Recently posted related deals
Great price and seems like cheapest so far with Free delivery.
Original Coupon Deal
wait for 5th gen
5 years ago, you'd have to add an extra 0 to the price for this amount of threads.. how things change so fast
Add and extra 0 to that years ago, and you'd have to have added 10 0's to that price and converted the entire land mass of Texas into a single 'super computer'.
Wtf am I taking about..
Wow that's cheap
Still soundly beaten by the cheaper i5-9400F in gaming. Anyone putting together a workstation with a particular need for a tonne of threads however should be all over this.
Friend, they are a generation and a half apart, not the most fair comparison.
First Intel chooses to use 14+++++++++++
To save monay and ripped off consumers,since no competition.
Second i5 9400f was released 1Q 2019 few months ago.
Third ryzen 7 2700 was released april last year.
Forth depending on wich type of game (if they uses more clock, or more memory speed, or more CPU processing the difference is impossible to see. A core i7 3770k can keep up in some games with a core i9. So depends. The i5 you are stacked with that clock speeds ryzen not that much.
@Femelo: Intel does not stay at 14+++++++++nm to save money - it’s because they cannot get the yields from their 10nm process. The silicon is cheaper at 7nm which AMD now commands and if Intel do not hurry up, they simply won’t be able to compete…
Interestingly a 3600 outperforms a 2700 in workstation benchmarks.
Worth considering paying the extra $20 or so for the 3600
oh, where'd u find $270 for 3600?
Actually about $30 more seems to be the frequent OzBargain listing for the 3600
@Salmando: For $26 more, 3600 is much better deal
Well that's completely wrong, an OC'd 2600x is very similar to a 9400f for gaming according to hardware unboxed https://youtu.be/hmhBgLSIneQ?t=771
I don't think the extra 4 threads would make the 2700 worse.
8 cores, 16 threads for $250
slap it in with 16gb of ram for ~120 and a solid b450 board for about ~150
basically give any system from that 2011-2013 era a complete overhaul now, as great as those sandy/ivy bridges were no point to keep on persisting with em, when you can get this type of value for like 500$
should be able to re-use all other components such as the case and whatnot, PSU would need to be replaced if its going on in age
The question being would I need to upgrade my R9 390x to have it not as a bottleneck for gaming?
This Ryzen has the same single and dual core performance as a i7 3770K. Dropping $500 for little to no performance gain might be a point to keep persisting.
you are moving off a platform that is almost 7-8 years old now, sure in benchmarks those CPU's may still kind of hang but in terms of real world use you can notice and feel the difference. you will find many people who have jumped off those old platforms and tell you the significant difference there is.
plus all those old chipsets don't have modern features
i mean sure you can have the mindset if it aint broke, dont fix it - if you are still getting what you need out of your system then sure i guess.
but i mean this is quite a good bang for buck path to take, plus you have options going down the track as well.
I have a i7 4790K which i use mainly for gaming and have pondered upgrading, but as tp0 said im not sure im going to see a tonne of benefits, especially for BF5. Do you think i will?
@jackwoz: to your question, yes BFV would benefit from being played on a ryzen 2700 with 8 cores
battlefield V is one of the games that thrashes the CPU, so for BFV specifically yes you will notice a benefit.
however, that CPU (although old) is not that bad so you could try overclocking it to get maybe a slight performance boost in the mean time.
I got a 1700X and a mate has 4790K, both have 1080Ti and his struggles to hit 100fps in BFV. I never drop below 100, mostly sit 120-150 depending on map and what's going on.
Identical settings at 1440p 144hz.
If you're happy with the performance you currently get then no point upgrading.
I'm glad I upgraded to Ryzen, it's certainly giving me plenty of performance for my needs :)
@DisabledUser242659: Thanks. It sounds like the CPU is definitely a bottleneck. However, I run a 75hz monitor. So those kinda of numbers are dreamland for me. I have a measly RX 580 (for now!)
Unless you need the cores and threads, I'd recommend spending a bit more for the 3600 which would destroy this in gaming and everyday tasks.
it depends, i think having an 8 core cpu for $250 is still a fantastic buy. plus it gives you alot more legs to grow into, games will eventually use more cores so the performance benefit you get from higher single core performance now might be lessened in a few years time when multi core performance becomes more of a focus.
plus just having additional cores lets you game/stream easier
Games that better utilise multiple cores/threads have been "coming soon" for almost 10 years. Admit it, it's not happening.
Having additional cores is no good if those cores have poor single core performance. You can just run more things, slower.
The extra money is definitely well spent on the impressive Zen 2.
the one thing you are overlooking however is that now the next gen of game consoles will be using zen2 type CPUs, the next generation of game consoles will have multi core CPU's - these days games console development is what leads the industry, PC games are often just ports from consoles.
if the consoles will be using zen2 type CPUs, then i expect developers to actually make use of the cores
@mooncake111: Current gen consoles have 8 cores too, you know that right?
Even the PS3 had 8 cores (kind of, not in an exactly traditional sense).
Games like Division 2, BFV? I'm sure there's a lot more.
I recommend watching this, it's a long 30 minute video but I think this channel is great and it shows you that the 3600 is just amazing value. It even beats the 2700x in several workstation tasks!. I think you can get it for around 290 right now which is worth it IMO.
as is said in my original response, i acknowledge you get better single core performance. but i mean 5-6 FPS difference in games is negligible.
ultimately it comes down to user needs, im willing to forego some game performance if it means i have an additional 2 cores, which means i might get another 12-24 months of use down the track from my system or if it means i am able to encode my media while gaming
but i mean 5-6 FPS difference in games is negligible.
but i mean 5-6 FPS difference in games is negligible.
This should be the other way around. Where the 2700 beats a 3600 the difference is almost negligible. Where the 3600 beats the 2700 the difference can be as large as 20%.
@bentan77: depends on the game, but once you hit your target framerate then it doesn't matter. plus at higher resolutions the gap in CPU performance becomes less significant. i mean we are already moving away from 1080 being the default,as larger screens are becoming more affordable
This is an excellent CPU for productivity on a budget
This will be good for VMs / media server?
If you upgrade, make it worth it.
Spend a bit more and get the 3700X.
If you want a jack of all trades, the 3600. If you need high end workstation, wait for the 3950x. Just my opinion, but I'm waiting for the latter to be released.