# 2700X vs 7700K, should I stay or should I go?



## Liviu Cojocaru (Apr 24, 2018)

Hi guys,

Lately I am not that much into gaming anymore, it is more Virtual labs (virtual Servers and VM's) for learning purposes and also I am doing a bit of video editing and music creation (Music maker) so my question would be:

Would it be a *GOOD* choice to move to AMD's 2700x or I would be just fine using my current 7700K? I can feel that the 4 cores on the i7 are holding back a bit

Thank you in advance for your respectable opinions


----------



## londiste (Apr 24, 2018)

If you feel the 4 cores are holding you back, go.


----------



## JalleR (Apr 24, 2018)

VM wise it is more a question about GOOOOD storage (SSD all the WAY)  ,  Video editing you will win som but how much now that you are running @4,8...





TPU test https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_7_2700X/6.html


----------



## evernessince (Apr 24, 2018)

The 2700X is the better choice.  Same single threaded performance as the 7700K but double the cores.  Any application than can use them will benefit.


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Apr 24, 2018)

It is a matter of how much more I can get as I will have to invest some money and also a few hours of my time and I need to know if it's worthwhile.


----------



## FYFI13 (Apr 24, 2018)

I don't think you will see any difference while playing around with virtual machines, unless you're running 7+ of them at the same time. Same for video editing, 7700K at 4.8GHz performance is way too close to 2700X to consider buying a new system.
If you have money burning your pocket, get 8700K and overcklock it.


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Apr 24, 2018)

FYFI13 said:


> If you have money burning your pocket, get 8700K and overcklock it.



I don't want to go that way anymore...I'll probably stick with what I have for now


----------



## qubit (Apr 24, 2018)

Sounds like a better bet would be to go to 32GB RAM on your current system rather than go to the expense of changing CPU, mobo, RAM and likely, cooler.

The apps you're using all demand a fair bit of memory, especially the VM and if you run more than one at once.

Oh and upgrade to an SSD!


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 24, 2018)

Liviu Cojocaru said:


> I can fell that the 4 cores on the i7 are holding back a bit


How can you tell it is the CPU? While 16GB is decent amount of RAM, when loading up VMs, even 16GB can be restricting. (qubit must be 1/2 cup of coffee ahead of me today).

I also agree storage I/O can be a factor so migrating to an SSD may be a more efficient use of the money burning holes in your pocket.


----------



## arroyo (Apr 24, 2018)

HODL dat CPU

Seriusly 7700k has planety of power, which you cannot utilize now. I jumped from 1055T to 8700K and it was negligible change in performance. Changing my SSD+HDD to NVME was huge difference in system speed.


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Apr 24, 2018)

I limit the VM's to 2GB of RAM so the 16GB are more than enough for 2 or 3 VM's running at the same time. I also have 2SSD's one m.2 275 GB and another 250GB Sata currently both are used for OS, software and games...I could probably go this way and upgrade the SATA SSD to 500GB. I was thinking that while having only 4 cores/8 threads will see a bit of an impact on performance while doing more than a few tasks at the same time...I think before I make any decision I should try and work out how much the current CPU can take


----------



## ASOT (Apr 24, 2018)

7700K for a 2700X not quite,u gain more core but performance wise is not such a difference

Gaming not worth it,more of editing way.


----------



## qubit (Apr 24, 2018)

Liviu Cojocaru said:


> I limit the VM's to 2GB of RAM so the 16GB are more than enough for 2 or 3 VM's running at the same time.


Running W10 in 2GB RAM will cause it to bottleneck and run slowly. There's your source of performance issues when it comes to VMs, at least. 4GB minimum is required to let W10 run properly.


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Apr 24, 2018)

qubit said:


> Running W10 in 2GB RAM will cause it to bottleneck and run slowly. There's your source of performance issues when it comes to VMs, at least. 4GB minimum is required to let W10 run properly.


