are eliminated with the RX 6900 XT. So for high refresh rate gamers seeking maximum performance, the 8700K is still the better choice, though for most the 2700X is more than adequate.

The 2700X also looks more suited to the task next to the 8700K than it did in a previous revisit feature where the 10700K, 11700K and 5800X were used for comparison. The 2700X is almost 40% slower than the 5800X, but it was just 14% slower than the 8700K.

Moving on to Watch Dogs: Legion we find that at 1080p the 8700K is 19% faster than the 2700X, which is quite a large margin, though it’s worth noting that at 1440p this figure was reduced to 7% and then about 2% at 4K. For those of you gaming at 1440p, you’ll be unable to notice the difference between the 8700K and 2700X, especially if you’re not using the $1,000 6900 XT.

F1 2021 is another game where the 2700X got completely railed by new CPUs, but when compared to the 8700K it’s not so bad. Sure, the 6-core/12-thread Intel CPU was still 15% faster, but that’s significantly less than the 41% gain we saw with the 5800X.

The 8700K remained 14% faster at 1440p and it wasn’t until we reached 4K that performance was the same, resulting in a heavily GPU-bound scenario.

Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 is still heavily thread dependant and as a result the 8700K enjoys a handy lead over the 2700X, delivering 21% more performance on average at 1080p and 1440p, though it’s worth noting that the Ryzen 7 part does enable slightly better 1% low performance, and of course, frame rates were much the same at 4K.

Cyberpunk 2077 might have been a game where some expected the 8-core/16-thread 2700X to beat or at least match the 8700K, but that wasn’t the case as Intel still enjoys a 13% performance advantage at 1080p, and even at 1440p the 8700K offers much stronger 1% low performance.

Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order is another DirectX 11 title where the 2700X struggles quite badly, allowing for just over 80 fps at 1080p and 1440p. The 8700K results in heavily CPU bound performance at these resolutions, but the frame rate is boosted by a little over 20% and that does make quite a bit difference for those with higher refresh rate monitors.

The Call of Duty Warzone performance is interesting because although the 8700K was almost 20% faster when comparing the average frame rate at 1080p, the 1% low performance was about the same. Then at 1440p there’s very little difference between these two CPUs and that being the case we see no real difference at 4K.

The Core i7-8700K was clearly faster in Death Stranding, offering around 12% more performance at 1080p and 1440p, but with the 2700X pushing over 144 fps at both resolutions, this isn’t a margin you’re going to notice in this title. The 2700X also looked a lot better next to the 8700K than it does against the newer 11700K and 5800X.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider is a CPU intensive title, especially the in-game village section that we use for testing. Despite heavily utilizing both CPUs, the 6-core 8700K was a good bit faster averaging 132 fps making it 23% faster than the 2700X. We saw a similar margin at 1440p and it wasn’t until we hit 4K resolution that performance normalized.

Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six Siege is a game where those playing seriously like a lot of frames, like a lot of frames. That said, the 2700X was good for well over 300 fps on average and a 1% low of almost 300 fps, and for even the most extreme players that’s typically enough.

It’s also worth noting that although the 8700K was 13% faster on average, the 2700X offered 5% greater frame time performance. The 8700K was stronger at 1440p but here we’re only talking about a 7% margin, so overall they’re fairly similar in RSS.

Performance in War Thunder was particularly poor for the 2700X relative to the new 8-core AMD and Intel CPUs, but not to say the experience was poor, quite the contrary as the game was smooth and enjoyable at 112 fps, it’s just that relative to the 5800X it was just over 40% slower. However, relative to the 8700K things look better for the old Ryzen 7 part, as here it was only 11% slower. That margin was seen at all three tested resolutions as the 2700X and 8700K were the primary performance limiting components in this testing.

In Hitman, the 2700X looks quite poor relative to the newer 5800X and 11700K, trailing by almost 30%. However, when compared to the 8700K, the 2700X was just 8% slower at 1080p and 11% slower at 1440p, so the margin wasn’t that extreme in that older generation comparison.

World War Z is the only game of the 30 we tested where the 2700X was faster than the 8700K, though by a small 5% margin. Frankly, that means both CPUs delivered comparable performance.

Performance Summary

We just looked at a dozen of the games tested, now it’s time to compare the CPUs across all 30 games, starting with the 1080p data. For CPU-limited gaming, it’s quite clear that in 2021, the Core i7-8700K remains the faster CPU against the 2700X, delivering 12% greater performance on average.

There’s a single title here where the 2700X takes the lead and the margin is fairly insignificant. On that note, 8 of the 30 games saw a margin of 5% or less in either direction which we typically deem a tie. Then there were 14 games, where the 8700K was faster by a significant 15% difference or greater.

Interestingly, if we take a quick look back at our 35 game benchmark data from 2018, we see that using the GeForce GTX 1080 Ti, the 8700K was 9% faster on average at 1080p and then 13% faster at 720p. Those margins are similar to what we’ve found here, some three years later.

Getting back to our 2021 benchmarks, at 1440p the margin comes down to 7% in favor of the 8700K and now we’re looking at 15 games, so half the games tested, where the margin is 5% or less.

There’s a further half dozen titles where we’re looking at single-digit margins and three games where the Core i7 was still faster by a sizable 20% margin or greater.

At 4K performance is very similar across the board. Here the 8700K was just 1% faster on average thanks to some decent wins in War Thunder and Dirt 5. But overall we are heavily GPU bound at 4K, even with the 6900 XT, so CPU performance was irrelevant.

What We Learned

That’s how the Core i7-8700K performs in 2021 and how it compares to its old foe, the Ryzen 7 2700X. Intel’s old school 6-core/12-thread CPU still delivers exceptionally good gaming performance in 2021, and if you’re primarily focused on gaming I imagine anyone using this processor will be more than happy with how it handles.

As we showed back in 2018 with a 35 game benchmark, the 8700K is the superior gaming CPU, but depending on your configuration there may be a small difference between the Core i7 and Ryzen 7 processors. As we also noted in 2018, the major drawback with the 8700K was the lack of an upgrade path. The only way forward was an expensive Core i9-9900K and that only nets you two extra cores, though again the 9900K is more than sufficient for high-end gaming in 2021.

You could argue that the Ryzen 7 2700X wasn’t as wise of an investment given high-end gamers would probably be looking at an upgrade to the 5800X or 5900X, and neither offer an affordable upgrade despite the fact that you can keep your high-end X470 motherboard.

After 2018, the 2700X did become a more attractive option thanks to heavy discounts that saw it selling for as little as $160 at one point in 2020 — so honestly if you did, that was a pretty great buy — while the 8700K was still at its MSRP due to 14nm supply issues.

So there you have it, the 8700K was and still is the better gaming CPU and the better choice for gamers. Those of you who bought it around its release in 2017 can be pretty content with your choice many years later, and keep it for a while longer if you mostly use it for gaming.

Shopping Shortcuts:
  • AMD Ryzen 5 5600X on Amazon
  • AMD Ryzen 7 5800X on Amazon
  • Intel Core i7-11700 on Amazon
  • Intel Core i7-10700K on Amazon
  • AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT on Amazon
  • Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 on Amazon
  • Nvidia GeForce RTX 3090 on Amazon

Intel Core i7 8700K vs AMD Ryzen 7 2700X: performance comparison

VS

Intel Core i7 8700K

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

We compared two desktop CPUs: the 3. 7 GHz Intel Core i7 8700K with 6-cores against the 3.7 GHz AMD Ryzen 7 2700X with 8-cores. On this page, you’ll find out which processor has better performance in benchmarks, games and other useful information.

  1. Review
  2. Differences
  3. Performance
  4. Specs
  5. Comments

Review

General overview and comparison of the processors

Single-Core Performance

Performance in single-threaded apps and benchmarks

Core i7 8700K

66

Ryzen 7 2700X

58

Performance

Measure performance when all cores are involved

Core i7 8700K

41

Ryzen 7 2700X

48

Power Efficiency

The efficiency score of electricity consumption

Core i7 8700K

41

Ryzen 7 2700X

46

NanoReview Final Score

Generic CPU rating

Core i7 8700K

51

Ryzen 7 2700X

53

Key Differences

What are the key differences between 2700X and 8700K

Advantages of Intel Core i7 8700K

  • Supports up to 128 GB DDR4-2666 RAM
  • More than 15° C higher critical temperature
  • 16% faster in a single-core Geekbench v5 test — 1242 vs 1074 points
  • Includes an integrated GPU Intel UHD Graphics 630
  • Consumes up to 10% less energy than the Ryzen 7 2700X – 95 vs 105 Watt
  • 9% higher Turbo Boost frequency (4. 7 GHz vs 4.3 GHz)

Advantages of AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

  • Has 2 more physical cores
  • Has 4 MB larger L3 cache size
  • More modern manufacturing process – 12 versus 14 nanometers
  • Newer — released 7-months later
  • Around 2.11 GB/s (5%) higher theoretical memory bandwidth

Benchmarks

Comparing the performance of CPUs in benchmarks

Cinebench R23 (Single-Core)

Core i7 8700K
+10%

1219

Ryzen 7 2700X

1106

Cinebench R23 (Multi-Core)

Core i7 8700K

8881

Ryzen 7 2700X
+14%

10143

Passmark CPU (Single-Core)

Core i7 8700K
+13%

2781

Ryzen 7 2700X

2455

Passmark CPU (Multi-Core)

Core i7 8700K

13898

Ryzen 7 2700X
+27%

17602

Geekbench 5 (Single-Core)

Core i7 8700K
+15%

1251

Ryzen 7 2700X

1084

Geekbench 5 (Multi-Core)

Core i7 8700K

6690

Ryzen 7 2700X
+10%

7365

▶️ Submit your Cinebench R23 result

By purchasing through links on this site, we may receive a commission from Amazon. This does not affect our assessment methodology.

