# My New pc



## baambaam (Jun 19, 2018)

Hello tech,I need to ask one questions,I have in plan to buy new pc,I have something in my head, but I want to ask what to buy ,PC 1-or PC 2

Pc-1
Intel core i5 8400
B360,gigabyte h310m
Gtx 1060 3gb
2x4 2666 ram memory dual channel
Or 

Pc™2 

Ryzen 5 1600x
Gtx 1060 3gb
2x4 2666
 And cheapest mobo?
I want it for gaming and maybe for streaming?™™


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 19, 2018)

baambaam said:


> I want it for gaming and maybe for *streaming*?™™



For that I'd personally go for the second PC , the one with the 1600X. Although you could use GPU encoding at the expense of some quality.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jun 19, 2018)

nr.1, 8400 is a better buy for gaming.


----------



## baambaam (Jun 19, 2018)

Yea I know tht bcz. I saw alot of videos on youtube and with i5 8400 I can get 15/20 fps+ in gaming


----------



## IceScreamer (Jun 19, 2018)

Flip a coin for it, seriously, either of those PC's will be good.

If price is a factor, go for the cheaper CPU+Motherboard combo (if you plan on overclocking then at least a B350 for the ryzen) and try to squeeze more money in the GPU, something like a GTX 1060 6Gb or RX 580, if it's possible.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jun 19, 2018)

The ryzen system will do better if you are gaming AND streaming. Also, the ryzen will perform better with faster 3200 memory.


----------



## Komshija (Jun 20, 2018)

For gaming and streaming definitely second PC with Ryzen 5 1600X.


----------



## bonehead123 (Jul 1, 2018)

FYI, the 3gb 1060 is an absolute P.O.S. for anything beyond surfing/email....

Been there, done that, never again


----------



## peche (Jul 11, 2018)

baambaam said:


> Hello tech,I need to ask one questions,I have in plan to buy new pc,I have something in my head, but I want to ask what to buy ,PC 1-or PC 2
> 
> Pc-1
> Intel core i5 8400
> ...


 would replace GTX 1060 3GB for the 6GB variant or better,


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Jul 11, 2018)

Ryzen due to the upgrade path, Forget locked intel cpu bs.


----------



## peche (Jul 11, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> Forget locked intel cpu bs.


any fact, reason or based comment for this?

Regards


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Jul 11, 2018)

peche said:


> any fact, reason or based comment for this?
> 
> Regards



I'd take a look at performance increases through overclocking - The ryzen is unlocked and the intel isn't - My 6600k was capable of 4.5ghz at 1.27v which was a massive difference over stock. It's not hard to overclock and has excellent gains.


----------



## peche (Jul 11, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> I'd take a look at performance increases through overclocking - The ryzen is unlocked and the intel isn't - My 6600k was capable of 4.5ghz at 1.27v which was a massive difference over stock. It's not hard to overclock and has excellent gains.


well, they are meant for a segment of the market were OC is not necesary, workstation, even gaming rigs, i did used to get unlocked processors, ended-up using locked processors at stock values, not all people wants higher clocks and tweaks for a real 10-35% improvement, take in consideration that locked processor use single motherboards, unlocked ones must be used on high end boars, which are expensive compared to single ones...


----------



## theFOoL (Jul 11, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> Ryzen due to the upgrade path, Forget locked intel cpu bs.


Just bc a cpu is locked and cannot be OC doesn't mean it's a bad product. Learn to type your words sir

OP, I'd go for the AMD but go for gpu 1060 6gb if possible


----------



## 27MaD (Jul 12, 2018)

As i can see the only diffrence between PC1 and PC2 is the CPU , And the 1600X is about 15% better then the 8400 , i would go to PC2 , but if you want to overclock the CPU then go for PC1.


----------



## jormungand (Jul 12, 2018)

Seriously try to get the gtx1060 6gb version and if youre thinking on streaming too ryzen can help you but both cpus are good for gaming. Ill try to put the xtra money on the gpu.


----------



## jamie225 (Jul 12, 2018)

that are some specs !!


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jul 12, 2018)

IceScreamer said:


> Flip a coin for it, seriously, either of those PC's will be good.
> 
> If price is a factor, go for the cheaper CPU+Motherboard combo (if you plan on overclocking then at least a B350 for the ryzen) and try to squeeze more money in the GPU, something like a GTX 1060 6Gb or RX 580, if it's possible.