Thank you for the advice, I am quite aware  (I am an IT Technician) but for these types of tasks like Group Policy verification and generic tasks it's enough and I only run 2 VM's at the same time. I incline to agree that more RAM would be beneficial but for what I am doing at the moment it should suffice especially when the RAM prices are so high


----------



## Mighty-Lu-Bu (Apr 24, 2018)

Liviu Cojocaru said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> Lately I am not that much into gaming anymore, it is more Virtual labs (virtual Servers and VM's) for learning purposes and also I am doing a bit of video editing and music creation (Music maker) so my question would be:
> 
> ...



Look at this:

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-7700K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-2700X/3647vsm475904

The 2700x is superior to the 7700k in almost every way except single core performance, but it's single core performance isn't too far off because AMD actually managed to close the gap. The 2700x decimates the 7700K in multicore performance, it has the same gaming performance (arguably better with modern games) and it has much better workstation performance. It's definitely the better processor, but I am not sure it is worth buying a new motherboard and CPU for since you aren't going to get any huge performance boosts when compared to your old processor. I would get it if you want to future-proof your system, or I would wait until the 2800x gets released because that is going to be a beast of a processor.

I definitely have my eyes on it because I think I would notice the performance gains coming from a 1700x, but I may just end up waiting for the 2800x.


----------



## John Naylor (Apr 24, 2018)

The didn't list the 7700k this time but as you might imagine ... it's not a big difference for any of the recent top end CPUs.   Rndering is an area, where more cores would provide an edge.  So as is customary, it will depend upon, specifically, what you are running, how often you do it and if it is worth a MoBo / CPU upgrade.

In After Effects


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 24, 2018)

Liviu Cojocaru said:


> Thank you for the advice, I am quite aware  (I am an IT Technician)


FTR, being an IT technician IN NO WAY means you are an expert in VM memory management specifically, or all things IT in general. IT is industries within industries. Being an IT technician just says you have technical expertise in some area within IT. It could pulling fiber, building UNIX boxes, manning the level 1 tech support for your ISP, or a member of the Geek Squad who upgrades RAM.

Nothing personal for I too am an "IT technician" as seen via the link in my sig. Just note if there has been one constant I've learned in my 45+ years as an IT tech, it is that the more I learn about IT, the more I realize there is _yet_ to learn. 

As qubit correctly notes, 2GB is most likely your biggest (smallest?) bottleneck. So I go back to my (our) original suggestion and recommend bumping up your RAM to 32GB - or in your case, even up to your board's maximum of 64GB would be probably give you the most best bang for your money - rather than buying what amounts to a new computer.

****

Getting back to the 2700x vs 7700k debate - I think it is important to note this is NOT just about the CPUs. Because the 2700x requires a new platform (motherboard), you will also be upgrading to a newer (and perhaps faster) motherboard and possibly new (and perhaps faster) RAM too. And IMO, if buying a new motherboard and RAM, you might as well go all in and go all SSD too (at least for the "working" disks). So for sure, it is likely you will see some decent performance gains (assuming you get enough RAM) but it will NOT be due to the new CPU alone. 

As a side note, remember a new motherboard does, for licensing purposes, constitute a new computer. And OEM/System Builder Windows licenses (the most common type) are not "legally" transferable to new computers under any circumstances. So don't forget to budget for that as well, if applicable.


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Apr 24, 2018)

Bill_Bright said:


> FTR, being an IT technician IN NO WAY means you are an expert in VM memory management specifically, or all things IT in general. IT is industries within industries. Being an IT technician just says you have technical expertise in some area within IT. It could pulling fiber, building UNIX boxes, manning the level 1 tech support for your ISP, or a member of the Geek Squad who upgrades RAM.
> 
> Nothing personal for I too am an "IT technician" as seen via the link in my sig. Just note if there has been one constant I've learned in my 45+ years as an IT tech, it is that the more I learn about IT, the more I realize there is _yet_ to learn.
> 
> ...