Specifications

Full technical specification of Intel Core i7 8700K and AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

General

Vendor Intel AMD
Released October 5, 2017 April 19, 2018
Type Desktop Desktop
instruction set x86-64 x86-64
Codename Coffee Lake Zen+
Model number i7-8700K
Socket LGA-1151 AM4
Integrated GPU UHD Graphics 630 No

Performance

Cores 6 8
Threads 12 16
Base Frequency 3. 7 GHz 3.7 GHz
Turbo Boost Frequency 4.7 GHz 4.3 GHz
Bus frequency 100 MHz 100 MHz
Multiplier 37x 37x
Bus Bandwidth 8 GT/s
L1 Cache 64K (per core) 96K (per core)
L2 Cache 256K (per core) 512K (per core)
L3 Cache 12MB (shared) 16MB (shared)
Unlocked Multiplier Yes Yes
Transistors 4.8 billions
Fabrication process 14 nm 12 nm
TDP 95 W 105 W
Max. temperature 100°C 85°C
Integrated Graphics Intel UHD Graphics 630
GPU Base Clock 350 MHz
GPU Boost Clock 1200 MHz
Shading Units 192
TMUs 24
ROPs 3
Execution Units 24
TGP 15 W
Max. Resolution 4096×2304 — 60 Hz

iGPU FLOPS

Core i7 8700K

0.38 TFLOPS

Ryzen 7 2700X

n/a

Memory support

Memory types DDR4-2666 DDR4-2933
Memory Size 128 GB 64 GB
Max. Memory Channels 2 2
Max. Memory Bandwidth 41.6 GB/s 43.71 GB/s
ECC Support No Yes
Official site Intel Core i7 8700K official page AMD Ryzen 7 2700X official page
PCI Express Version 3.0 3.0
PCI Express Lanes 16 20
Extended instructions SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX-2

Cast your vote

Choose between two processors

Core i7 8700K

4 (21.1%)

Ryzen 7 2700X

15 (78.9%)

Total votes: 19

Сompetitors

1.
Intel Core i7 8700K and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X

2.
Intel Core i7 8700K and Intel Core i9 12900K

3.
Intel Core i7 8700K and Intel Core i7 12700K

4.
Intel Core i7 8700K and Intel Core i5 12600K

5.
Intel Core i7 8700K and Intel Core i5 12400F

6.
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X

7.
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X and AMD Ryzen 7 5800X

8.
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X and AMD Ryzen 7 5700X

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X vs Intel Core i7-8700K

Summary

  • AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

    109%

  • Intel Core i7-8700K

    100%

Relative performance

  • AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

    100%

  • Intel Core i7-8700K

    112%

Relative performance

  • AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

    129%

  • Intel Core i7-8700K

    100%

Relative performance

Reasons to consider AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
Much higher multi threaded performance (around 29% higher). This allows for higher performance in professional applications like encoding or heavy multitasking.
Reasons to consider Intel Core i7-8700K
12% higher single threaded performance.
Has an integrated GPU, which allows to run the system without a dedicated graphics card, unlike the AMD Ryzen 7 2700X.

Gaming

No clear winner declared


Productivity

HWBench recommends AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

Based on productivity benchmarks, overall multithreaded performance and theoretical specifications.

Features
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X Intel Core i7-8700K
MMX
3DNow!
SSE
SSE2
SSE3
SSE4A
AMD64
CnQ
NX bit
AMD-V
SMT
XFR
SSSE3
SSE4. 2
AVX
AVX2
EIST
Intel 64
XD bit
VT-x
VT-d
HTT
AES-NI
TSX
TXT
CLMUL
FMA3
F16C
BMI1
BMI2
Boost 2.0

Architecture
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X Intel Core i7-8700K
Architecture AMD Zen+ vs Intel_Coffelake
Market Desktop vs Desktop
Memory Support DDR4 vs DDR4
Codename Zen vs Coffee Lake
Release Date Mar 2018 vs Oct 2017

Cores
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X Intel Core i7-8700K
Cores 8 vs 6
Threads 16 vs 12
SMPs 1 vs 1
Integrated Graphics No vs Intel UHD 630

Cache
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X Intel Core i7-8700K
L1 Cache 96 KB (per core) vs 64 KB (per core)
L2 Cache 512 KB (per core) vs 256 KB (per core)
L3 Cache 16384 KB (shared) vs 12288 KB (shared)

Physical
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X Intel Core i7-8700K
Socket AMD Socket AM4 vs Intel Socket 1151
Max Case Temp unknown vs 72°C
Package uPGA vs FC-LGA1151
Die Size 192mm² vs 151mm²
Process 14 nm vs 14 nm

Performance
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X Intel Core i7-8700K
Cpu Frequency 3700 MHz vs 3700 MHz
Turbo Clock 4350 MHz vs 4700 MHz
Base Clock 100 MHz vs 100 MHz
Voltage variable vs unknown
TDP 105 W vs 95 W
  • AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

    4785 points

  • Intel Core i7-8700K

    5640 points

Points — higher is better

  • AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

    39723 points

  • Intel Core i7-8700K

    31968 points

Points — higher is better

  • AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

    1828

  • Intel Core i7-8700K

    1412

points — higher is better

  • AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

    180

  • Intel Core i7-8700K

    202

points — higher is better

Ryzen 7 2700X vs i7-8700K — Call of Duty Modern Warfare with GTX 1660 Benchmarks 1080p, 1440p, Ultrawide, 4K Comparison

GTX 1660 with

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

Call of Duty Modern Warfare

GTX 1660 with

Intel Core i7-8700K @ 3. 70GHz


Ryzen 7 2700X
i7-8700K

Multi-Thread Performance

16960 Pts

15970 Pts

Single-Thread Performance

2190 Pts

2703 Pts

Call of Duty Modern Warfare

Ryzen 7 2700X vs i7-8700K in Call of Duty Modern Warfare using GTX 1660 — CPU Performance comparison at Ultra, High, Medium, and Low Quality Settings with 1080p, 1440p, Ultrawide, 4K resolutions

Ryzen 7 2700X
i7-8700K


Ultra Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p

97.8 FPS

1080p

110.0 FPS

1440p

70.4 FPS

1440p

79.2 FPS

2160p

42.0 FPS

2160p

47.3 FPS

w1440p

60.2 FPS

w1440p

67.7 FPS

High Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p

154. 6 FPS

1080p

170.7 FPS

1440p

117.1 FPS

1440p

129.4 FPS

2160p

75.3 FPS

2160p

83.4 FPS

w1440p

102.5 FPS

w1440p

113.3 FPS

Medium Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p

211.5 FPS

1080p

231.4 FPS

1440p

163.8 FPS

1440p

179.6 FPS

2160p

108.6 FPS

2160p

119.5 FPS

w1440p

144.8 FPS

w1440p

158.8 FPS

Low Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p

325. 2 FPS

1080p

352.8 FPS

1440p

257.2 FPS

1440p

280.0 FPS

2160p

175.1 FPS

2160p

191.6 FPS

w1440p

229.4 FPS

w1440p

250.0 FPS

Ryzen 7 2700X
  • The Ryzen 7 2700X has higher Level 2 Cache. Data/instructions which have to be processed can be loaded from the fast L2 and the CPU does not have to wait for the very slow DDR RAM
  • The Ryzen 7 2700X has higher Level 3 Cache. This is useful when you have substantial multiprocessing workloads, many computationally intense simultaneous processes. More likely on a server, less on a personally used computer for interactive desktop workloads.
  • The Ryzen 7 2700X has more cores. The benefit of having more cores is that the system can handle more threads. Each core can handle a separate stream of data. This architecture greatly increases the performance of a system that is running concurrent applications.
  • The Ryzen 7 2700X has more threads. Larger programs are divided into threads (small sections) so that the processor can execute them simultaneously to get faster execution.
  • The Ryzen 7 2700X has a smaller process size. The faster a transistor can toggle on and off, the faster it can do work. And transistors that turn on and off with less energy are more efficient, reducing the operating power, or “dynamic power consumption,” required by a processor.
i7-8700K
  • The i7-8700K is more power efficient and generates less heat.
  • The i7-8700K has a higher turbo clock boost. Turbo Boost is a CPU feature that will run CPU clock speed faster than its base clock, if certain conditions are present. It will enable older software that runs on fewer cores, to perform better on newer hardware. Since games are software too, it is also applicable to them.

