/b/, I'm going to build a new computer in the next month.

Amd for cpu and Nvidia for gpu as amd mid and high tier gpu prices are extremely inflated due to crypto currency mining. Also amd has better performance and price accross the board compared to their intel counterparts so there's no reason to go for Intel at the moment. The higher clocked Intel chips might be better at gaming but you might sacrifice in workstation applications that make use of the higher core count of the amd ryzen chips.

>>744021984
Just adding this: the most price efficient system rn is the 1700x paired with a 1080/ti

I wouldn't buy a 4 core processor today.. not even the i7-7700k (which is fastest for gaming currently). These chips will start to show their age quickly. If you want an intel chip for its faster single core speed, then I would wait for the new coffee lake chips (8th gen 6 core processors). Otherwise I would get a ryzen 5 1600X, or ryzen 7 processor.

>>744021263
I'm actually in the middle of rebuilding too, I would say AMD Ryzen 1700 w/ Nvidia 1080. the 1080 TI is only if you're really going to be doing 4k gaming if your not then save some money and just get a regular 1080. also unless your going to be doing SLI then get a B350 motherboard

i have a intel 6700k and a 1080 gpu
been running it for a year now and it's been really good to me.

If you really care about processor capability I would say go with Intel. The equivalent priced AMD CPUs still don't hold a candle to Intel performance.
Source: passmark.com cpu score comparisons

>>744021263
I have a Ryzen and absolutely love it.

>>744022316
Or 1700 if you plan on overclocking a bit or if you want lower power usage.

>>744022316
>Just adding this: the most price efficient system rn is the 1700x paired with a 1080/ti
top kek fuck no
that gpu is over a grand
no where near equals the price performance ratio of even an over inflated polaris gpu

>>744023318
Intel fan boy spotted

>>744023727
1080 is 520US$? I don't think that's 1000$

>>744023318
Nice b8

>>744021263
I haven't payed much attention to hardware in years but intel with nvidia combo used to be the goto, gtx1070 and i5 seems to be a decent budget rig and 1080ti and i7 7 series was the best, correct me if I'm wrong

>>744023848

EXACTLY 1080 is cheapest around $520 and 1080ti is around cheapest $750 or so.

What do you guys think of a 1050ti and i3-7100 for a budget build?

Intel master race, there is a reason why AMD is cheaper...

>>744025382
Are you even aware of Ryzen, Threadripper, and vega? Intel is goofing up because they never had to deal with competition in so long, AMD is starting to give them a run for their money.

>>744025382
Thing is amd is cheaper AND better

Are there any advantages to coupling an AMD CPU with an AMD GPU?

>>744024356
lmao the 1070 is aruond 500

>>744025382
Except Intel had to literally hire shills to shit on AMD in the past and lost a lawsuit because of that and now they're in full damage control mode again

1600x/1060 and call it a day

Ryzen or nothing. I have my 1600X at 4.0 GHz right now on my MSi gaming pro B350m, 8gb DDR4 and being bottlenecked by a R9 270 I got for $30. It still mines altcoins though, this CPU is a beast.

I'd go AMD I spent roughly $330 on my chip and motherboard

Chip: Ryzen 1600 (6C/12T) ($227) paired with H60 WC and get about 1200 on cinebench
Motherboard: ATX B350 (MSI)

>>744026977
Update on cinebench

with chrome open (to lazy to return to thread) and listening to music

Base clock (3.2Ghz): 1093
OC Stable (3.75Ghz): 1186

if I closest all my shit I could easily hit 1200 (my highest ever (last saved) was 1268 but I know I beat that intel X5650 by 1 or 2 though)

>>744027345
Weak oc. Tfw silicon lottery.

>>744021263
AMD. Cheaper and pretty much just as good.

>>744027626
Yeah I lost the silicon lottery anything about 3.8Ghz for me is unstable and fucks me over but my old 9370 I got to boot on 5.2Ghz once and was semi stable on 4.9-5Ghz but couldn't load it to much but 4.8Ghz on that was perfect

Intel/Nvidia

Butt hurt poorfags will cry all day, but they know the truth

>>744021263
don't fall for the Intel meme, it's been years since they were actually superior

>>744028139
what I spent on a CPU and motherboard alone is still cheaper than an i7 and has 2 more cores and 4 more threads than said i7

Go Ryzen. But if you have the money
THREADRIPPER

God damn that thing is beautiful I wish I had the money

>>744026977
What idle temps are you getting with the h60? I got a i5 6600k paired with the h60, loving the 18-20c idle temps.

>>744022316
LOL I love it. 10/10 would bang

>>744029222
roughly 29C and on load it goes up to a high of 40C

for general gaming and office stuff, you don't need a 1080 like all elitist fags say. simply get yourself a nice i5 like a i5-6500 or if you're feeling cucky go for a i5-6700k (kaby lake processors used to require bios flashes, idk because there are probably new motherboards out at this point that support them without flashes, if so just replace the 6 with 7). For a gpu you don't necessarily need more than a gtx 1060, but a gtx 1070-based graphics card should be about perfect. If getting an overclockable processor (honestly any processor that runs over 3 gHz should have this) get a cryorig H7 or hyper 212 evo for cooling. Not necessary for a casual build to include an AIO or a full hardline custom loop. This is probably your most cost effective pc option.