Thank you for your input, I do realise that I do not know everything (I also keep an open mind and I am looking to learn new things from anyone)  but I do know how and for what I am using the VM's and as Microsoft specifies : W10 needs 

*Basic Requirements*

Processor: 1 gigahertz (GHz) or faster processor or SoC.
RAM: 1GB for 32-bit and 2GB for 64-bit.
Hard disk space: 16GB for 32-bit OS or 20GB for 64-bit OS.
Graphics card: DirectX 9 or later with WDDM 1.0 driver.
Display: 800-by-600 resolution.
That *BASIC *is exactly what I need.

So there is no need to come at me like I said something very bad. I've also specified that I appreciate qubit's advice I did not mean to sound rude or anything, if I did I apologise. 

Getting back on topic and to give you a response regarding the other components, I will keep the RAM (maybe buy another kit of 16GB in the near future) as I think 3200mhz  is quite good for now and I will definitely sell the 7700K+MB combo that I have to make up for some of the money I will spend on new hardware


----------



## Mighty-Lu-Bu (Apr 24, 2018)

John Naylor said:


> The didn't list the 7700k this time but as you might imagine ... it's not a big difference for any of the recent top end CPUs.   Rndering is an area, where more cores would provide an edge.  So as is customary, it will depend upon, specifically, what you are running, how often you do it and if it is worth a MoBo / CPU upgrade.
> 
> In After Effects



If we are comparing the Ryzen 2700x to the Intel i7 7700k, then the Ryzen wins. It is also very important to note that the 2700x consistently trades blows with Intel's 8700k- the 2700x has much higher multi-core speed.  

You can't go wrong with either the 2700x or the 8700k, but the fact that AMD has managed to closed the gap with its 2nd generation Ryzen CPUs is pretty damn impressive. This is good news for both gaming and for us consumers because that means through competition we are just going to get better CPUs. I think that the 2800x is going to be the game changer for Ryzen.

Anyways, here is a comparision between the 2700x and the 8700k:

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-8700K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-2700X/3937vs3958


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 24, 2018)

Liviu Cojocaru said:


> and as Microsoft specifies : W10 needs


That is true. But note that's the minimum recommended for the OS. Not for everything you run under that OS which includes all your security and your apps.


Liviu Cojocaru said:


> That *BASIC *is exactly what I need.


Then why are you looking to upgrade in the first place? Your current CPU is far more capable than a *"BASIC" *1GHz CPU. I'm just say, I don't feel your priorities are in the right place for your stated purposes.

Also note restricting RAM to 2GB forces the OS to spool data back and forth from the page file, constantly banging on drive - just another reason to increase RAM and go for SSDs (which I ideally suited for PFs).


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Apr 24, 2018)

Bill_Bright said:


> Then why are you looking to upgrade in the first place? Your current CPU is far more capable than a *"BASIC" *1GHz CPU. I'm just say, I don't feel your priorities are in the right place for your stated purposes.



Not the running of the VM's was my concern but the bulk of the programs and tasks I would have running on the PC at the same time, I want everything to run smooth and not cause any freezes or make my PC unresponsive...but as you've said it might be more of a RAM and disk speed case


----------



## qubit (Apr 24, 2018)

Liviu Cojocaru said:


> Thank you for the advice, I am quite aware  (I am an IT Technician) but for these types of tasks like Group Policy verification and generic tasks it's enough and I only run 2 VM's at the same time. I incline to agree that more RAM would be beneficial but for what I am doing at the moment it should suffice especially when the RAM prices are so high


Ah, ok fair enough. Yeah, RAM's not exactly cheap nowadays. 

I suspect that given the kind of work you do, your need for more cores will grow over time, so perhaps going to AMD with more cores will help here.

Personally, if the problem isn't chronic, I think you should wait for the 8 core Intel competition, which I believe will come out next year and compare the two brands then.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Apr 24, 2018)

qubit said:


> Running W10 in 2GB RAM will cause it to bottleneck and run slowly. There's your source of performance issues when it comes to VMs, at least. 4GB minimum is required to let W10 run properly.



Thats 64bit OS, 32Bit can run on 2 all day


----------



## qubit (Apr 24, 2018)

eidairaman1 said:


> Thats 64bit OS, 32Bit can run on 2 all day


True, I guess I kinda assumed it since "everyone" is running 64-bit nowadays. 