Compare Ryzen 7 2700X vs i7-8700K specifications

Ryzen 7 2700X vs i7-8700K Architecture
Ryzen 7 2700X i7-8700K
Codename Zen Coffee Lake
Generation Ryzen 7
(Zen+ (Pinnacle Ridge))
Core i7
(Coffee Lake)
Market Desktop Desktop
Memory Support DDR4 DDR4
Part# unknown SR3QR
Production Status Active Active
Released Apr 2018 Oct 2017
Ryzen 7 2700X vs i7-8700K Cache
Ryzen 7 2700X i7-8700K
Cache L1 96K (per core) 64K (per core)
Cache L2 512K (per core) 256K (per core)
Cache L3 16MB (shared) 12MB (shared)
Ryzen 7 2700X vs i7-8700K Cores
Ryzen 7 2700X i7-8700K
# of Cores 8 6
# of Threads 16 12
Integrated Graphics N/A UHD Graphics 630
SMP # CPUs 1 1
Ryzen 7 2700X vs i7-8700K Features
Ryzen 7 2700X i7-8700K
MMX
SSE
SSE2
SSE3
SSSE3
SSE4A
SSE4. 1
SSE4.2
AES
AVX
AVX2
BMI1
BMI2
SHA
F16C
FMA3
AMD64
EVP
AMD-V
SMAP
SMEP
SMT
Precision Boost 2
XFR 2
MMX
SSE
SSE2
SSE3
SSSE3
SSE4.2
AVX
AVX2
EIST
Intel 64
XD bit
VT-x
VT-d
HTT
AES-NI
TSX
TXT
CLMUL
FMA3
F16C
BMI1
BMI2
Boost 2.0
Ryzen 7 2700X vs i7-8700K Notes
Ryzen 7 2700X i7-8700K
This processor comes with an unlocked base clock multiplier, allowing users to set the multiplier value higher than shipped value, to facilitate better overclocking. This processor comes with an unlocked BCLK multiplier, allowing users to set the multiplier value higher than shipped value, to facilitate better overclocking.
Ryzen 7 2700X vs i7-8700K Performance
Ryzen 7 2700X i7-8700K
Base Clock 100 MHz 100 MHz
Frequency 3.7 GHz 3.7 GHz
Multiplier 37. 0x 37.0x
Multiplier Unlocked Yes Yes
TDP 105 W 95 W
Turbo Clock up to 4.35 GHz up to 4.7 GHz
Voltage variable variable
Ryzen 7 2700X vs i7-8700K Physical
Ryzen 7 2700X i7-8700K
Die Size 192 mm² unknown
Foundry GlobalFoundries Intel
Package µOPGA-1331 FC-LGA1151
Process Size 12 nm 14 nm
Socket AMD Socket AM4 Intel Socket 1151
Transistors 4800 million unknown
tCaseMax unknown 72°C

Share Your Comments 0

Compare Ryzen 7 2700X vs i7-8700K in more games

Elden Ring

2022

God of War

2022

Overwatch 2

2022

Forza Horizon 5

2021

Halo Infinite

2021

Battlefield 2042

2021

Assassin’s Creed Valhalla

2020

Microsoft Flight Simulator

2020

Valorant

2020

Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War

2020

Death Stranding

2020

Marvel’s Avengers

2020

Godfall

2020

Cyberpunk 2077

2020

Apex Legends

2019

Anthem

2019

Far Cry New Dawn

2019

Resident Evil 2

2019

Metro Exodus

2019

World War Z

2019

Gears of War 5

2019

F1 2019

2019

GreedFall

2019

Borderlands 3

2019

Call of Duty Modern Warfare

2019

Red Dead Redemption 2

2019

Need For Speed: Heat

2019

Assassin’s Creed Odyssey

2018

Battlefield V

2018

Call of Duty: Black Ops 4

2018

Final Fantasy XV

2018

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

2018

Forza Horizon 4

2018

Fallout 76

2018

Hitman 2

2018

Just Cause 4

2018

Monster Hunter: World

2018

Strange Brigade

2018

Assassin’s Creed Origins

2017

Dawn of War III

2017

Ghost Recon Wildlands

2017

Destiny 2

2017

PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds

2017

Fortnite Battle Royale

2017

Need For Speed: Payback

2017

For Honor

2017

Project CARS 2

2017

Forza Motorsport 7

2017

Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation

2016

Battlefield 1

2016

Deus Ex: Mankind Divided

2016

Doom

2016

F1 2016

2016

Total War: Warhammer

2016

Overwatch

2016

Dishonored 2

2016

Grand Theft Auto V

2015

Rocket League

2015

Need For Speed

2015

Project CARS

2015

Rainbow Six Siege

2015

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

2012

League of Legends

2009

Minecraft

2009

Core i7-8700K vs Ryzen 7 2700X

Availability

Intel Core i7-8700K Desktop Processor 6 Cores up to 4. 7GHz Turbo Unlocked LGA1151 300 Series 95W

Buy on Amazon

€267.84

In Stock

Updated 51 minutes ago

Availability

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X Processor with Wraith Prism LED Cooler — YD270XBGAFBOX

Buy on Amazon

€198.85

In Stock

Updated 51 minutes ago

Key Differences

In short — Core i7-8700K outperforms the cheaper Ryzen 7 2700X on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Ryzen 7 2700X is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i7-8700K is 196 days older than the cheaper Ryzen 7 2700X.

Advantages of Intel Core i7-8700K

  • Performs up to 6% better in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive than Ryzen 7 2700X — 664 vs 629 FPS

  • Consumes up to 10% less energy than AMD Ryzen 7 2700X — 95 vs 105 Watts

  • Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen 7 2700X doesn’t have integrated graphics

Advantages of AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

  • Up to 26% cheaper than Core i7-8700K — $179. 14 vs $241.3

  • Up to 20% better value when playing Counter-Strike: Global Offensive than Core i7-8700K — $0.32 vs $0.4 per FPS

  • Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i7-8700K — 16 vs 12 threads

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Resolution

1920×1080

Game Graphics

High

Core i7-8700K

Desktop • Oct 5th, 2017


FPS

664

100%

Value, €/FPS

€0.4/FPS

75%

Price, €

€267.84

74%

FPS Winner

Intel Core i7-8700K Desktop Processor 6 Cores up to 4.7GHz Turbo Unlocked LGA1151 300 Series 95W

Buy for €267.84 on Amazon

In Stock

Updated 51 minutes ago

Ryzen 7 2700X

Desktop • Apr 19th, 2018


FPS

629

94%

Value, €/FPS

€0.32/FPS

100%

Price, €

€198.85

100%

Value Winner

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X Processor with Wraith Prism LED Cooler — YD270XBGAFBOX

Buy for €198. 85 on Amazon

In Stock

Updated 51 minutes ago

Resolution

1920×1080

Game Graphics

High

Core i7-8700K

Desktop • Oct 5th, 2017

Ryzen 7 2700X

Desktop • Apr 19th, 2018

1081

FPS

1026

FPS

League of Legends

472

FPS

446

FPS

VALORANT

271

FPS

256

FPS

Grand Theft Auto V

296

FPS

280

FPS

Apex Legends

248

FPS

234

FPS

PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds

Geekbench 5 Benchmarks

Core i7-8700K

Desktop • Oct 5th, 2017


Single-Core

1245

100%

Multi-Core

6510

95%

Ryzen 7 2700X

Desktop • Apr 19th, 2018


Single-Core

1039

80%

Multi-Core

6842

100%

Intel Core i7-8700K

vs

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

Oct 5th, 2017 Release Date

Apr 19th, 2018

Core i7 Collection Ryzen 7
Coffee Lake Codename Pinnacle Ridge
Intel Socket 1151 Socket AMD Socket AM4

Desktop

Segment

Desktop

6 Cores

8

12 Threads

16

3. 7 GHz Base Clock Speed 3.7 GHz

4.7 GHz

Turbo Clock Speed 4.3 GHz

95 W

TDP 105 W
14 nm Process Size

12 nm

37.0x Multiplier 37.0x

UHD Graphics 630

Integrated Graphics None
Yes Overclockable Yes

Builds Using Core i7-8700K or Ryzen 7 2700X

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, 1080p, High

Skytech Blaze II Gaming Computer PC

389 FPS

€2.77/FPS

GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER

Ryzen 7 2700X

16 GB, N/A Storage

Buy on Amazon

€1,197.07

In Stock

Updated 35 minutes ago

Skytech Chronos Gaming PC

403 FPS

€4.03/FPS

GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER

Ryzen 7 2700X

16 GB, 1 TB SSD

Buy on Amazon

€1,801. 79

In Stock

Updated 35 minutes ago

CYBERPOWERPC Gamer Supreme Liquid Cool SLC10060 Gaming PC

384 FPS

€6.34/FPS

GeForce GTX 1080

Core i7-8700K

16 GB, 240 GB SSD + 1 TB HDD

Buy on Amazon

€2,701.8

In Stock

Updated 41 minutes ago

Dell Inspiron High Performance Gaming Desktop PC

233 FPS

€6.61/FPS

Radeon RX 580

Ryzen 7 2700X

16 GB, 256 GB SSD + 1 TB HDD

Buy on Amazon

€1,710.81

In Stock

Updated 40 minutes ago

Select from the most popular similar processor comparisons. Most compared processor combinations, including the currently selected ones, are at the top.

Core i7-8700K

€297.3

Core i9-12900K

€522.51

Core i7-8700K

€297.3

Core i9-9900K

€495.5

Core i7-8700K

€297.3

PRO A12-8830B

N/A Stock

Ryzen 7 2700X

€220.72

Athlon X2 7750 Black Edition

N/A Stock

Core i7-8700K

€297. 3

E1-6010

N/A Stock

Core i7-8700K

€297.3

Celeron T3500

N/A Stock

Core i7-8700K

€297.3

Core i7-7660U

N/A Stock

Core i7-8700K

€297.3

Pentium G5600

N/A Stock

Core i7-8700K

€297.3

Xeon E3-1260L

N/A Stock

Intel Core i7 8700K vs AMD Ryzen 7 2700:

performance comparison

VS

Intel Core i7 8700K

AMD Ryzen 7 2700

Which is better: 6-core Intel Core i7 8700K at 3.7 GHz or AMD Ryzen 7 2700 with 8 cores at 3.2 GHz? To find out, read our comparative testing of these desktop processors in popular benchmarks, games and heavy applications.

