My brother wants a new PC with only one main usecase: Playing

If he wants to stream, get the Ryzen. No brainer.

Go 1080p120+ instead.

File: Ryzen-Benchmarks-Stock-new.001-1440x1080.png (129KB, 1440x1080px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 1440x1080px

>>59220011
What about this though?

>>59220092
Why would anyone want to spend $160 less and only get 50% more performance?

7700K / GTX 1070 with a video splitter and a modest second system for the stream itself. Anything else is wrong.

>>59220221
I've heard that with that setup, getting audio working properly (ie, properly synced) can be a pain.

>>59220182
It's like 25~29% more performance on 7700k vs 1800x in streaming. But we don't know the resolutions or settings. :/

why would you want to play a competitive shooter at 4K60 instead of 144+Hz

File: index.png (83KB, 690x1161px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 690x1161px

Ryzen 1700 will be better than 7700K 'cuz x264.
Which you could probably do at --slower in 720p60 and that will the better as he will probably set to 2-2.5Mbps. HWEnc is not the same thing, quality wise

>>59220264
https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_ryzen_7_1800x_processor_review,11.html

File: 1481938713798.png (495KB, 600x572px) Image search: [Google]

495KB, 600x572px

>>59220528
>dat 6900k
Why would anyone pay 100% more for ~15% less performance? Intel BTFO.