@op  AMD made combo they call, i think, Combat Crates. worth looking into for a budget build.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Jul 12, 2018)

27MaD said:


> As i can see the only diffrence between PC1 and PC2 is the CPU , And the 1600X is about 15% better then the 8400 , i would go to PC2 , but if you want to overclock the CPU then go for PC1.


Sorry but locked intel cpus don't overclock. PC2 it is.



rk3066 said:


> Just bc a cpu is locked and cannot be OC doesn't mean it's a bad product. Learn to type your words sir
> 
> OP, I'd go for the AMD but go for gpu 1060 6gb if possible


It's a gimped product, making it a bad product - I'd never go for a locked cpu a dead chipset over a unlocked cpu with a chipset that will last 3+ intel refreshes.



peche said:


> well, they are meant for a segment of the market were OC is not necesary, workstation, even gaming rigs, i did used to get unlocked processors, ended-up using locked processors at stock values, not all people wants higher clocks and tweaks for a real 10-35% improvement, take in consideration that locked processor use single motherboards, unlocked ones must be used on high end boars, which are expensive compared to single ones...


"Z" Boards are minimally more expensive, not too much of a cost difference. Ryzen can be overclocked and it's a better buy than intel - z370 is coming to EOL soon for z390 and there is 0 upgrade path, 10-35% is a massive improvement over stock and will improve multitasking performance massively. Even my 6600k at 4.5 bottlenecks my 1080 ti and I purchased a i7-7740x and awaiting a x299 mobo - I chose intel due to single core performance due to games like civ 6 and total war rome 2 crunching through single core over multithreaded.


----------



## micropage7 (Jul 12, 2018)

1

No.2 with cheapest board is NO
You can use cheap case, small hdd but cheapest board is big no
Except you are tight and all you do is browsing and typing


----------



## peche (Jul 12, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> "Z" Boards are minimally more expensive, not too much of a cost difference. Ryzen can be overclocked and it's a better buy than intel - z370 is coming to EOL soon for z390 and there is 0 upgrade path, 10-35% is a massive improvement over stock and will improve multitasking performance massively. Even my 6600k at 4.5 bottlenecks my 1080 ti and I purchased a i7-7740x and awaiting a x299 mobo - I chose intel due to single core performance due to games like civ 6 and total war rome 2 crunching through single core over multithreaded.



Finally, a comment with a little sense, but lets see this:
compare this:
Budget i5 locked combo  and Budget i5  unlocked combo
Diference over those parts is like $100 or so, incluiding almost the same parts, but the locked combo incluides a better motherboard, the unlocked one has one of the cheapest boards, which might not be the best for OC and tweaks, so everytime you build a machine or advise about a build have to consider if you can go cheaper on some parts, or go mid range but locked processor, and quality board for it, those examples are pretty close due availability on parts, in the market or  real world is hard to have the same availability incluiding lower costs, for a miniaml performance gain or real need for higher clocks, speeds and plenty more, so sometimes going locked means money save, or wise purchase for your wallet.
Lets get clear on this, there is no problem going locked nor is going unlocked, 

Regards,


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Jul 12, 2018)

peche said:


> Finally, a comment with a little sense, but lets see this:
> compare this:
> Budget i5 locked combo  and Budget i5  unlocked combo
> Diference over those parts is like $100 or so, incluiding almost the same parts, but the locked combo incluides a better motherboard, the unlocked one has one of the cheapest boards, which might not be the best for OC and tweaks, so everytime you build a machine or advise about a build have to consider if you can go cheaper on some parts, or go mid range but locked processor, and quality board for it, those examples are pretty close due availability on parts, in the market or  real world is hard to have the same availability incluiding lower costs, for a miniaml performance gain or real need for higher clocks, speeds and plenty more, so sometimes going locked means money save, or wise purchase for your wallet.
> ...


"money saved" - Because intel are a monopoly all they do is lock the cpu from changing multiplier, Compare it to ryzen - It's near enough the same as the locked bundle and you can overclock.


----------



## peche (Jul 12, 2018)

intel is what it is and your comments will not change it, so deal with locked processors and different market segments or keep in a lie forever....
I totally understand that ryzen are unlocked and might cost a bit less and offer less / same / more performance over "X" locked intel processor, but thats something we could not change, so deal with it and learn from this scenario or remain a noob and claim cr*ps about locked and unlocked processors without proper facts...