  1. Overview
  2. Differences
  3. Performance
  4. Features
  5. Comments

Overview

Overview and comparison of the main metrics from NanoReview

Single -flow performance

Rating in tests using one nucleus

Core i7 8700k

66 66

Ryzen 7 2700

54

Multi -flow performance

Tests in benchmarks where all nucleus

9 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000

Core i7 8700k

41

Ryzen 7 2700

43 9000

Core i7 8700K

51

Ryzen 7 2700

50

Key differences

What are the main differences between 2700 and 8700K

Reasons to choose Intel Core i7 8700K

  • Supports up to 128GB DDR4-2666
  • 22% faster in Geekbench v5 single-core test — 1242 and 1016 points
  • Has an integrated Intel UHD Graphics accelerator 95% 0 6011 frequency in Turbo Boost (4. 7 GHz vs 4.1 GHz)

Reasons to choose AMD Ryzen 7 2700

  • 32% lower than Core i7 8700K peak power consumption — 65 vs 95 Watts
  • Has 2 physical cores more than
  • Has 4 MB more L3 cache
  • More modern process technology — 12 vs. 14 nanometers
  • Appeared 7 months later than the rival
  • 2.11 GB / s (5%) higher maximum memory bandwidth

Benchmark tests

Compare the results of processor tests in benchmarks

Cinebench R23 (single core)

Core i7 8700K
+14%

1219

Ryzen 7 2700

1065

Cinebench R23 (multi-core)

Core i7 8700K

8881

Ryzen 7 2700
+1%

9005

Passmark CPU (single core)

Core i7 8700K
+26%

2781

Ryzen 7 2700

2204

Passmark CPU (multi-core)

Core i7 8700K

900 R2 13898

+14%

15781

Geekbench 5 (single core)

Core i7 8700K
+23%

1251

Ryzen 7 2700

1019

Geekbench 5 (multi-core)

Core i7 8700K

6690

Ryzen 7 270 270 90
+2%

6817

▶️ Add your score to Cinebench R23

Specifications

List of full technical specifications for Intel Core i7 8700K and AMD Ryzen 7 2700

General

Manufacturer Intel AMD
Release date October 5, 2017 April 19, 2018
Type Desktop Desktop
Instruction set architecture x86-64 x86-64
Codename Coffee Lake Zen+
Model number i7-8700K
Socket LGA-1151 AM4
Integrated graphics UHD Graphics 630 No

Performance

Cores 6 8
Number of threads 12 16
Frequency 3. 7 GHz 3.2 GHz
Max. frequency in Turbo Boost 4.7 GHz 4.1 GHz
Bus frequency 100 MHz 100 MHz
Multiplier 37x 36x
Tire speed 8 GT/s
Level 1 cache 64KB (per core) 96KB (per core)
Level 2 cache 256KB (per core) 512KB (per core)
Level 3 cache 12MB (shared) 16MB (general)
Unlocked multiplier Yes Yes

Power consumption

Number of transistors 4.8 billion
Process 14 nanometers 12 nanometers
Power consumption (TDP) 95 W 65 W
Critical temperature 100°C 95°C
Integrated graphics Intel UHD Graphics 630
GPU frequency 350 MHz
Boost GPU frequency 1200 MHz
Shader blocks 192
TMUs 24
ROPs 3
Computer units 24
TGP 15W
Max. resolution 4096×2304 — 60Hz

Igpu Flops

Core i7 8700k

0.38 Teraflops

Ryzen 7 2700

N/D

Memory Support

Memorial type

DDR4-2666 DDR4-2933
Max. size 128 GB 64 GB
Number of channels 2 2
Max. throughput 41.6 GB/s 43.71 GB/s
ECC support No Yes

Other

Official site Intel Core i7 8700K 9 website0192

AMD Ryzen 7 2700 website
PCI Express Version 3.0 3.0
Max. PCI Express lanes 16 20
Extended instructions SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX-2

Poll

What processor do you think is the best?

Core i7 8700K

7 (33. 3%)

Ryzen 7 2700

14 (66.7%)

Total votes: 21

Competitors

1.
AMD Ryzen 5 5600X and Intel Core i7 8700K

2.
Intel Core i9 12900K and i7 8700K

3.
Intel Core i7 12700K and i7 8700K

4.
Intel Core i5 12600K and i7 8700K

5.
Intel Core i5 12400F and i7 8700K

What will you choose: AMD Ryzen 7 2700 or Intel Core i7 8700K?

Name

Message

AMD Ryzen 7 2700

vs Intel Core i7-8700K: What is the difference?

57 BALLLA

AMD Ryzen 7 2700

59 Ballla

Intel Core i7-8700k

VS

64 Facts compared to

AMD Ryzen 7 2700

Intel Core I7-870023 Better Intel Core i7-8700K?

  • 15. 32% higher CPU speed?
    8 x 3.2GHz vs 6 x 3.7GHz
  • 267MHz faster memory speed?
    2933MHz vs 2666MHz
  • 4 more CPU threads?
    16 vs 12
  • Smaller semiconductor size 2nm?
    12nm vs 14nm
  • 2.5MB more L2 cache?
    4MB vs 1.5MB
  • 30W below TDP?
    65W vs 95W
  • 4MB more L3 cache?
    16MB vs 12MB
  • 384KB more L1 cache? Why is Intel Core i7-8700K better than AMD Ryzen 7 2700?
    • 5°C higher than maximum operating temperature?
      100°C vs 95°C
    • 0.6GHz higher turbo clock speed?
      4.7GHz vs 4.1GHz
    • Does it have integrated graphics?
    • 22.99% higher PassMark score (single)?
      2728 vs 2218
    • Has NX bit?

    What are the most popular comparisons?

    AMD RYZEN 7 2700

    VS

    AMD Ryzen 5 3600

    Intel Core i7-8700k

    VS

    Intel Core i5-12400

    AMD Ryzen 7 2700

    VS

    VS

    AMD RYZEN Core i7-8700K

    VS

    AMD Ryzen 5 5600x

    AMD Ryzen 7 2700

    VS

    AMD Ryzen 5 5600x

    Intel Core i7-8700k

    VS

    VS

    AMD Ryzen 7 270002 22 27000 AMD Ry

    Intel Core i5-10400

    Intel Core i7-8700k

    VS

    Intel Core i7-9700k

    AMD Ryzen 7 2700

    VS

    AMD

    Intel Core I7-8700K

    Intel Core I7-8700K AMD Ryzen 5 5600G

    AMD Ryzen 7 2700

    vs

    AMD Ryzen 7 3700X

    Intel Core i7-8700K

    vs

    AMD Ryzen 5 3600

    AMD Ryzen 7 2700

    vs

    AMD Ryzen 7 1700

    Intel Core i7-8700k

    VS

    Intel Core i5-9600k

    AMD Ryzen 7 2700

    VS

    AMD Ryzen 7 2700x

    Intel Core I7-8700K 9000 VS

    9000 AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD /10

    2 reviews of users

    Intel Core i7-8700k

    1 reviews of users

    Intel Core i7-8700k

    10. 0 /10

    1 reviews of users

    Functions 9000

    10.0 /10

    2 Votes

    10.0 /10

    1 Votes

    Games

    10.0849 /10

    2 VOTES

    10.0 /10

    1 Votes

    performance

    10.0 /10

    2 Votes

    10.0 /10

    1 Votes

    Reliability

    /10 9000 9000 9000 2 Votes

    9000)

    1 Votes

    Energy efficiency

    /10

    2 Votes

    10.0 /10

    1 Votes

    Productivity

    1. Specific central processor

    8 x 3.2GHz

    6 x 3.7GHz

    CPU speed indicates how many processing cycles per second a processor can perform, given all its cores (processors). It is calculated by adding the clock speeds of each core or, in the case of multi-core processors, each group of cores.

    2nd processor thread

    More threads result in better performance and better multi-tasking.

    3.speed turbo clock

    4.1GHz

    4.7GHz

    When the processor is running below its limits, it can jump to a higher clock speed to increase performance.

    4. Unlocked

    ✔AMD Ryzen 7 2700

    ✔Intel Core i7-8700K

    Some processors come with an unlocked multiplier and can be easily overclocked for better performance in games and other applications.

    5.L2 Cache

    More L2 scratchpad memory results in faster results in CPU and system performance tuning.

    6.L3 cache

    More L3 scratchpad memory results in faster results in CPU and system performance tuning.

    7.L1 cache

    More L1 scratchpad memory results in faster results in CPU and system performance tuning.

    8.core L2

    0.5MB/core

    0.25MB/core

    More data can be stored in the L2 scratchpad for access by each processor core.

    9.core L3

    2MB/core

    2MB/core

    More data can be stored in L3 scratchpad for access by each processor core.

    Memory

    1.RAM speed

    2933MHz

    2666MHz

    Can support faster memory which speeds up system performance.

    2.max memory bandwidth

    43.71GB/s

    42.7GB/s

    This is the maximum rate at which data can be read from or stored in memory.