>>744030007
this, please follow these directions; ryzen is good for general tasks and stuff like rendering videos, but intel prevails in gaming tests.

>>744030287
intel beats ryzen in games because ryzen is new and a new build give it time for games to optimize ryzen to use its full potential

>>744025207
I have a 1050ti and an AMD 6300. It can run 1080p easily.

>>744030474
either way the build calls for casual gaming and an intel is reliable and already optimized in games, and doesn't show too much of a downfall vs. ryzen in cpu-intensive tasks such as video rendering.

>>744030554
go intel if you feel like paying out the ass for a slightly better performance

>>744030622
go intel if you don't mind paying maybe a hundred bucks more for a reliable experience in the short-term future***

File: 1502197826296.gif (2MB, 417x417px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 417x417px

My system:

GPU: GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-7700K CPU @ 4.20GHz
Memory: 16 GB RAM (15.96 GB RAM usable)

>>744030826
I was gonna go with amd cpu but I got a great deal on the 7700k. Think I paid $229

>>744022692
no ones gonna do sli, sli is useless

>>744028717
those are not real cores. those are not real threads

>>744022844
i'm running 1080 for 5 years already.

File: 1504266842556.gif (127KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 600x600px

>>744021263
Fuck Shintel

>>744025382
yep, the reason being amd doesn't inflate their prices as much as intel does, also intel market segmentation is lolworthy.
1048576 different CPUs all differ by one feature or lack of it. HURR DURR YOU WANT HT, PAY 1024X MORE, shit like this.
Fuck off Intel, you've lost this year. Time to start actually improving your CPUs, releasing old shit with new names and toothpaste under the lid isn't the future.

File: 1502378124390.jpg (112KB, 691x771px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 691x771px

>>744021263
Buy 1700 or 1600 then download ryzen master and overclock to 3.8-4.1ghz. GG Intel fucking dead already. covefe lake gonna be 6 core shit finally after what 8 years of fucking quad cores. fuck the jews at Shintel

>>744021984
This nigger is right.
Ryzen is amazing performance and great prices.

AMD used to be great for a GPU choice if your main concern was price to performance, I got a rx 480 when they first came out and were $200, but now they are priced close to $500 or $600, so you are better off with Nvidiea

Nvidea has been superior for a while performance wise, but now they are superior pricing wise too. You can get a GTX 1080 (4K capable) for around $500.

>>744031826
>Nvidea has been superior for a while performance wise, but now they are superior pricing wise too.
the performance part isn't exactly true as they often gimp visuals in their drivers, also as far as I know nvidia is shit in async, whereas AMD actually can do that. AMD used to be shit mostly because of their shit drivers tbh, not sure where they're now with that, as the last GPU i bought was 1060 (im a fan of low power and still being able to game). my previous was 270x.

>>744032077
to continue, currently nvidia seems to be superior for this generation of games (which is why i got 1060 without really thinking much), but who knows whet the future holds.

Go AMD. AMD beats Intel at every respective price point. If you want the best in the business than buy a 7700k but that's the only argument that you can make for buying an Intel chip atm.

I heard news that Intel's 8000 series is gonna wreck face. Might wanna wait and do some research on what Intel has up its sleeve

>>744031225
yeah on the FX chips...

>>744026706
Literally my exact setup. I want to upgrade the r9 270, but not sure what to get?

Economy build? then get AMD/Nvidia
High end build? Intel (wait till 8th gen later this month)/Nvidia

>>744021263
get an intel.

>>744032234
amd can only beat intel on price and nothing else. single core performance cannot be matched with intel's latest offerings.

anyway..
want to be a dumb faggot? buy an amd. want real performance per core? intel.

>>744021984
>inflated due to crypto currency mining

has nothing to do with it, you dribbling spastic.

>>744022480
>These chips will start to show their age quickly

said nobody.. ever.

what the fuck is wrong with you people? it's like the world's computer illiterate morons of the planet have gathered in the same thread today.

File: tracerIRL.jpg (81KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 640x480px

>>744032077
> they often gimp visuals in their drivers
Agreed. I fucking hate Nvidea drivers. I have an Nvidea in my gaming lapton and I can't stand it. Add to that Nvidea is really pushy and bitchy about their driver updates and heaven forbid you try and crossfire a 1070 and a 1080.

I'm an AMD fanboy. I game on 1080p 60hz TVs so price to perfomance has always been more important than the absolute best. When AMD drops a new driver, I get excited and the drivers always give serious visible gains in improvment in performance (pushing some cards to 50% improvement). I thought the RX series was gonna revolutionize making your own PC and crush consoles dead. RX 480 and 580 were light 4k, maxed 2k gaming for $200. But then the fucking minors came.

When a card that struggles with low settings on 4k is $150 more than a card that can crush medium to high settings on 4k, I can't push for it. Yes, AMD will let you crossfire so long as the cards are in the same architect family. Yes, they're drivers will push the life of your card way past what should be the experation date. Yes, they are just easier to deal with.... but I can't justify that kind of a price spike for 3/5ths the performance. It sucks. I really thought RX would change the world and was gonna go on a PC building spree.

>>744031610
Intel inflates prices? More like AND has to cut rheir proves to get uninformed idiots to buy their crap