You're gonna be that difficult one that swears by 32-bit _forever!_ aren'tcha eidy?


----------



## eidairaman1 (Apr 24, 2018)

qubit said:


> True, I guess I kinda assumed it since "everyone" is running 64-bit nowadays.
> 
> You're gonna be that difficult one that swears by 32-bit _forever!_ aren'tcha eidy?



No im on 7 64bit, I might the one that Endorses 7 forever lol.


----------



## Bones (Apr 24, 2018)

Liviu Cojocaru said:


> Not the running of the VM's was my concern but* the bulk of the programs and tasks I would have running on the PC at the same time*,* I want everything to run smooth and not cause any freezes or make my PC unresponsive*...but as you've said it might be more of a RAM and disk speed case



I believe this makes the case for the 2700, although the 7700K IS a good CPU it's multitasking performance just can't keep up with the 2700 in termps of sheer multi-tasking capability. I am running a 7700K here myself and while it is a good chip you're talking about a heavily loaded system with several tasks being ran all at once.

Speaking personally..... If I had this in mind for a build I'd also look at TR and if I were to go that way with it I'd go with the base chip (1900) to get these extra cores plus all the PCI-E express lanes (64) too for the cheapest cost possible. Single threaded performance is still good, clearly not on par with the 7700K for example but with the stated useage the OP would benefit from this investment for a few years at least before any need to upgrade would be required making the investment more viable over time.

The 2700 isn't a bad investment either and would be great too, I'm just thinking about potential longevity of the setup here.

With the 1900 not being too much more than the other chips named it's a cost vs benefit "Thing" and that would make the $$ go further. I know all the rest would have to be accounted for too such as a board and such BUT IF making a move to AMD from the 7700K setup that's kinda a mute point because you'd need to replace it all anyway to get it done regardless of which AMD chip you decide on.

That's how I'm seeing it but it's really up to the OP - It's your call and good luck however it goes.


----------



## Vya Domus (Apr 24, 2018)

Depending on what you do with the VMs , having more cores is definitely desirable.


----------



## RealNeil (Apr 24, 2018)

eidairaman1 said:


> I might the one that Endorses 7 forever lol.



Yeah, that was me a few months ago. But I gave up finally.

And to the OP: Get the 2700X for the multitasking benefits, the newer platform, and the overall better performance. Just make sure that you have at least 32GB of RAM on it.
I have a pair of 7700Ks here in gaming boxes and they're pretty sweet, but when I encode movies, I use my Ryzen 1700X or my i9-7900X because cores = faster chores!


----------



## Vayra86 (Apr 24, 2018)

Liviu Cojocaru said:


> Not the running of the VM's was my concern but the bulk of the programs and tasks I would have running on the PC at the same time, I want everything to run smooth and not cause any freezes or make my PC unresponsive...but as you've said it might be more of a RAM and disk speed case



A good way to figure out if its the CPU holding you back and not other components (most notably RAM when it comes to 'stuttery' or brief unresponsive behavior) is to find a realtime application and monitor it while using the rig in various scenario's. If the realtime application stutters (or feels 'jerky' even though performance is ok), you will want to look at RAM and Storage in that order. If its performance is just lower than it should be or is preferable with the CPU pegged at high load, then you will want to look at the CPU.



Mighty-Lu-Bu said:


> Sorry to stray off topic, but I get perplexed by the naysayers of Windows 10.



Well.. as a Windows 10 user, there are times I want the 7 days back, most notably around a big update. Other than that its a big win.


----------



## Mighty-Lu-Bu (Apr 24, 2018)

eidairaman1 said:


> No im on 7 64bit, I might the one that Endorses 7 forever lol.



What is the reason why you are not upgrading to Windows 10? I understand that Windows 10 isn't everyone's cup of tea, but from a pure performance perspective, it is much better than Windows 7. Remember, Windows 7 is an operating system that is almost a decade old and since Microsoft is no longer supporting it, it makes the decision to upgrade to Windows 10 that much easier.