    3.DDR version

    DDR (Dynamic Random Access Memory, Double Data Rate) is the most common type of RAM. New versions of DDR memory support higher maximum speeds and are more energy efficient.

    4 memory channels

    More memory channels increase the speed of data transfer between memory and processor.

    5.Maximum memory

    Maximum memory (RAM).

    6.bus baud rate

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 7 2700)

    The bus is responsible for transferring data between various components of a computer or device.

    7.Supports memory troubleshooting code

    ✔AMD Ryzen 7 2700

    ✖Intel Core i7-8700K

    Memory error recovery code can detect and repair data corruption. It is used when necessary to avoid distortion, such as in scientific computing or when starting a server.

    8.eMMC version

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 7 2700)

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

    The newer version of eMMC — built-in flash memory card — speeds up the memory interface, has a positive effect on device performance, for example, when transferring files from a computer to internal memory via USB.

    9.bus frequency

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 7 2700)

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

    The bus is responsible for transferring data between various components of a computer or device

    Geotagging

    1. PassMark result

    This test measures processor performance using multi-threading.

    2. PassMark result (single)

    This test measures processor performance using a thread of execution.

    3.Geekbench 5 result (multi-core)

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

    Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform test that measures the performance of a multi-core processor. (Source: Primate Labs,2022)

    4. Cinebench R20 result (multi-core)

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

    Cinebench R20 is a benchmark that measures the performance of a multi-core processor by rendering a 3D scene.

    5.Cinebench R20 result (single core)

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

    Cinebench R20 is a test to evaluate the performance of a single core processor when rendering a 3D scene.

    6.Geekbench 5 result (single core)

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

    Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures the single-core performance of a processor. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)

    7. Blender test result (bmw27)

    243.7seconds

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

    The Blender benchmark (bmw27) measures CPU performance by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render a scene in a shorter time.

    8.Blender result (classroom)

    750.9seconds

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

    The Blender (classroom) benchmark measures CPU performance by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render a scene in a shorter time.

    9.performance per watt

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

    This means that the processor is more efficient, giving more performance per watt of power used.

    Functions

    1.uses multithreading

    ✔AMD Ryzen 7 2700

    ✔Intel Core i7-8700K

    processor cores into logical cores, also known as threads. Thus, each core can run two instruction streams at the same time.

    2. Has AES

    ✔AMD Ryzen 7 2700

    ✔Intel Core i7-8700K

    AES is used to speed up encryption and decryption.

    3. Has AVX

    ✔AMD Ryzen 7 2700

    ✔Intel Core i7-8700K

    AVX is used to help speed up calculations in multimedia, scientific and financial applications, and to improve the performance of the Linux RAID program.

    4.Version SSE

    SSE is used to speed up multimedia tasks such as editing images or adjusting audio volume. Each new version contains new instructions and improvements.

    5.Has F16C

    ✔AMD Ryzen 7 2700

    ✔Intel Core i7-8700K

    F16C is used to speed up tasks such as image contrast adjustment or volume control.

    6 bits transmitted at the same time

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 7 2700)

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

    NEON provides faster media processing such as MP3 listening.

    7. Has MMX

    ✔AMD Ryzen 7 2700

    ✔Intel Core i7-8700K

    MMX is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting image contrast or adjusting volume.

    8.Has TrustZone

    ✖AMD Ryzen 7 2700

    ✖Intel Core i7-8700K

    Technology is integrated into the processor to ensure device security when using features such as mobile payments and streaming video using Digital Rights Management (DRM) technology ).

    9.interface width

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 7 2700)

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i7-8700K)

    The processor can decode more instructions per clock (IPC), which means that the processor performs better

    Price comparison

    Cancel

    Which CPUs are better?

    Risen 5 or risen 7 which is better? We also tested the older representatives of the Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 7 lines at the same time, but mentioned that both have peculiar “poor relatives”, which actually differ from them only in clock speeds and price. The latter makes the Ryzen 5 2600 and Ryzen 7 2700 even a little more interesting from a budget-conscious buyer’s point of view, since, unlike Intel, AMD favorably overclocks any processor in the Ryzen family, so different frequencies are just different

    by default frequencies, but in practice they can become the same. Most buyers are, of course, not ready to engage in “manual tuning”, but everyone has a desire to save money. Especially when you can save money due to only quantitative, but not qualitative differences: after all, both the top-end Ryzen 7 2700X and the slightly cheaper Ryzen 7 2700 are eight-core processors for the same mass platform. And the Ryzen 5 2600, like the Ryzen 5 2600X, is equipped with six dual-threaded cores — but in his case, the savings are even more relevant, since it is he, paired with the «old» Ryzen 5 1600, that is the cheapest solution with a «wheel formula» 6/12, competing in this parameter with the more expensive Intel Core i7 for the «second version» LGA1151.

    The only question that remains to be clarified is how the performance compares in new pairs and whether there are any other “hidden bonuses” at a lower frequency (at least this should have a beneficial effect on power consumption — namely, it is for us in older models like times and did not like it). Well, you also need to compare the «younger» processors with other solutions on the market.

    Test bench configuration

    This is what the new “2000 series” looks like when finished. It is easy to see that, in addition to the frequency, the requirements for the cooling system have also decreased — obviously not from scratch 🙂 What happens in practice with energy consumption — we will definitely check it.

    We used a couple of models of the previous line last time, and today we decided to expand this list to four models, adding to it not only the Ryzen 5 1600, but also the Ryzen 5 2400G. The latter, we recall, is an APU — and with a very productive (in its class) graphics core. True, you have to pay for everything: in these models there is only one CCX, i.e. strictly no more than four processor cores. Accordingly, the performance of the 2400G should be noticeably different from the 2600, although both belong to the Ryzen 5 line. But the savings opportunities (both in monetary terms and in terms of size and / or power consumption) are higher in this case. Accordingly, it makes sense to compare all the pluses and minuses in practice, and using the 2400G in the most interesting version: without a discrete video card. It is clear that for games these are radically different layouts, but today we decided once again to do without them.

    But «expanded and deepened» in the direction of inexpensive models, the list of used Intel processors. There will be four of them — as in the last article, but the place of a couple of models for LGA2066 will be taken by the Core i5-8400 (the cheapest six-core Intel) and. The Core i3-8350K, which, in fact, has to compete directly in retail not only with the Ryzen 5 2400G, but also with the Ryzen 5 1600/2600. And the presence of an integrated video core does not quite save the situation: after all, the UHD Graphics 630, by today’s standards, has not only too low performance in gaming applications, but also limited multimedia capabilities. As a result, even for simple viewing of video in modern formats or for connecting high-resolution monitors, many buyers prefer to purchase at least an inexpensive discrete plug. In addition, the i3-8350K is also interesting from the point of view that (as we saw in our time) in normal mode, it is almost identical to the Core i5-7600K, i. e. the best Core i5 «generations» up to the seventh inclusive. A lot of them have been sold over the past years, and many owners are already interested in the question: what can you get when switching to new platforms for money comparable to the initial costs? In the case of Intel, everything is simple and clear: two more cores of comparable architecture. But Ryzen 5 can also be considered as a possible upgrade option, this is about the same price class.

    All processors, except (as already mentioned) Ryzen 5 2400G were tested together with the GeForce GTX 1070 video card. Ryzen (for five out of eight processors, it is also already full-time, and we did not test the “thousanders” according to the current version of the methodology with lower frequencies).

    Test Method

    The method is described in detail in a separate article. Here we briefly recall that it is based on the following four pillars:

    Detailed results for all tests are available as a complete results spreadsheet (in Microsoft Excel 97-2003 format). Directly in the articles, we use already processed data. This is especially true for application tests, where everything is normalized relative to the reference system (AMD FX-8350 with 16 GB of memory, GeForce GTX 1070 graphics card and Corsair Force LE 960 GB SSD) and grouped by computer application areas.

    With this material, we seem to be completing the use of the 2017 version of the test method, since the new one is almost ready. For the same reason, it was decided to do without gaming tests — how they behave on the GeForce GTX 1070 together with the tested processors is understandable, and what will change in newer projects, we will study a little later.

    iXBT Application Benchmark 2017

    In principle, the Ryzen 7 2700 is already enough to slightly overtake the Core i7-8700K, but it is just as slightly behind the previous «flagship» AMD — which can be considered the rationale for the existence of 2700X: ) As for cheaper models, the situation is even more favorable for the new line: the Ryzen 5 2600 not only outperforms any Core i5, but is also practically equivalent to the “old” 1600X, and this calls into question the need for a 2600X. And it is clearly seen that further attempts to save on performance are already fraught: after all, APUs and “clean” CPUs of the Ryzen 5 family differ more in technical characteristics than six- and eight-core models.

    Nothing changes in rendering for Ryzen 5, but Ryzen 7 looks a little less convincing: in fact, only one model for AM4 can compete with the older Core i7-8700K (which once again hints that only the number of different devices can be compared kernels is not always correct). However, the Ryzen 7 2700 looks good for its price, and the speed can be increased manually if desired — which distinguishes it from, for example, the Core i7-8700.

    The degree of multithreading utilization by these programs is lower than in the previous two cases — which plays into the hands of Ryzen 5: the 2600X almost caught up with the 2700. And let’s focus on the fact that in the older pair of new processors for AM4, the performance differs much more than in the younger one. In fact, this is no coincidence — and below we will show why.

