Which is better for a non-overclocker? i7-7700 or R7 1700?

>>59607542
r7 1700, but i dont understand why you wouldent overclock, its free performance

>>59607542
i7 7700

define
>better

price, performance, availability, energy usage, etc etc
a generic "better" prolly means you're just trolling, so fuck you

7700. Amd's crash after you oc them 100mhz anyway. Don't go for the indian piece of shit

r7 1700

>>59607745
do not listen to this jew. ryzen after ram fix that corrects the ram speed is better then the intel

File: IMG_2564.jpg (102KB, 601x806px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 601x806px

Choose for yourself

>>59607542
7700 by far lmfao

>>59607542
>non overclocker
G4560

>>59607712
Cheaper mobo
>>59607850
Go away with your piece of trash
>>59607744
This

>>59607885
A $50 pentium has better single core performance than amd's $600 flagship. No one but street shitters, shitskins, virgin weeb loser buys amd

r7 1700
Especially if you plan to keep it for several years, since 8 cores will be able to keep up longer than 4 cores.

>>59607933
flame that burns twice as much must be an intlel fanboi

>>59608020
eight weak cores are worse than 4 strong cores

File: rotten milk technology.jpg (141KB, 650x889px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 650x889px

>>59607712
>>59607781
>>59608020
>retarded shills actually recommending ryzen

>>59608060
>This same benchmark again

File: IMG_2649.png (112KB, 806x580px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 806x580px

>>59608074
Nice rebbutal you dumb indian. It's like your 8 core cpu could beat at least a 2 core i3. Oh wait

>>59608060
>>59608100
>gaymen benchmarks

>>>/v/

File: Ryzen-Rise-of-the-Tomb-Raider-1080p-Very-High-Preset.png (22KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 800x600px

>>59608100

File: 1489121025154.png (61KB, 1306x1646px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 1306x1646px

>>59607542
7700k for gaming
1700 for heavy multi threaded workloads

I love shill always using old benchmark result

File: 1488463869810.png (25KB, 687x694px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 687x694px

>>59608128
That bench looks suspicious

File: IMG_2800.jpg (460KB, 2140x1214px) Image search: [Google]

460KB, 2140x1214px

>>59608153
DigitalFoundry, video uploaded yesterday. 7700k still DEMOLISHES your indian shit, no matter how many bioos updates poojet rolls out

File: Screenshot_2016-08-16-19-24-37-1.png (692KB, 922x1112px) Image search: [Google]

692KB, 922x1112px

>>59608180
But but but dx12 will use all 8 cores!

File: 1490620326061.png (650KB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

650KB, 960x540px

>>59607827
And now back in reality.

Man, you can almost count all the samefagging.
>>59607827
>>59608060
>>59608100
>>59608147
>>59608179
>>59608180

>>59607542
Gaming only (no background applications) - 7700K
Everything else - R7 1700

>>59608219
He's been sent back from the future to correct the global freezing problem.

>>59607827
ryzen is not the intel killer it look like it was going to be but still that's straight up bullshit

>>59608219
>>59608241
>>59608251
>memes vs actual benchmarks

Confirmed for indian weeb forever alone fat hairy ugly smelly virgins who shit in the street with their poo in loo made cpoo

File: hiding.png (365KB, 600x561px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 600x561px

>>59608180
>60+ FPS on ryzen
>still shit in peoples eyes
>I think that hardware getting 60fps is good
>pls no bully

>>59608291
go back to /asp/

>>59608297
your replying to shills

>>59608297
Humans can see up to 247 hz and 240hz monitors already exist.

>>59608291
>fake memes vs outdated memes
Fixed it for you, anon.

>>59608219
Swing and a miss.

Seriously, what did I say that was wrong?
8 core Zen chips are bad at Gaming
But good at heavy multi threaded applications.

File: Screenshot_2017-03-27-12-53-25-1.png (109KB, 1055x625px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1055x625px

>>59608325
Forgot Pic

>>59608325
they're 10% better in video remdering than a 4 core cpu but %60 worse in gaming. Ryzen seems like a bad purchase to me

If you play highly threaded games like Battlefield 64 player MP, then Ryzen...

If you run 144Hz, Intel...

If you don't want to OC, either get the 1800X or 7700k...

>>59608060
>>59608100
>>59608128
>>59608147

For gaming, yes Ryzen definitely isn't the best choice, but for enterprise it has Intel scrambling. Unless OP tells us whether he's gaming or building a workstation I'd tell him to go with the 7700.

>>59608357
Rashjeet just added a "X" to the naming scheme so he could sell his shit to retards like you, in reality when you oc a 1800X 100mhz it crashes your mobo

>>59608382
Enterprises aren't poor indians who need to refute to using shit hardware made by amd. They can afford a 6900k or a 6950x altogether.

>>59607885
That pentium has HT, so it's pretty much an i3 but cheaper.

>>59608396
The fuck are you on

I said if you don't want to OC, get the fucking 1800X, it's clocked higher

>>59608430
It's advertised as 4.1ghz when it boosts with pajeet's secret curry technology but in reality it crashes when you overclock it to even 4ghz.

>>59608430
If you DO want to OC, get the 1700, because it's cheaper and OC's the same.