Sorry to stray off topic, but I get perplexed by the naysayers of Windows 10.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Apr 24, 2018)

Mighty-Lu-Bu said:


> What is the reason why you are not upgrading to Windows 10? I understand that Windows 10 isn't everyone's cup of tea, but from a pure performance perspective, it is much better than Windows 7. Remember, Windows 7 is an operating system that is almost a decade old and since Microsoft is no longer supporting it, it makes the decision to upgrade to Windows 10 that much easier.
> 
> Sorry to stray off topic, but I get perplexed by the naysayers of Windows 10.



Well its fine tuned for my needs, well oiled, dont have to worry about it updating on its own or forced into updates that break alot of drivers/programs.


----------



## Mighty-Lu-Bu (Apr 24, 2018)

eidairaman1 said:


> Well its fine tuned for my needs, well oiled, dont have to worry about it updating on its own or forced into updates that break alot of drivers/programs.



While I can understand that, you do realize that both newer Intel CPUs and AMD CPUs are not really Windows 7 compatible right? So if you want to upgrade to a Ryzen system you are going to have to settle for Windows 10.


----------



## RealNeil (Apr 24, 2018)

Mighty-Lu-Bu said:


> both newer Intel CPUs and AMD CPUs are not really Windows 7 compatible



Hence, why I went to Win-10. I really loved Win-7, but I love new computers more.
I have Win-10 tweaked to my needs and preferences and the last big update caused a 10-minute non-use scenario in two of them. I can live with that.
All of my PCs have 32 or 64GB of RAM, and Win-10 seems to use it well.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Apr 25, 2018)

Mighty-Lu-Bu said:


> While I can understand that, you do realize that both newer Intel CPUs and AMD CPUs are not really Windows 7 compatible right? So if you want to upgrade to a Ryzen system you are going to have to settle for Windows 10.



Erm there are ways to bypass it too


----------



## moproblems99 (Apr 25, 2018)

I am in a similar boat as you in which I run a few a few vms at a time.  I only have a 4770k, 16gb of ram, but my vms run on an SSD.  I limit my vms to usually about 4gb and mostly only have two running but occassionally but three.

I have never experienced the issues you have described so I think an investment in an ssd would be more beneficial to you.  BUT, if I had spare money lying around, I would accompany that new SSD with new 2700X, mobo, and 32gb of ram.


----------



## Vario (Apr 25, 2018)

Mighty-Lu-Bu said:


> While I can understand that, you do realize that both newer Intel CPUs and AMD CPUs are not really Windows 7 compatible right? So if you want to upgrade to a Ryzen system you are going to have to settle for Windows 10.


I am on Win 7 and Coffee Lake, it is not a big deal, and I dislike WIndows 10 immensely.  That is my preference just like eidairaman.


----------



## RealNeil (Apr 25, 2018)

eidairaman1 said:


> Erm there are ways to bypass it too



I tried that for a while but Microsoft kept throwing a wrench into the gears when I updated. It turned out to be a PITA re-configuring all of the time.
I've grown accustomed to Win-10 enough that I've updated all but one of my PCs to it. I'll probably do it in the next few weeks.


----------



## Vario (Apr 25, 2018)

RealNeil said:


> I tried that for a while but Microsoft kept throwing a wrench into the gears when I updated. It turned out to be a PITA re-configuring all of the time.
> I've grown accustomed to Win-10 enough that I've updated all but one of my PCs to it. I'll probably do it in the next few weeks.


Was not a problem for me.  I used WUFUC shown here https://github.com/zeffy/wufuc.  When my board is set to PS/2 Emulation, Windows 7 installs from disk perfectly, then I set it back to default and run Windows Update until it stops updating due to the processor.  Then I install the WUFUC and it begins updating again.  No problems 4 months later still updating fine.  It runs just like any other Windows 7 installation, there are no pesky issues at all.


----------



## trparky (Apr 25, 2018)

Virtual machine disk images are usually very huge files equal to the size of the disk inside the VM. I myself have found out that if you put the VM disk images on an SSD performance of the VM is going to go straight into the stratosphere.