    «Multi-core» is needed even less, so «per thread» performance is extremely important. And in this case, as we already wrote, there are no special improvements in the “restyled” Ryzen — they still lag behind Intel processors in such conditions. Even the already known problems with one of the Photoshop filters inherent in the latest generation Core i3 and Core i5 still do not let them noticeably lag behind, for example, the Ryzen 5 2400G in the overall standings, and the Core i7 turn out to be the undisputed leaders. On the other hand, the new AMD processors are slightly faster than their immediate predecessors — and that’s enough.

    Once again we see that, despite the success of the new AMD architecture, it still cannot directly compete with Intel developments — a certain head start is required in the number of cores (or, at least, computation threads). But since the company can provide it at the current price level, everything is in order from the point of view of the buyer.

    And the work with memory has not changed much either, so the state of affairs has not changed radically either. By the way, let’s again pay attention to the big difference in the 2700/2700X pair and the small one in the 2600/2600X.

    However, some internal architecture optimizations were carried out. And they led to funny effects — already the Ryzen 5 2600 is enough to overtake any Intel processors for the «new» LGA1151, the 2600X does it with the «last year» series of processors for AM4, and the new Ryzen 7 is simple. the fastest in the class. It is in its own way — since, for example, the Core i7-7820X is even faster. But this is a completely different story — and not always with a happy ending.

    What can be said about performance in the end? Firstly, the spread in the Ryzen 5 family is very large — APUs and CPUs differ radically: the former compete with the Core i3 at best, which is not bad, but the latter convincingly overtake the Core i5. Secondly, it’s hard to say that “X is only slightly faster than without X”: in the Ryzen 7 line, the difference cannot be called insignificant. On the other hand, there is a «third»: Ryzen 7 2700 still looks great. And, perhaps, not only in terms of performance.

    Energy consumption and energy efficiency

    The picture is even more mixed with energy consumption. Ryzen 5 2600X, as we have already noted, is not only faster than 1600X, but also hotter — but this does not apply to Ryzen 5 2600: it is identical to 1600. Our copy of Ryzen 7 2700X turned out to be very voracious — but 2700 is more economical than even 2600, not just 2600X.

    This is especially evident if you pay attention to the «net» consumption of processors. For example, it is clearly visible that at minimal loads, the new «without X» behave like last year’s Ryzen. But the «X» models, even in this case, began to work worse. Moreover, inspired by the results of the new younger members of the family, we also retested the Ryzen 7 2700X (and what if this is a consequence of “finishing” the firmware of the board or something like that) — he did not feel better.

    Performance, however, is also different for everyone, so it’s better to evaluate everything as a whole. And it is clear that for Intel processors, for example, the “energy efficiency” introduced in this way is largely a characteristic of the platform: the results of different processors and even different models, but of the same family, are always close. But for AM4, the spread of values ​​was large before, but the new processors only increased it. And you can’t just write it off for different instances — both X’s turned out to be worse than the old models, and both X’s were better. That is, in the first, the company clearly squeezed out all the juice, forcing the processors to give their best, operating at the highest possible frequency — a kind of «factory overclocking» (which, however, is not unique on the modern market). But the amount of «run-up» is probably related to specific instances — to the great horror of the company’s partners, who are forced to focus on the worst cases in final products. And for users, there is nothing good in such instability. Moreover, last year AMD had the opportunity to more or less flexibly sort the crystals, sending the “worst” ones to Ryzen 3 (as a result, our 1300X copy, recall, had an “energy efficiency” of only 1.05 points, which is much worse than all the other tested processors of this architecture) , and the “best” on Ryzen 7 (especially on the most expensive 1800X, which, as we observed in our time, not only worked a little faster than the 1700X, but also consumed a little less). In the same year, the freedom of maneuver was greatly reduced. On the one hand, junior quad-core models now simply make sense to do on completely different crystals. On the other hand, the “best” ones are needed for multi-chip models (Epyc or Ryzen Threadripper), and the “regular” Ryzen 7 also fell in price. Nothing criminal, of course, but that’s it. And it would be nice to see all the processors of the new family have the same “energy efficiency” as the Ryzen 7 2700, or at least close to that.

    Total

    If in the previous article we had complaints about the new Pinnacle Ridge family in terms of high power consumption, now they can probably be replaced by a complaint about the «lack of stability» of this indicator. On the other hand, it makes the choice of a particular processor more interesting and multivariate than when building a system based on Intel processors, adding some luck factor — which is exactly what many people like: it allows you not to get bored. And if you’re lucky, you’ll also save a lot of money.

    And one more small remark concerns the «hole» between the 2400G and 2600 — despite the fact that both processors belong to the Ryzen 5 family, but are very different in terms of functionality and performance. To some extent, the predicted Ryzen 5 2500X will be an intermediate solution, but this quad-core model without graphics and at a price comparable to the 2400G does not look very promising — even despite 16 MiB of cache and «full-width» PCIe 3. 0 x16 (recall, that all APUs have only eight PCIe lanes). In the end, the Ryzen 5 2600 also has it — not much more expensive, but with six cores. A year ago, such a distribution of processors by families did not raise any special questions, but now. Maybe it’s time to «devalue» all quad-core models to Ryzen 3 and, for example, Athlon? 🙂

    Ryzen 7 2700X or Ryzen 5 3600?

    Which is better for video and game rendering: Ryzen 7 2700X or Ryzen 5 3600?

    I’m editing in Sony Vegas, I would like to play on ultras.

    Better go for 5600x, it’s worth it. Again, support for the b450 chipset will save money on the motherboard. It and P5 3600 in overclocking are a very peppy thing

    if you know how to search, you can find it for 20k. At a price of 5 3600 at 15k, I don’t see a single advantage, except for the price, of the R5 3600. I think you can find time to look cheaper and 5k surcharge, because the processor is not taken for a couple of years. Don’t even start talking about overclocking.

    What is the advantage of Ryzen 7 1700

    The processor is a more advanced version of the CPU family. It has 8 cores and 16 threads. It excels at most computing tasks that require high performance. It is used for rendering video, processing large amounts of mathematical data, creating and visualizing three-dimensional objects. many other purposes.

    However, how relevant is the use of Ryzen 7 1700 in games, is it worth overpaying? Or is it better to get a Ryzen 5 1600?

    Comparison of processor performance in games

    As an example, I will use the tests Ryzen 5 1600 and Ryzen 7 1700 , which are presented on the YouTube channel RAM eShop. Its author talks in detail about the advantages of each CPU. And also gives the results of tests in various games.

    In order to reveal the capabilities of the Ryzen 7 1700 processor, the author of the YouTube channel took a fairly powerful gaming video card. This is NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti. The remaining components of the computer are also identical for the accuracy of the experiment. Only the processor changes in the system.

    After watching the video and comments from the author of the YouTube channel, I have the opinion that for gamers there is no need to buy a Ryzen 7 1700. In most games, it shows approximately the same FPS with the Ryzen 5 1600.

    However, not everything is so simple. In some games, Ryzen 7 is still superior to Ryzen 5. And if we take into account the fact that many gamers are let’s players, then Ryzen 7 1700 will be preferable. After all, its performance is enough for streaming rendering and streaming games on YouTube or Twitch.

    Of course, you can always buy a special device for streaming and reduce the load on the processor. However, in total it can cost more than buying a Ryzen 7. In general, in most games, the Ryzen 5 1600 shows identical performance. In some, it even outperforms the Ryzen 7 1700.

    This result is somewhat staggering. After all, in theory, the Ryzen 7 1700 should surpass the Ryzen 5 1600 in gaming performance. But in most cases this is not the case. The reason is that the Ryzen 5 has higher base clocks, and they overclock better. In many key characteristics, these two processors are identical. They have the same manufacturing process and core architecture, cache memory size, number of transistors.

    Which is more powerful AMD Ryzen 5 3600X or Ryzen 7 2700X? For games and tasks, Ryzen 3000 is not needed?

    Greetings to everyone on my PC Master channel, today we will figure it out and do preliminary tests of two High-performance mid-high processors, namely Ryzen 5 3600X vs R7 2700X, thereby determining whether it is worth overpaying for a particular processor.

    Let’s start with the technical characteristics of both processors.

    R5 3600X Specifications

    Comparing 2 of these high-end processors, the 3rd generation will have superior performance over 7 Ryzen due to smaller 7nm lithography and larger 32MB cache, high frequencies and a larger overclock of -4. 6 GHz.

    R7 2700X Specifications

    And now it’s time to talk about the advantages of the 16-thread R7 2700X, respectively, More cores and threads compared to 3600X, Overclocking potential is not much worse, It has a large cache size of 1 and 2 levels and more supported technologies that listed below, also more transistors 4940 vs 4800.

    Supported technologies R7 2700X

    AMD StoreMI technology
    AMD SenseMI technology
    AMD Ryzen™ Master
    AMD Ryzen™ VR-Ready Premium

    Specifications figured out, now tests

    games.

    1. 3DMark Time Spy

    In this test, the 7 Ryzen has a slight performance advantage despite the lower frequency difference of 100 MHz.

    2. Cinebench R20

    Here now the advantage for the 12-thread R5 3600X is almost 100 points difference, not a significant difference in performance, in general R5 is good, let’s move on.

    3. Adobe Premiere CC 2019

    In this «test», the 16th R7 streamer was dragged due to more cores and threads, and more technologies played a role.

    Now let’s move on to our games.