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Jul 12, 2018)

Peche, Here's many reasons why ryzen is better:
-Soldered, no intel glue BS.
-Unlocked for the price of the locked intel cpu
-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RF0x9wWxXMM Near enough identical performance, and when overclocked the ryzen will pull ahead with ease. 
-AM4 upgradability (new amd cpus until 2020) - How's coffee lake upgradability going for you? Well it's getting replaced by z390 so enjoy that useless motherboard - you can't stick a new cpu in 2 years time like ryzen can. 
-Lower cpu utilisation 6 threads vs 12 threads
Why save money on the intel system when you can grab ryzen? Intel fanboys are salty nowadays sadly, instead of fanboying a brand you should buy what's best for your use case - He wants to game and stream and those 6 additional threads will reduce performance impact and it will outperform the i5 with gaming+streaming at the same time.

Learn from this scenario? I'll tell you what I learnt:
-Your a die hard intel fanboy
-Ryzen is the better buy
I may learn more as your false facts and zero advice to the op intensifies, only time will tell.



peche said:


> intel is what it is and your comments will not change it, so deal with locked processors and different market segments or keep in a lie forever....
> I totally understand that ryzen are unlocked and might cost a bit less and offer less / same / more performance over "X" locked intel processor, but thats something we could not change, so deal with it and learn from this scenario or remain a noob and claim cr*ps about locked and unlocked processors without proper facts...


Locked and Unlocked cpus are no "market sector" - Intel made it a market sector because blind sheep remain loyal - AMD has upped their game and is heading to dominate that market sector since the sheep are slowly waking up to the reality - Ironically I'm a far bigger intel user than you ever will be - I buy what meets my needs like my x5650, 6600k and my 7740x (need x299 mobo) And ryzen is perfect for the low/mid end sector. The i5 is irrelevant and can't yield a performance improvement from overclocking.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?biw...0k1j0i24k1.0.TosAFseurKU#imgrc=c9Y2_N9olskNiM:
Here you go - Ryzen takes the victory in multi thread without overclocking even and comes close in single core - Oh and that's the 1600 with a smaller oc yield. The 1600x will crush the i5 8400 easily and your advising is awful since ironically your asking me to put out facts and you haven't shown one, Your advising is the equivalent of telling someone to grab a i5 over the same priced but better i7  - zero sense and plain stupid, I'd take 6c12t over 6c6t any day - my x5650 performs dead close to the ryzen 5 1600 and that's when intel wasn't pulling the same BS.


----------



## peche (Jul 12, 2018)

lol... seriusly if the topic or one of my responses offended you i do offer an apologize, as owner and systems builder of amd and intel i totally understand the performance given by the 2 competitors and also understand and deal with both options, own both options and always try to help people, the point here is your lack of reading comprehension here, im not stating to get one of the given examples, im trying to comprehend why the f*ck you claim a product shitty or bad cuz you dont like it, thats the problem here, and my participation here ends, if you want to discuss it feel free to sent pm, cuz im not interesting to deal with a child that only knows to to say i love ryzen, support me or you are a fan boy ... so, have a great day.

Regards


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Jul 12, 2018)

peche said:


> im trying to comprehend why the f*ck you claim a product shitty or bad cuz you dont like it, thats the problem here, and my participation here ends, if you want to discuss it feel free to sent pm, cuz im not interesting to deal with a child that only knows to to say i love ryzen, support me or you are a fan boy ... so, have a great day.


Popcorn moment because of dramatic irony aka the "I can't respond so I'll throw a poor insult out" moment. 
If you can't comprehend it's bad it's because your a casual and don't care - I'm here to get people the best value for money system and your telling him to stick a trash cpu in there, don't go around spreading that crap of yours since your not capable of giving good advice, now that's that - you want to throw any more insults and false information pm me it and not let the op waste money over a fool.


----------



## Hood (Jul 12, 2018)

Locked or unlocked doesn't matter so much these days.  The Intel is already clocked about as high as it can go @ 2.8-4.0, the Ryzen can go higher than stock 3.2-3.6, but only to same 4.0, (possibly on all cores). Choose the Ryzen if 6 more threads are useful, the Intel if single thread performance/gaming is most important to you.


----------



## sepheronx (Jul 12, 2018)

Plus with boost, does it really matter much?  It will boost to a good clock when playing games anyway.  My 3570K would boost to 4.1ghz when gaming.


