AMD Ryzen 7 1700 vs Core i7 7700K
Whats better?
AMD Ryzen 7 1700 vs Core i7 7700K
Straightened my back. thanks
Only game and suck dicks: Intel
Be productive, get shit done and maybe game casually because that's what grown people do: AMD
/thread
7700k if your top priority is max fps in dota.
1700 if you're adult.
Gaming-7700k
Workloads-1700x
me too
>i7 is better please stop listening to shills AMD's chips are slower and more expensive in every benchmark that isn't cinema-bench or specifically targeted by BIOS settings to gimp the tests
>AMD is also not stable
Priority on games from the last 2 years and a majority of games for the next 2 years*: 7700K@5ghz
Everything Else: 1700
>*depending on Scorpio final specs, if it's 8core Zen, it's game over for quadcores.
GOLEM GET YA GONE
6900k
Gonna piggyback off of OP, I do a lot of video capturing and streaming through PCIE and USB capture devices, while I'm sure either would do it- which will handle rendering with something like H264 better?
R7 1700 60hz 1440p
pcpartpicker.com
$1445
>vs
i7 7700K >75hz 1080p
pcpartpicker.com
$1570
>max fps in dota.
holy fuck fag detected
no one cares about your shit channel so whatever you do to record footage does not matter at all.
JUST BUY THE DAMN 1700 ALREADY.
haha frickin nice one you roasted that guy i wish i was you
>which will handle rendering with something like H264 better?
Ryzen 7 1700. By far.
>which will handle rendering with something like H264 better
Ryzen 7 1700 will shit all over the 7700K in parallelised tasks like H264
1700
More cores, socket will have a way longer lifespan than the intel equivelent, more future proofing, more efficient
cpu.userbenchmark.com
(In before the same day one benchmarks that've been spammed by shills for weeks now)
>>*depending on Scorpio final specs, if it's 8core Zen, it's game over for quadcores.
Pretty much already confirmed from multiple sources, and the PS4 pro has 8 cores, so why would Microsoft do less when they're trying to compete? google.com
Intel makes a better product.
AMD has a better price point.
You need to ask yourself "is this extra performance being put to use?"
The answer is almost certainly no from a user experience perspective.
>userbenchmark
that shit is only accurate for hard drive speeds, are you fresh off the boat from Sup Forums?
>intel makes a better product
but they don't
...
I've benchmarked plenty of my own shit using it and it shows raw performance pretty well. Still better than Geekbench and Passmark.