    Test bench:

    Computing center: R5 3600X/2700X
    Motherboard: X470
    The top one is responsible for the graphics: RTX 2080 Ti
    RAM: 16 GB 3600 MHz 16 dual rank

    Note: When testing games, the processors were overclocked to 4.3 GHz, the maximum possible graphics settings were set.

    1. Call Of Duty Modern Warfare

    In this game, there is practically no difference between the processors in performance, not excluding rare events, I can say that the R7 2700X is slightly ahead by 1-2 FPS.

    2. Apex Legends

    The situation is similar in this game, but the 16th streamer is noticeably ahead of its younger brother in some frames and the performance difference reaches 10-12 FPS in some places, perhaps more cores and capabilities of the R7 2700X processor were used in this game.

    3. The Division 2

    There is no noticeable difference in processor performance here, both show similar FPS.

    4. Battlefield 5

    In this game, an interesting case turned out, while on the R5 3600X FPS jumped from 196 to 171 then on R7 2700X FPS did not fall below 200 for 25-30 seconds, in the minimum and average FPS 2700X will have superiority.

    5. Assassin’s Creed Odyssey

    Here the difference in favor of the R5 3600 is 3-4 frames, at the minimum and at 0.1 there is also a slight advantage.

    6. Shadow Of The Tomb Raider

    This game prefers the R7 2700X and again, the difference is not that significant in the performance of these two monsters, the minimum FPS is 3-4 FPS higher in favor of a 16 threaded monster as well as the average.

    7. Escape From Tarkov

    Once again, the difference in favor of the R7 2700X is especially significant in rare events 98 vs 43, in terms of average it will be ahead of R7 by 3-4 frames, but the R5 3600 is not simple, does not rest senior R7.

    I think we can end here, we will conclude with a demonstration of the above tests, both processors are high-end and have high performance that not many can compare with, both will reveal powerful cards like RTX 2080 Ti and ways to run streams with games and video encoding, etc. , which In terms of overclocking, I’ll say this, both are excellently chasing and I have no complaints, at least for overclocking, processors for gamers and enthusiasts are suitable.

    However, they are suitable for anyone who wants to build a high-performance system for themselves for several years, I recommend that you purchase one of these two excellent processors.

    What you need to know about Ryzen 5 1600

    The Ryzen family of processors was designed with gaming in mind. Many consider them gaming processors. However, this is not quite true. They handle many other tasks that require multithreading and performance.

    Ryzen5 1600 9 processor1321 has 6 cores and 12 threads. This is the best option for computer games in terms of cost and performance, performance and getting the highest possible FPS. Today, new Ryzen 5 series (2600, 3600, 4600) have already been created. However, 1600 Ryzen is still relevant.

    Ryzen 5 1600 and Ryzen 7 1700 processors in games, which side has the advantage

    In many gaming projects, it is desirable to use 6-core 12-thread processors. However, do you need more cores and threads? I want to consider this question using the example of two gaming processors Ryzen 5 1600 and Ryzen 7 1700.

    More on this in this article .

    See also:

    • Ftpm nv corrupted or ftpm nv structure changed what is
    • Battletoads 2020 how to change language
    • Children of the sun lindemann what is the song
    • about

    • Why they put me in demoorgan GTA 5 RP
    • How to reinstall shaders in call of duty warzone

    We assemble and upgrade the system unit [part 2] — Computers

    JavaScript is disabled

    You have JavaScript disabled. Some functions may not work. Please enable JavaScript to access all features.

    Posts in the topic: 4670

    #31449918

    fell from the moon

    Sent 01/18/2015, 02:22:12

    Pinned

    A small FAQ on computer assembly. (ver 0.9.1 beta)
    Read to everyone who asks a question in this thread for the first time!

    1. This topic discusses the assembly of system units, for laptops there is another topic, questions about the service are asked here.

    Hidden text

    2. User tips in this topic will help you choose the best computer

    for you.

    Hidden text

    3. The right question is half the answer!

    Therefore, it is desirable, but not necessary, to format your message as follows:

    Hidden text

    4. Attention : Computer technology is developing very quickly, most parts of a conventional computer become obsolete much earlier than they fail physically.

    Hidden text

    5. Typical configurations:

    5.1 The simplest for the home.

    Hidden text

    5.2 Game room for the home.

    Hidden text

    6. It is best to collect in one company with a maximum guarantee for the system (up to 3 years).

    P.S. The FAQ will be added, and then, if possible, updated, if you have ideas and desire, I will be very happy if you participate in the creation.

    Post has been editedIGK: 18.01.2015, 17:23:27

    • Top

    #one

    Administrator

    Sent by 21.09.2012, 13:49:14

    Automatic message.
    This is the next part of the discussion of the topic.

    • Top

    #2

    Dimmmkhan

    Sent by 24.09.2012, 14:42:35

    hello everyone! The situation is this: I decided to assemble myself a game system unit. friends advise to push off from the Intel Core i7 2600 3400MHz.
    what kind of mother and video card will the members of the forum advise me? is it worth taking socket 1155? advise what to take.

    • Top

    #3

    vrum

    Sent by 09/26/2012, 08:40:15

    hello everyone! The situation is this: I decided to assemble myself a game system unit. friends advise to push off from the Intel Core i7 2600 3400MHz.
    what kind of mother and video card will the members of the forum advise me? is it worth taking socket 1155? advise what to take.

    budget? needs? score? and if in general:
    1. Processor S-1155 Intel Core i7-3770 3.4 GHz (HT, 8MB L3 Cache, Ivy Bridge), oem 1 year 47600 tg. 47600 tenge
    2. Cooler DeepCool Ice Edge 300U, 9cm fan, 2200rpm, 3 pipes, 39.58CFM, 4pin, 17.8 -28.1db(A), S1156/775/AMD (on tubes) 1 month 3800 tg. 3800 tenge
    3. Motherboard S-1155 Gigabyte Z77-D3H (Z77, 4DDR3, 2*PCI-Ex16, VIA VT2021 7.1, GbE LAN, 2*SATA3+4*SATA2, RAID, 4*USB3.0, D-Sub+ DVI+HDMI, ATX), Retail 1 year 22000 tenge. 22000 tenge
    4. PCI-E Gigabyte GeForce GTX560 Ti 1024/256 DDR5, (GV-N560OC-1GI), Retail 1 year 39900 tenge 39900 tenge
    5. RAM DDR3 1866/8Gb (4*2) Kingston HyperX T1 Black Series (2 sets), (KHX1866C9D3T1BK2/8GX) 1 year 12600 tg. 25200 tenge
    6. HDD Seagate 2 Тb, 7200.14, SATA3, 64Mb, (ST2000DM001) 1 year 19500 tenge 19500 tenge
    7. Hard drive SSD 2.5″ OCZ Agility 3, 60 Gb, SATA3, (AGT3-25SAT3-60G) 1 year 11800 tenge 11800 tenge ], oem 1 year 3100 tenge 3100 tenge
    9. Case AeroCool Strike-X One, black, w/o, for gaming PCs 1 month 6900 tg. 6900 tenge
    10. HEC Cougar RS650 power supply, rated power 650W, 12cm fan, 2*PCI-E, 4*Molex, 7*SATA, 80+ 1 year 11200 tg. 11200 tenge
    Total: 1

    tenge.

    Post has been edited by vrum: 09/26/2012, 08:42:10 AM

    • Top

    #four

    Loyt

    Sent by 28.09.2012, 19:23:30

    hello everyone! The situation is this: I decided to assemble myself a game system unit. friends advise to push off from the Intel Core i7 2600 3400MHz.
    what kind of mother and video card will the forum users advise me? is it worth taking socket 1155? advise what to take.

    i7 for toys is in most cases redundant. If the budget is large, you can take the minimum i5, such as 3450 or 3470, 4-core, costs less than 30 pieces. But even this is «for growth», if you want to save somewhere — feel free to take i3, because modern games use 2 cores through a stump-deck, or even spin on one.

    The bottleneck of games is almost always the video card, everything «saved» from other components can be thrown here. Yes, and here it makes no sense to take the very top (if you use several monitors or a monitor with some brutal resolution much more than 1920×1200 — then it’s a completely different matter), the difference between a card in the region of 70 pieces and a card in the region of 120 pieces will be visible only in synthetic tests. I would recommend something on the HD7850.

    CPU overclocking is pure prank now. Firstly, modern processors are chasing themselves, automatically, and just when the load on them increases, and not constantly, as during overclocking. Secondly, as it was already said before, their power is already excessive and the advantages of overclocking in normal applications will not even be noticeable. It is understandable, you can overclock everything, check out the addition of parrots in some benchmarks and live with a sense of inner satisfaction, just do not forget that you will have to pay a lot of extra money for this nonsense.

    Therefore, processors with index «K» are ignored.
    Motherboards on the z77 chipset — too.
    The H77 motherboard is quite enough, and even B77 is better. The main difference between them is the number of CAT3 ports (2 and 1), despite the fact that there is enough for hard drives and CAT1, and for SSD the difference between CAT2 and CAT3 is again visible only in benchmarks, there is no difference in operation. And given their price, the optimal use of SSD is the system disk, and everything else is on the hard drive. That is, two SATA3 is most likely an overkill in the next 5 years.

    There is no point in expensive memory either, because the price in this category is often cheated on show-offs like cool coloring or a radiator. Samsung and Hynix have the best memory, the frequency of 1600 is regularly supported by the process, it makes no sense to drive, 8 gigabytes «for growth» is about 9 pieces, in principle, and 4 gigabytes above the roof, but here the savings are cheap.