Often times the performance issue of a computer isn't due to the processor or RAM but the hard disk. Upgrading the system to include an SSD more often than not will breathe new life into a system unless of course the processor is like really ancient.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Apr 25, 2018)

RealNeil said:


> I tried that for a while but Microsoft kept throwing a wrench into the gears when I updated. It turned out to be a PITA re-configuring all of the time.
> I've grown accustomed to Win-10 enough that I've updated all but one of my PCs to it. I'll probably do it in the next few weeks.



If I ever move it would be to LTSB which takes out a lot of stuff I wont use anyway.



Vario said:


> Was not a problem for me.  I used WUFUC shown here https://github.com/zeffy/wufuc.  When my board is set to PS/2 Emulation, Windows 7 installs from disk perfectly, then I set it back to default and run Windows Update until it stops updating due to the processor.  Then I install the WUFUC and it begins updating again.  No problems 4 months later still updating fine.  It runs just like any other Windows 7 installation, there are no pesky issues at all.



Good To Know, I probably would of found the way to put it on.

TR2 3000 series is my time to upgrade


----------



## Vario (Apr 25, 2018)

eidairaman1 said:


> If I ever move it would be to LTSB which takes out a lot of stuff I wont use anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If you buy the AsRock board check if it has PS/2 Emulation mode in the bios, if it does you are good to go with 7.  The other manufacturers do not allow Windows 7 install nearly as easily.  Asus requires slip streaming the USB driverse for example, and a lot of people have issues with that.  For me, PS/2 emulation allows install without losing your keyboard and mouse, then once you are into Windows you insert the driver disk and install the USB 3 drivers.  After the drivers are installed, turn off PS/2 emulation.  That is the first difficulty.  The second difficulty is getting Windows to patch update without being processor invalid, and you use WUFUC to fix that.  Pretty simple solution and it runs Windows 7 like it was meant to.  Hopefully Thread Ripper 2 will be fixable same way.  I tried Windows 10 and it felt slower, and more cumbersome.  Everything required more steps to complete.  Even re-arranging my start menu was a chore.  I really disliked it and I also found the UI to be ugly compared to 7 Aero.  I don't care if I can install some third party skin or mess around in Powershell for a few hours cleaning up 10, 7 does it all perfect.


----------



## Mighty-Lu-Bu (Apr 25, 2018)

Vario said:


> I am on Win 7 and Coffee Lake, it is not a big deal, and I dislike WIndows 10 immensely.  That is my preference just like eidairaman.
> View attachment 100219



Sorry, but I just don't understand the logic that people have by holding on to an outdated operating system that is nearing a decade old. Again, on a pure performance level, Windows 10 outperforms Windows 7. It is also a lot more secure and it is a lot more optimized than its predecessor. 

If you don't like automatic updates, you can turn them off by disabling the Windows Update service or by applying a group policy. If you don't like the interface, you can use classic shell or Stardock's version of classic shell. The biggest complaints that I often hear about Windows 10 are automatic updates and the interface, but both can be fixed in less than 5 minutes. These are both very minor complaints, yet I guess for some people they are deal breakers which to me doesn't make a whole lot of sense.


----------



## Bones (Apr 25, 2018)

Vario said:


> I am on Win 7 and Coffee Lake, it is not a big deal, and I dislike WIndows 10 immensely.  That is my preference just like eidairaman.



Me too - I HATE the spying Win 10 does, the forced updating, ect.... ect....

I'm glad I went linux instead of running Win 10 - And I also have Win 7 that can and does run great on my 7700K setup no prob. 
I will never run Winspy 10 period, that's how much I hate it - I'd rather stay linux and be done with it.


----------



## Mighty-Lu-Bu (Apr 25, 2018)

Bones said:


> Me too - I HATE the spying Win 10 does, the forced updating, ect.... ect....
> 
> I'm glad I went linux instead of running Win 10 - And I also have Win 7 that can and does run great on my 7700K setup no prob.
> I will never run Winspy 10 period, that's how much I hate it - I'd rather stay linux and be done with it.