You're gonna get shitty bins with all of them, because they're so new, but it doesn't make sense to buy a an 1800X to OC it when IT'S ALREADY FUCKING OVERCLOCKED

>>59607542
The G4560 has hyperthreading, so it's pretty much an i3 on the cheap:

https://youtu.be/FUapuF0y30s

https://au.pcpartpicker.com/list/Ww7wFd

>>59608457
Lmao the 6900k can overclock to 4.5ghz

>>59608470
Don't forget even pentium has higher single core performance than ayymd 1800x flagshit

>>59608418
Can someone explain to me why enterprises need faster and faster hardware all the time? What the fuck are they doing that computer hardware constantly needs to get faster as fast as possible? How much datamining REALLY goes on? What are they simulating? A spaceship with a hundred quadbillion parts landing on mars? It's not like theres been a manned mission or some shit. They've already landed rovers a decade ago, and nowadays space X uses their shit to launch more facebook satelittes so some pajeet can update their status with a hd video in buttfuck nowhere india

File: 1476946858531.jpg (544KB, 800x1113px) Image search: [Google]

544KB, 800x1113px

>>59608291
Stay mad Shlomo.
We're buying Ryzen because of how well it preforms all round.
The gaming benchmarks are still good. Just because the AMD chip comes in under an Intel one means next to fuck all.
If anything you're actually doing free advertising for Ryzen. You're fucking yourself over.
Very few people will give a fuck about 10-20 frames when it's already over 100.
And a large majority of consumers are moving to higher core counts.
>muh IPC
Who gives a fuck about that any more. We're getting more cores and developers will have to cater to it.
Clutching to IPC is a serious disservice to the progression of computational science. Sure IPC is helpful, but it's a finite resource.
It's over.

>>59608497
Like they catered to faildozer's 8 cores? Not happening my poojet, developers never bother with shit hardware (see how much they cares about faildozer's 8 cores)

>>59608471
(((((can))))) hit 4.5, but you'd be a lucky motherfucker since broadwell-e is a burning dumpster fire compared to haswell-e for overclocking. My old 5820k hit 4.7 with acceptable volts and Temps, with room to go higher if I ever wanted to go full retard. From what I have heard and seem, the 6xxx lineup can't dream of hitting those clocks. My 1800x hits 4.1 @ 1.4v, fast enough for me these days, though admittedly I look forward to a revision of the arch that can handle higher clocks at saner voltages.

>>59607827
>>59608060
>>59608100
>>59608179
I wonder how many times these same shitty day one GAYMURR benchmarks are going to be posted before the shills run out of shekels.

>>59607542
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-7700K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-1700/3647vs3915

You are trading 30% single core for 60% multicore.

>>59608794
>http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-7700K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-1700/3647vs3915

Do those benches get distorted by people overclocking?

>>59607542
For non-overclock, 1700 is pretty much the worst. >>59607740 >>59607821 and >>59607712 are wrong in this regard since its base clocks are pretty awful.

You should wait for the 1600X, or get the 1700X(they're $30 off at a few places now).

>>59608060
>2133 ram
>before release day
>performance has gone up drastically and in may even more

>>59608470
>2012
>advocating a dual core

pls

>>59607712
Only gratis if you have someone else paying your electricity bill.
But yeah, overclocking is a nice way to extend CPU lifetime (performance-wise - OC'ing can also break you CPU)

>>59608893
They have seperate listing for OC and non-OC

>>59608488
Kill yourself, shill.

File: 1490041495857.png (944KB, 1228x1502px) Image search: [Google]

944KB, 1228x1502px

>>59608565
>waaaah
Consider suicide

>>59608179

>guru3d.


Kekd

>>59608761
Those gaming benches are important as OP probably going to game at some point.

I literally said Zen was far superior when it came to heavy work loads.

A shill isnt gonna advocate for the competition.

I stand by my opinion
7700k-gaming
1700x-workloads ex.

>>59610056
7700k has 10-15 max FPS lead on Ryzen, while having poor minimum FPS and microstutter because of poor scaling, lack of cores/threads and shitty SMT. Unless you can tell the difference between 110 FPS and 130 FPS at 1080p, you aren't going to get much more out of Intel for gayman.

File: 1488464621854.png (74KB, 806x580px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 806x580px

>>59610086
>while having poor minimum FPS and microstutter because of poor scaling,

Incorrect, a 7700k posts better 1% lows than Zen does.

If you have 8 background processes, sure that might hurt a 4 core,

Also, AMD poors were claiming latency and frame time spikes didn't matter when looking at the furyX.
Make up your mind.

Ramesh does it again.

>>59610783
Wasn't this exact same shitty single thread optimized game benchmark posted earlier in this thread? Not everyone plays RTS and only RTS, retard.

>>59607542
Depends on what you're doing. If you do any non-gaming stuff 1700 is hands down a way better deal, but if gaming's your primary use scenario I'd go i7 7700 or i5 7500

Buying AMD products is antisemitic.

You niggers are still at it? The 1700 is the best bang for the buck CPU out there, there is no debating it. The 7700k excels and it does beautifully being THE fastest CPU on single threaded applications.
Fuck off toddlers.

>>59607542
Always ryzen, why pay the same amount for less cores?

Also it takes literally a minute to go into Ryzen Master and punch in 3700mhz 1.3V

File: INTEL-HASWELL-66.jpg (169KB, 537x515px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 537x515px

>>59610964
i.e. the only applications that matter. Face it, shill, AMD is, always has been, and always will be complete and utter trash.

>>59610986
kek

File: Screenshot_2016-08-05-00-07-54-1.png (471KB, 932x1012px) Image search: [Google]

471KB, 932x1012px

>>59610903
Nice argument
Poo in the fucking loo

File: 1488669819153.png (1MB, 1919x1079px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1919x1079px

>>59610964
>1700 is the best bang for the buck CPU out there
Not for gaming, as cheaper CPUs beat it.
Zen is also heavily dependent on fast DDR4.

>>59611279
Fantastic, I can still play 240Hz on Ryzen.

>>59611247
kys cuck

File: good goy.png (604KB, 800x523px) Image search: [Google]

604KB, 800x523px

>>59610986
*chases shekel down the street*

if I run multiple programs at the same time which one do I want to get? i.e. emulators and scripts for botting games and overwatch