    • Top

    #5

    fell from the moon

    Sent by 28.09.2012, 21:01:01

    Where can I buy a complete system unit for Core i3?
    Interested in the quality of components and a sane service center with a three-year warranty.
    Additionally interested in the possibility of changing the configuration.

    Thank you in advance.

    Post has been editedFrom the moon fell: 09/28/2012, 21:55:15

    • Top

    #6

    Dimmmkhan

    Sent by 09/28/2012, 21:33:28

    2 vrum prices are expensive)
    2 Loyt thanks for the detailed answer!

    Intel Core i5 3450 3100MHz — 27 650tg
    and which mother is better to take for 1155?
    GIGABYTE GA-H61M-S1 — 6 975tg
    or
    ASRock H61M-HVS — 7 130tg
    is it worth considering these options?
    or
    ASUS P8H61-M LX3 Plus — 7 425tg or do I need to take more expensive options?

    and advise on the video card:
    which GeForce to take?

    from memory how is it better to take one board or split it into two?
    Transcend JM1333KLH-8G 8GB DDR3 1333 MHz — 6 075tg are these good brains?

    let’s define percent, mother and memory! and dalle advise the hard drive and network card with Wi-Fi.

    Post has been edited by Dimmmkhan: 09/28/2012, 10:02:59 PM

    • Top

    #7

    Stalinist

    Sent by 28.09.2012, 23:03:17

    hello everyone! The situation is this: I decided to assemble myself a game system unit. friends advise to push off from the Intel Core i7 2600 3400MHz.
    what kind of mother and video card will the forum users advise me? is it worth taking socket 1155? advise what to take.

    i7 for toys is in most cases redundant. If the budget is large, you can take the minimum i5, such as 3450 or 3470, 4-core, costs less than 30 pieces. But even this is «for growth», if you want to save somewhere — feel free to take i3, because modern games use 2 cores through a stump-deck, or even spin on one.

    The bottleneck of games is almost always the video card, everything «saved» from other components can be thrown here. Yes, and here it makes no sense to take the very top (if you use several monitors or a monitor with some brutal resolution much more than 1920×1200 — then it’s a completely different matter), the difference between a card in the region of 70 pieces and a card in the region of 120 pieces will be visible only in synthetic tests. I would recommend something on the HD7850.

    CPU overclocking is pure prank now. Firstly, modern processors are chasing themselves, automatically, and just when the load on them increases, and not constantly, as during overclocking. Secondly, as it was already said before, their power is already excessive and the advantages of overclocking in normal applications will not even be noticeable. It is understandable, you can overclock everything, check out the addition of parrots in some benchmarks and live with a sense of inner satisfaction, just do not forget that you will have to pay a lot of extra money for this nonsense.

    Therefore, processors with index «K» are ignored.
    Motherboards on the z77 chipset — too.
    The H77 motherboard is quite enough, and even B77 is better. The main difference between them is the number of CAT3 ports (2 and 1), despite the fact that there is enough for hard drives and CAT1, and for SSD the difference between CAT2 and CAT3 is again visible only in benchmarks, there is no difference in operation. And given their price, the optimal use of SSD is the system disk, and everything else is on the hard drive. That is, two SATA3 is most likely an overkill in the next 5 years.

    There is no point in expensive memory either, because the price in this category is often cheated on show-offs like cool coloring or a radiator. Samsung and Hynix have the best memory, the frequency of 1600 is regularly supported by the process, it makes no sense to drive, 8 gigabytes «for growth» is about 9 pieces, in principle, and 4 gigabytes above the roof, but here the savings are cheap.

    is absolutely correct. I will add that you do not need to take a PSU of 700-800 watts. 500 is enough normal. Super-duper coolers can also be omitted, the processors are not very hot, the main thing is that the system unit itself has a large blowing cooler

    • Top

    #eight

    Count Cagliotstro-2

    Sent by 29.09.2012, 22:21:39

    hello everyone! The situation is this: I decided to assemble myself a game system unit.

    1. If you take a video card, then why take a motherboard with all these HDMI, DVI and the like? Start with this to begin with.
    2. «PROC AND VIDEO» as it was said here is your starting point. This is actually all.

    Post has been edited by Count Cagliotstro-2: 09/29/2012, 22:22:17

    • Top

    #9

    fell from the moon

    Sent by on 01.10.2012, 01:41:14

    Criticize the configuration of the system unit!
    But before you criticize, please read my selection criteria.
    Thank you so much.

    Warranty for the assembled system unit — 3 years!
    I collect in the configurator of the company Pulser for this price is slightly higher, but for all 3 years and Asus.
    Users — pensioner and granddaughter 11 years old.

    Configuration:
    Intel Pentium G850 2900MHz (1155)
    Cooler DeepCool, for Socket 1155, Theta 16, 95W, Al+Cu, 9cm fan, 1800rpm, 32. 12CFM, 3pin
    MB Socket1155, MATX, iH77 (VGA+DVI+HDMI,SB,GNIC), ASUS P8H77-M, 4DDR3, 2PCIx16, PCIx1, 1PCI, USB3.0
    2xDIMM DDR3 2 GB Transcend, JM1333KLU-2G, CL9, 16 chip 48x, Sony Optiarc DDU1681S, Black, SATA
    Power supply ATX, HuntKey LW-6550HG GreenStar, 550W Real, 12cm fan, 20+4pin, 4 SATA, 2x6pin
    Case ATX midi tower AeroCool, VS-3 (Brown box), ( without PSU), black

    Total: 60 325 tenge.

    Intel Pentium G850 dual-core processor with Intel® HD Graphics, almost the same Intel® HD Graphics 2000, but without Intel® Quick Sync Video and a couple of other technologies that do not affect gaming performance.
    The simplest fan with a 95W copper insert, the processor emits a maximum of 65W, but in reality the G850 can compete with the Core i3-2100T (35W) in terms of heat dissipation!
    Motherboard, nothing unusual USB 3.0, SATA 6, but maybe change to simpler H61, H67!
    The hard drive is not the latest, but there is no more modern model from WD, is it possible to change to Seagate?
    The power supply was taken with a margin in case of adding video.
    The case has one drawback: USB 2.0 is displayed on the front panel instead of USB 3.0, but you just have to find an extension cable.

    What do you think?

    • Top

    #ten

    Count Cagliotstro-2

    Sent by 01.10.2012, 09:19:05

    Just buy them a laptop. Get free monitor and mobility.

    Post has been edited by Count Kaliotstro-2: 10/01/2012, 09:20:17

    • Top

    #eleven

    fell from the moon

    Sent by 01. 10.2012, 09:28:59

    Just buy them a laptop. Get free monitor and mobility.

    Requires a system unit, the rest is already there.
    Moreover, I do not know how to connect to a laptop — LPT printer.
    No idea how the USB-LPT adapter will work.

    • Top

    #12

    One

    Sent by 01.10.2012, 10:04:14

    What do you think?

    I would not take a cooler with a three-pin power supply, it will be noisy. It is necessary to take with a 4-pin, or special, low-speed silent models. A copper insert for such a processor is generally useless, pure aluminum will cool it easily.

    • Top

    #13

    fell from the moon

    Sent by 01.10.2012, 10:39:04

    I would not take a cooler with a three-pin power supply, it will be noisy. It is necessary to take with a 4-pin, or special, low-speed silent models. A copper insert for such a processor is generally useless, pure aluminum will cool it easily.

    In Pulser — nothing sane with a horizontal position is observed.

    • Top

    #fourteen

    One

    Sent by 01. 10.2012, 10:51:56

    In Pulser — nothing sane with a horizontal position is observed

    And what is this?

    • Top

    #fifteen

    fell from the moon

    Sent by 01.10.2012, 11:03:01

    In Pulser — nothing sane with horizontal position is observed

    And what is this?

    What you need!
    Thank you.

    • Top

    #16

    Collector

    Sent by 01. 10.2012, 14:21:28

    Help me to choose.

    Hidden text

    Post has been edited by Collector: 01.10.2012, 14:22:34

    • Top

    #17

    Dimmmkhan

    Sent by on 01.10.2012, 14:24:22

    repeat! I collect a system unit for games so that it is budgetary, but for 5 years it did not bother me. with the processor, they already helped me with advice. thank you all for this!
    Intel Core i5 3450 3100MHz — 27 650tg

    and which mother is better to take for 1155?
    GIGABYTE GA-H61M-S1 — 6 975tg
    or
    ASRock H61M-HVS — 7 130tg
    is it worth considering these options?
    or
    ASUS P8H61-M LX3 Plus — 7 425tg or do I need to take more expensive options?

    and advise on the video card:
    which GeForce to take?

    from memory how is it better to take one board or split it into two?
    Transcend JM1333KLH-8G 8GB DDR3 1333 MHz — 6 075tg are these good brains?

    let’s define percent, mother and memory! and then advise the hard drive and a network card with Wi-Fi.

    • Top

    #eighteen

    One

    Sent by 01.10.2012, 15:04:31

    2) Budget — 60-70 thousand tenge

    Fell off the moon collects just for the same budget, what prevents you from choosing a similar package?

    • Top

    #19

    IGK

    Sent by 01.10.2012, 15:35:28

    system for games to be budget but 5 years did not bother me

    Mission impossible.