Again, all things that can be turned off...


----------



## eidairaman1 (Apr 25, 2018)

Mighty-Lu-Bu said:


> Again, all things that can be turned off...



Just for them to be turned back on by updates or the creator editions...


----------



## trparky (Apr 25, 2018)

Turn the telemetry to Basic Mode and you'll be fine. Basic Mode contains none of the most damning of the data that Full Mode contains. I myself have verified this.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Apr 25, 2018)

he doesnt Have to get rid of the win7 machine, buy new ,buy x470 with an ssd and storeMI you should see noticeable performance increases in the things that you do ,but on win 10 with everything switched off as i have, that too is easy and permanent these days afaik.
no need for compromise with both but id bet after getting used to win 10 the 7 machine would be on ebay after a bit.

I Was a 10 Hater.


----------



## mcraygsx (Apr 25, 2018)

eidairaman1 said:


> Just for them to be turned back on by updates or the creator editions...



That is not a fact for enterprise edition. Updates have never altered settings on my personnel PC running enterprise or workstation running 2016 Server Standard. Cannot speak for Professional or Home edition. But If you are worried about Telemetry there are more then few methods to turn it off permanently. But I have to agree Microsoft did not just hand out a Operating System to masses for no reason  .


----------



## RealNeil (Apr 25, 2018)

Taming Win-10 is really not such a problem anymore.
The same people who bring us *Spybot Search And Destroy* have put together a nice little tool that shuts down all of the windows 10 crap.

*Spybot Anti-Beacon*    It works.


----------



## Bones (Apr 25, 2018)

Mighty-Lu-Bu said:


> Again, all things that can be turned off...



OK - Tell that to the guys I know that tried that already.... And it came right back.... Repeatedly - Even to the point of doing an update that caused all kinds of headaches with updates they already knew were trouble so they disabled auto-updating to try and prevent it but it happened anyway.

MS has these things setup to auto-activate/turn on by default taking control away from the user like for example having Cortana - You try to get rid of it and it just comes right back again.
If you know a 100% guaranteed way to turn it off* and for it to stay off* *period *without it coming back (Esp after doing an update manually) we'd like to hear about it.

Until then it's Linux or Win 7 here.

I will be checking out the above to see if it works - Thanks Realneil.


----------



## HammerON (Apr 25, 2018)

Okay folks, please stay on the topic at hand.  I think there has been enough discussion in regards to Windows 7 versus Windows 10.  I resisted the urge to delete the off-topic posts, but that could change if the topic doesn't turn back to the OP's question about whether or not to switch their CPU.


----------



## RealNeil (Apr 26, 2018)

Even though I have two i7-7700K systems, I still like the idea of the Ryzen 2700X. I like that its a lot better than my Ryzen 1700X. (and my 1700X is a great little CPU)
The only thing that might change that would be if the 2800X release was happening soon. Then, I would get that.
The added bonus of supporting the underdog in the market makes it a no-brainer for me.


----------



## Caring1 (Apr 26, 2018)

My choice would be based on core count and efficiency, what you need it for and are willing to pay.
Personally real life power consumption comes in to play for me as I run my system constantly and every cent counts.
It all adds up.


----------



## Bones (Apr 26, 2018)

Yes it does. 
I was thinking since the OP wanted it for doing alot of VR machine use along with multi-tasking a TR might be the ticket and would certainly be able to run for a few years, the 2700 with it's 8 core/16 thread setup isn't bad either. 
The cost of it along with the cost to use is something else but I'd have to assume if getting one they should already know what to expect. 

I am really thinking about selling some stuff to get a Ryzen or even a TR if I can, the 7700K here is working fine but as you know there's always the need for more.....


----------



## RealNeil (Apr 26, 2018)

Bones said:


> but as you know there's always the need for more.....



Yes, always!