----------



## HammerON (Jul 12, 2018)

Let's not get into a debate in this thread.  State your opinion and if others choose not to agree, then that is okay.
If you are going to debate, then take it to PM.  Warnings coming next.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Jul 12, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> Popcorn moment because of dramatic irony aka the "I can't respond so I'll throw a poor insult out" moment.
> If you can't comprehend it's bad it's because your a casual and don't care - I'm here to get people the best value for money system and your telling him to stick a trash cpu in there, don't go around spreading that crap of yours since your not capable of giving good advice, now that's that - you want to throw any more insults and false information pm me it and not let the op waste money over a fool.



Technically the 8400 isnt _'trash'_ as you claim it to be. Its a strong CPU albeit not very overclockable but that doesnt mean that its trash... If it was a straight up gaming machine id pick the 8400 hands down out of the two. but the 1600X has it beat when it comes to streaming and gaming at the same time because the extra cores -- Its just a more smoother experience overall. Does this mean the 8400 is _'Junk'_?? Absolutely not.

If you check TPUs 8400 review (which is slightly broken) you will see that the 8400 with a little OC is right up there with the 8600k and in some cases the 8700k until games get more multi-core orientated like civilisation IV is really when when the 1600X starts to shine and steal the show.

By your definition of _'Junk'_ the 8600k and 8700k are probably _'Junk'_ too.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jul 12, 2018)

The only point of getting a HT/SMT processor over a non-SMT/non-HT one is SMT/HT.Four cores needed HT like oxygen when paired with a fast GPU like 1080/1080ti. Six cores don't need it for gaming but need it for heavy multitasking. Both are good options as long as you know what you need. 8400 will provide better min. fps and slightly better avg. fps,that's the benefit of a faster single core. 1600X will do better in multitasking. The question is - are you multitasking OP ? You never specified what games you play and what fps you're targeting.

I suspect he made a polarizing thread just for the sake of creating chaos, and boy, did some of you make an outyelling contest out of it.


----------



## Tatty_One (Jul 12, 2018)

It seems to me that many are making the assumption that everyone overclocks, I can only assume that if the OP is considering a locked CPU then he does not overclock and therefore additional gains from overclocking the 1600X don't exist, for me personally I would go for the 1600X because I do overclock and I like free performance, well partially free as the lowest end boards don't tend to offer the OC ability but if I absolutely did not overclock then for me it's a tougher decision that maybe the 1600X may just win, thereafter it just remains cost.


----------



## peche (Jul 12, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> Both are good options as long as you know what you need.


This the most important point when building or advising,


----------



## Frick (Jul 12, 2018)

Hood said:


> Locked or unlocked doesn't matter so much these days.  The Intel is already clocked about as high as it can go @ 2.8-4.0, the Ryzen can go higher than stock 3.2-3.6, but only to same 4.0, (possibly on all cores). Choose the Ryzen if 6 more threads are useful, the Intel if single thread performance/gaming is most important to you.



This is essentially the gist of it.


----------



## Devon68 (Jul 12, 2018)

Here is a video of the I5 8400 and how it can keep up with even a 1080ti.








but regardless if you plan on streaming "*I would go with the Ryzen build."*


----------



## sepheronx (Jul 13, 2018)

I don't think many processors are bottlenecking the 1080ti, unless you go with something really slow and crappy.  Even older Xeons can handle it quite well.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jul 13, 2018)

Tatty_One said:


> It seems to me that many are making the assumption that everyone overclocks, I can only assume that if the OP is considering a locked CPU then he does not overclock and therefore additional gains from overclocking the 1600X don't exist, for me personally I would go for the 1600X because I do overclock and I like free performance, well partially free as the lowest end boards don't tend to offer the OC ability but if I absolutely did not overclock then for me it's a tougher decision that maybe the 1600X may just win, thereafter it just remains cost.


I dont OC unless i have to, 98% of the time, I am running stock.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 13, 2018)

If you are going to go ryzen with the assumption that you are going to upgrade the CPU in the future you are going to want to spend more on the motherboard so that it can actually handle the increased power requirements of some larger overclocked chip you throw in later...

You end up sacrificing current value for future value.


----------



## Melvis (Jul 13, 2018)

pc 2 will be better for gaming and streaming at the same time, the more threads will help alot when it comes to streaming but you might as well go the 2600x over the 1600.