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Apr 26, 2018)

Hi guys,

I've done some testing these days to figure out what I actually need in a workload environment and I've noticed that the CPU is rarely going over 60% usage while the disk usage (where the VM's are) is always at 100%. The RAM memory stays around 9-10GB used, this probably concludes that my i7 7700K it's still a good option for now. I will probably make the move to the next generation in a year or so.

These being said I will try and clear-up around 100GB of space on one of my SSD's to use for the VM's and probably buy a new SSD sometime soon.

Thank you all again for your opinions, it's great to see that you can get very constructive feedback form these threads.

P.S As I am an obsessed person I might make some stupid moves but I try to be content now and be happy with what I have.


----------



## las (Apr 26, 2018)

evernessince said:


> The 2700X is the better choice.  Same single threaded performance as the 7700K but double the cores.  Any application than can use them will benefit.



Same single thread perf... No. It has better multi thread tho. Obviously because of 100% more cores and threads. 8C/16T would be much better for many VM's, depending on load and requirements...

Even 6700K will beat Ryzen 2700X in single thread perf Pre-OC. Post-OC it will destroy it completely. 6700K at 5 GHz will be at 215+ in CB ST. Ryzen Refresh at will barely break 180 at max clock.

On Ryzen X CPU's. Single core boost *at stock* is as good as it gets for single thread perf. Which is why most games perform worse when you do an all-core OC on Ryzen X models, since clock will be lower than single core boost (50-100 MHz on average).

Even an old Ivy Bridge at 4.5ish will rival Ryzen in single thread perf. They do 180ish in CB ST just like Ryzen at 4.2ish.


----------



## 我是老外 (Apr 26, 2018)

2700X应该VS 8700K吧。。7700K没有太大的参考价值 不过现在玩游戏还是英特尔牛逼 毕竟主频高 我4790K超频4.7Ghz照样用。。


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Apr 26, 2018)

我是老外 said:


> 2700X应该VS 8700K吧。。7700K没有太大的参考价值 不过现在玩游戏还是英特尔牛逼 毕竟主频高 我4790K超频4.7Ghz照样用。。



Use English please


----------



## 我是老外 (Apr 26, 2018)

Liviu Cojocaru said:


> Use English please


I'm sorry
I want to say that 2700X should be VS 8700K. 7700K does not have much reference value, but now playing games or Intel bull, after all, the main frequency is high, I 4790K overclocking 4.7Ghz still use.
The above is the translation software translation do not know whether the translation is accurate。。


----------



## trparky (Apr 26, 2018)

Liviu Cojocaru said:


> disk usage (where the VM's are) is always at 100%.


That's a classic sign of your storage device not keeping up with I/O demands, it's basically screaming and begging for mercy to let it catch its breath.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Apr 26, 2018)

Liviu Cojocaru said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> I've done some testing these days to figure out what I actually need in a workload environment and I've noticed that the CPU is rarely going over 60% usage while the disk usage (where the VM's are) is always at 100%. The RAM memory stays around 9-10GB used, this probably concludes that my i7 7700K it's still a good option for now. I will probably make the move to the next generation in a year or so.
> 
> ...



Check your private message.


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Apr 26, 2018)

eidairaman1 said:


> Check your private message.



I did but I forgot to respond, thank you for the advice. I'll see how I'll get along with the current set up and I will as well keep an open mind to any updates. Probably for the moment, not to complicate things very much, I will go on the route to buy a 500GB SSD


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (May 2, 2018)

Sorry for double post...

In the end I got an 500GB SSD and another 8GB of DDR4 so now I have 24GB which helps a lot. The CPU does not sweat with 3 VM's on


----------



## dorsetknob (May 2, 2018)

Just strolled thru 63 posts, and agree with your last  post


Liviu Cojocaru said:


> In the end I got an 500GB SSD and another 8GB of DDR4 so now I have 24GB which helps a lot. The CPU does not sweat with 3 VM's on


right Choice as i was about to Suggest
your Best choice would be More Ram and Probably 1 big SSD or 2 smaller SSD's ( one for each VM),
Reason your Current System is Generaly Very Suitable but above Upgrades will add to your Systems Capability ( and can be transferred to a later New Build )


----------