In this video you can see how much better for streaming a 2600 at stock clocks is over the 8400.


----------



## peche (Jul 13, 2018)

DeathtoGnomes said:


> I dont OC unless i have to, 98% of the time, I am running stock.


+1 here,  i became to lazy, and stock numbers still makes me happy, 



GorbazTheDragon said:


> If you are going to go ryzen with the assumption that you are going to upgrade the CPU in the future you are going to want to spend more on the motherboard so that it can actually handle the increased power requirements of some larger overclocked chip you throw in later...
> 
> You end up sacrificing current value for future value.


AMD legacy,  i remember when buldozer times, that people were totally amazed by the infamous, 8320FX and so, then 9350 came to eat all possible watts your psu could bring.....


----------



## phanbuey (Jul 13, 2018)

Melvis said:


> pc 2 will be better for gaming and streaming at the same time, the more threads will help alot when it comes to streaming but you might as well go the 2600x over the 1600.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


^ this... for streaming definitely 2600x or a used 1700 that you can OC (there are quite a few of them online)










streaming you want as many cores as possible.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jul 13, 2018)

"I've a 1060 3GB,I want a gaming CPU, I might be streaming but not sure"
"Get a 8c/16t workstation powerhouse cause corez"

why doesn't he get a used 12 core xeon while he's at it, they're selling for the same. 

2600x was good advice if he can afford it.


----------



## Hood (Jul 14, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> I suspect he made a polarizing thread just for the sake of creating chaos, and boy, did some of you make an outyelling contest out of it.


Whatever his intention was, the question is valid to potential buyers, and the responses were interesting.  The fanboys went straight for their brand, regardless of intended use.  The ones with anger issues climbed right up on their soapbox to spew hate.  The sensible ones said either one, depending on your intended use. And the ones who seem GPU-obsessed jumped all over the crappy GPU, even though the OP purposely didn't ask.  Yes, polarizing thread.  At least nobody was banned, maybe there's still a chance civilization can avoid collapse in the near future.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 14, 2018)

peche said:


> AMD legacy, i remember when buldozer times, that people were totally amazed by the infamous, 8320FX and so, then 9350 came to eat all possible watts your psu could bring.....


Lost count of how many troubleshooting threads I've been through of motherboards causing bluescreens or throttling due to OCP from 8300 chips... surprised I didn't run into more *poof vrm* threads


----------



## Final_Fighter (Jul 14, 2018)

i would go ahead and get the ryzen system but get a 2600 with a b350 mobo, something from asus or asrock. i say ryzen only because you said you might be streaming later down the road. the added threads will help and the processor is more than capable of meeting your current gaming demands. it might be a little more expensive for the 2600 over the 1600 but you will appreciate it.

the intel system will work good too, and if you can get it for a reasonably lower price then id say grab it. the intel is "fine wine" compared to the amd system so chances are you wont have issues setting up your memory.

just my 2 cents.


----------



## peche (Jul 16, 2018)

GorbazTheDragon said:


> Lost count of how many troubleshooting threads I've been through of motherboards causing bluescreens or throttling due to OCP from 8300 chips... surprised I didn't run into more *poof vrm* threads


and what about dead 900 and 800FX chipset based boards dead or fried by 9350's  ? Lolz,


----------



## John Naylor (Jul 16, 2018)

First lets address the 1060 3GB ... just fine for 1080p... easily delivers 60+ fps with moderate OC  in most games, 15 of 18 in TPUs test suite and the other 3 or over 40.

As we can see here....the 8400 is the faster CPU by about 5%

https://tpucdn.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i5_8400/images/perfrel_1920_1080.png in gaming

looking at web based benchies... 8400 does better in Google Octane, Mozilla Kraken and WebXPRT

Here we see that the 6600k had a slight edge while streaming ober the 1600x.... and since the 8400 is way faster than the 8400, that gives the 8400 the edge in straming
https://www.toptengamer.com/wp-cont...ming-Average-Gaming-Benchmark-vs-Intel-i5.jpg

Since the 8400 tests faster in both instances... and is $20 cheaper, I would choose the 8400.

As far as the overclock... The  it's less than 5% impact in H264, a highly threaded apps ... won't be near as much in gaming or streaming so not enough to make up the difference.



Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> Sorry but locked intel cpus don't overclock. PC2 it is..



You can do the BCLK thing as well as adjust the CPU boost settings







As far as the rest of the claims... saying something is better because it uses a more expensive technology is of no value if it doesn't deliver better performance.

For example...

- Soldering the IHS provides what value if it does not deliver better performance ?   Was a day when Intel needed to solder... they bungled it when they stopped with SB /  IB ... but since then, it has simply become unnecessary.  In recent generations, I'm hitting a voltage I am not comfortable with exceeding before temp is becoming a concern.   Some may see an advantage to delidding and bringing CPU temp down from 72C to even say 62C, but other than that, other than trying to impress folks, what is the point ?  It's not going to drop the voltage by doing so and it's not going to make anything go faster.

Simply put, it's all about the numbers .... the links and numbers I provided point in a  clear direction, but I would advise the OP to look at other sites and see if other tests produce performance results which cast doubt on that these links above.   After looking at 3 or 4, OP should be in a place to make a decision based upon anticipated results ... performance matters, most of the rest is just noise.    When they run the Daytona 500, they don't adjust the order that the cars crossed the finish line because of what color the car was painted, or what technical features were used.


----------



## peche (Jul 17, 2018)

John Naylor said:


> As far as the rest of the claims... saying something is better because it uses a more expensive technology is of no value if it doesn't deliver better performance.


dont waste your time with him dude, srly.....


----------



## Bones (Jul 17, 2018)

@ the OP - Go with what fits your needs the best and I believe the Ryzen system is the ticket for that.
Less expense and more flexibility if you want to do some tweaking - Not that you will be doing it but the option is there.
It fills the bill for your planned useage for less $$ and will serve you well.


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 17, 2018)

Tatty_One said:


> It seems to me that many are making the assumption that everyone overclocks, I can only assume that if the OP is considering a locked CPU then he does not overclock and therefore additional gains from overclocking the 1600X don't exist, for me personally I would go for the 1600X because I do overclock and I like free performance, well partially free as the lowest end boards don't tend to offer the OC ability but if I absolutely did not overclock then for me it's a tougher decision that maybe the 1600X may just win, thereafter it just remains cost.


The problem with that is that the OP is looking at the cheapest board possible, which kind of precludes that OC will be limited by the board's VRM. It's not like the 1600X OC's that far anyway... since all Ryzen CPUs get limited at just over 4.0 GHz, and this CPU hits 4.0 out of the box. I changed my 1600X rig for the 8400, and thanks to it's lower power use overall, runs far quieter (1600X is 95W CPU, i5-8400 is 65W). With a B360 board, that i5-8400 isn't going to OC at all anyway, so I think we can safely assume that OC is not in the OP's mind at all, given his already stated "cheapest" board for the 1600X.

Now, for the bit of usage info he gave us, he did mention streaming, so the SMT cores of the 1600X may be more useful, but again, you need to consider cooling costs, etc, although I think we are also safe to assume that the OP would use the cooler that comes in the box with the CPU.

In my own personal testing, there is actually very little difference between AMD and Intel for gaming, but this is also very dependent on which GPU is in use. Some GPUs benefit from Intel, but some do not, depending on several factors. This whole idea is where AMD shines right now, IMHO, because for a long time AMD wasn't even an option, but today, they are. 

I vote for going with the LEAST EXPENSIVE system overall, which just might be the AMD one.


----------



## hat (Jul 17, 2018)

If streaming, you can use the IGP found on the i5 8400 with Quicksync. This would result in very little to no CPU usage required for streaming, the IGP will do it all.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 17, 2018)

If you want to use quicksync just stick with the i3s lol... I get perfectly adequate streaming performance off my laptop using QS

But I must emphasise *ADEQUATE* because as far as I have been able to fiddle with it CPU x264 gives way better quality for a given bitrate.

As for overclocking an 8400, don't bother with the cheaper boards, best you can do is just lock at the highest turbo multis, open the TDP limits, and call it a day. The majority of these low end boards are not capable of pushing the required currents for the 4.5+ GHz OC with adequate stability and the performance benefit you get is within a few hundred MHz.


----------



## Caring1 (Jul 19, 2018)

John Naylor said:


> .... and since the 8400 is way faster than the 8400, that gives the 8400 the edge in straming


Makes sense to me


----------



## Bones (Jul 19, 2018)

It's gotta be able to stram you know.....
The AMD should be good for that use.


----------

